Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing (1997) 11(6), 903–916

CREST FACTOR AND KURTOSIS CONTRIBUTIONS

TO IDENTIFY DEFECTS INDUCING PERIODICAL
IMPULSIVE FORCES
C. P
AIF, Service Maintenance Diagnostic Vibration, 87000 Limoges, France

R. S  C. F

Laboratoire de Traitement du signal, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Ingénieur de Limoges,
Parc d’ESTER Technopole, 87068 Limoges Cedex, France

(Received January 1997 , accepted June 1997)

Many mechanical defects generate periodical impulsive excitation forces which excite
structural resonances and the mounted resonance frequency transducer. In order to
characterise the time signals induced by such defects, specific indicators such as the crest
factor and kurtosis need to be used. The root mean square value, which only characterises
the signal energy, and not its shape, does not give information about the origin of the
excitation. These two shape indicators are used currently in the monitoring of rotating
machinery and are not always used correctly. By using a simple model the properties and
the limitations of these indicators are demonstrated and illustrated with real examples.
7 1997 Academic Press Limited

1. MODELISATION OF THE RESPONSE OF A RESONANCE

A response resonance may be modeled by a linear mechanical system of one degree of

freedom (dof) with viscous damping. The impulsive responses of such a system is
represented by the function s (Fig. 1) defined by:

s(t) = A e−t/t sin 2pfL t

and

Q
t= , fL = f0 z1 − 1/4Q 2 and Q q 1/2
pf0

where, t, fL , f0 and Q represent the relaxation time, the free oscillation frequency, the phase
resonance frequency, and the quality factor, respectively.
The energy of the signal is given by the integral:

g
a
A 2t 4Q 2 − 1
E[s] = s 2(t) dt = . (1)
0
4 4Q2

The Hilbert transformation allows the calculation of the envelope of the signal (Fig. 2):

env(t) = zs2(t) + s̃ 2(t) = A e−t/t with: s̃(t) = H(s(t)) = −A e−t/t cos 2pfL t.

0888–3270/97/060903 + 14 $25.00/0/pg970115 7 1997 Academic Press Limited

904 .   .

Figure 1. Impulsive response of a 1 dof linear mechanical system with viscous damping.

The energy of this signal’s envelope is equal to:

g
a
A 2t 4Q 2
E[env] = env 2(t) dt = =2 E[s] (2)
0
2 4Q 2 − 1

The energy of the signal’s envelope representing the impulsive response of a resonance
mode model by a linear dissipative system to 1 dof is included between 1.88 (for Q = 2)
and 2 (for Q1) times the energy of the latter.

2. THE CREST FACTOR

2.1.  ‘’ ’  
In order to model the response’s envelope to an excitation by a sequence of equidistant
impulse functions from step Td , consider the signal represented by the function env' defined
by (Fig. 3):

a
env '(t) = env(t)* s d(t − kTd ) with Td q 3t.
k=0

Figure 2. Envelope of the impulsive response in Fig. 1.

        905

Figure 3. Envelope of the response to a periodical impulsive excitation from step Td .

If Td e 3t and if the signal is established for a sufficiently long time behind the relaxation
time, the crest factor of this signal can be written as:

FC[env '] 1
sup[=env(t)=]
=
X X
2p
Q
f0
fd
= z2
X Td
t
with fd = 1/Td (3)

X g
a
1
env 2(t) dt
Td 0

This relationship shows that the envelope signal’s crest factor is:
, equal to z2 times the square root of the quotient of the shock repetition period by the
relaxation time;
, for a given shock repetition frequency, consistently higher than the resonance frequency,
and since damping is important, so the quality factor is low.

Figure 4. Response of an excitation to a periodical impulsive excitation from step Td .

906 .   .
2.2.  ‘’ ’  
In the same way, the considered system’s ‘response’ signal may be defined by the
function (Fig. 4):

a
s'(t) = s(t) ( s d(t − kTd )
k=0

According to our hypotheses, the root mean square (rms) and peak amplitude of this signal
are practically equal to:

Aeff [s'] 1
X
E[s] A
Td
=
2 X4Q 2 − 1
4Q2 Xt
Td
and sup [=s=] = A sin a e−(a/2Q)(f0 /fL )

The signal’s crest factor is therefore equal to:

FC[s'] = FC(Q)
X f0
fd
= 2k(Q)
tX
Td
(4)

The expressions and values of the coefficients k(Q) and FC(Q) are given in Appendix A.
The coefficient k(Q) varies from 0.712 (Q = 2) to 0.962 (Q = 20). The coefficient FC(Q)
varies from 1.803 (Q = 2) to 0.763 (Q = 20).
The crest factor of the signals represented by the functions s' and env' are linked by the
relationship:
FC[s'] = z2k(Q)FC[env'] (5)
These last relationships are simplified if the damping of the considered resonance mode
is very weak (Q1). In this case, the value of the factor k(Q) is close to 1 and the
relationships (4) and (5) become:

FC[s'] 1
X X
4p
Q
f0
fd
=2
XTd
t
= z2FC[env'] (6)

These two relationships show that the crest factor of the ‘response’ signal defined by the
function s' is:
, between 1.4 (for Q = 2) and two (for Q1) times the square root of the quotient of the
shocks repetition period by the relaxation time, according to the value of the quality
factor;
, a decreasing function of the quality factor Q, the crest factor is even lower since the
damping is low, therefore the quality factor is high;
, proportional to the square root of the quotient of the resonance frequency by the shocks
repetition frequency and, because of this fact, is inversely proportional to the square
root of the shock repetition frequency (in the case of a rotating machine); the value of
the crest factor is in fact inversely proportional to the square root of the rotational
speed);
, between one (for Q = 2) and z2 (for Q1) times the crest factor of the corresponding
‘envelope’ signal according to the value of the quality factor.
Note that Td = 3t, the value of the signal’s crest factor is, according to the value of the
Q quality factor, between 2.49 and 3.46. However, the condition Td q 3t is clearly
        907
insufficient to characterise a periodic impulse signal. Indeed, the instantaneous amplitude
distribution of a random signal is a Gaussian distribution and, according to the security
interval, the peak amplitude of such a signal is statistically between three and five times
its rms amplitude. The crest factor value of such a signal is therefore between 3 and 5.
The crest factor as a defect indicator inducing periodic impulsional forces will only be
capable of detecting this type of defect if its value is higher than 5. The aptitude of the
crest factor in detecting this type of defect requires that the shocks repetition period be
at least equal to 13, eight and seven times the relaxation time in the case of a quality factor
respectively equal to 2, 10 or 100.

3. KURTOSIS

3.1.    ‘’ 

Given the accepted hypotheses, the kurtosis of the ‘response’ signal is equal to:

g
a
1
s 4(t) dt
Td 0 f0 6Q 2 Td
Kurt[s'] 1 = Kurt(Q) = 2 (7a)
fd 4Q + 3 t
$ g %
a 2
1
s 2(t) dt
Td 0

As shown in Appendix A, the values of Kurt(Q) decrease from 1.984 (for Q = 2) to 0.235
(for Q = 20).
If the resonance is lightly damped (Q1), the relationship (10) is simplified and
becomes:

3 Td 3p f0
Kurt[s'] 1 = (7b)
2 t 2Q fd

The value of the ‘response’ signal’s kurtosis defined by the function s' is:

, between 1.26 (for Q = 2) and 1.5 (for Q1) times the quotient of the shock repetition
period by relaxation time according to the value of the quality factor;
, proportional to the quotient of the resonance frequency f0 of the system excited by the
shock repetition frequency fd ,
, a decreasing function of the quality factor Q; for a given resonance frequency and a
given shock repetition frequency, the value of the kurtosis is lower since the damping
is low and therefore the quality factor is high;
, inversely proportional to the rotational speed and not independent of it as previously
suggested. Indeed, in the case of the rotating machine, the shock repetition frequency
is proportional to the rotational speed whereas the resonance frequency is independent
of it and depends only on the characteristics of the structure.

Note that if Td = 3t, the value of the signal’s kurtosis is included, according to the value
of the quality factor Q, between 3.8 and 4.5. Also, the kurtosis of a signal whose
instantaneous amplitude distribution is a Gaussian distribution is equal to 3. In practice,
the kurtosis, as an indicator of defects inducing shocks will only be capable of identifying
this type of defects if its value is at least equal to 3.5. This condition will be obtained if
the minimal shocks repetition period is at least equal to 2.8 times the relaxation time.
908 .   .
3.2.     ‘’ 
The kurtosis of the ‘envelope’ signal represented by the function env' is defined as:

g
a
1
env 4(t) dt
Td 0 p f 0 Td
Kurt[env'] 1 = = . (8)
Q fd t
$ g %
a 2
1 2
env (t) dt
Td 0

From equations (7) and (8), the kurtosis of these two signals verify the following
expression:
4Q 2 + 3
Kurt[env'] = Kurt[s'] (9a)
6Q 2
If the damping is very weak (Q1), this expression becomes:
Kurt[env'] 1 23 Kurt[s'] (9b)
The value of the ‘envelope’ signal’s kurtosis defined by the function env' is:
, equal to the quotient the shock repetition period by the relaxation time,
, between 0.66 and 0.79 times the value of the kurtosis of the corresponding ‘envelope’
signal according to the value of the quality factor.

4. COMPARISON BETWEEN THE CREST FACTOR AND KURTOSIS

It has been seen that the crest factor and kurtosis are two indicators that are sensitive
to the signal’s form. They may allow the detection of the evolution of defects generating
periodical shocks such as bearing or spline clearance, friction, spalling in gear teeth or
bearings. It is interesting to compare the properties of these two indicators and their
sensitivity regarding their aptitude to detect the appearance and to follow the evolution
of this defect.

4.1.    ‘’ 

From equations (4) and (7), the kurtosis and the crest factor of the ‘response’ signal
defined by the function s' are linked by:
Kurt[s'] = Kurt1 (Q)FC 2[s'] (10)
As shown in Appendix A, the values of Kurt1 (Q) are a monotonous and decreasing
function of the quality factor Q and varies from 0.610 (for Q = 2) to 0.375 for (Q infinite).
These different relationships lead to the following conclusions.
, The kurtosis is an indicator which is more sensitive to the variations in rotation speed
than the crest factor. A reduction of factor 2 in the rotational speed halved the value
of the kurtosis and reduced the value of the crest factor by only z2.
, The kurtosis is a more sensitive indicator than the crest factor in detecting the presence
of periodic impulse signals, since it is proportional to the square of the latter and the
proportional coefficient varies, according to the quality factor, from 0.610 (Q = 2) and
0.375 (Q1).
, The kurtosis is a more sensitive indicator of the rms signal amplitude than the crest
factor since it is a function of its fourth power.
        909
, The ability of the kurtosis to detect defects inducing periodic impulse forces is much
greater than that of the crest factor because it requires a minimal shock repetition
period of between 2.5 (Q1) and three (Q = 2) times the relaxation time, whereas the
crest factor requires a period of between seven and 13 times the relaxation time.
It is interesting to compare the quotient of the real signal crest factor or kurtosis by these
of a random signal and to define new indicators:
Kurtreal FC
Kurt = FC = real (11)
3 5

4.1.2. Example
Figure 5 illustrates the sensitivity difference between crest factor and kurtosis. These
experimental values were obtained using a signal representing the response to a periodic
impulse excitation by a rectangular signal of a width of 1 ms from a RLC circuit with a
resonant frequency of f0 = 663 Hz and a quality factor of Q = 6.4 for different values of
the ratio f0 /fd . The relative error between the experimental values and the values calculated
using equations (6) and (10) was between 0.6 and 2.5%.

4.2. Case of the ‘envelope’ signal

Using expressions (3) and (8), it is easy to show that the kurtosis and the crest factor
of the ‘envelope’ signal are related by the expression:
FC2[env'] FC 2[s']
Kurt[env'] = = 2 (12)
2 4k (Q)
This shows that the kurtosis of the envelope of a signal representing the response of a
resonance to an excitation modeled by a Dirac comb is:
, equal to half of the square of the crest factor of the envelope of this same signal;
, between 0.25 (for Q1) and 0.354 (for Q = 2) times the square of the crest factor of
the ‘response’ signal, depending on the value of the quality factor.

5. PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
A high crest factor or kurtosis value simply means that the stimulated resonances have
a sufficient amount of time to damp between two successive excitations. The shock

Figure 5. Comparison between crest factor (Q) and kurtosis (q).

910 .   .
repetition period is therefore very large compared to the relaxation time and the period
of oscillation of the excited resonance. If this is not the case the crest factor is not a
significant indicator. A weak crest factor value (less than 5) provides no information on
the nature of the excitating forces (sinusoidal, periodic or random impulse). In this case,
it is necessary to use other signal treatments in order to obtain this information (spectral
analysis, cepstrum, envelope analysis).
The relationship (4) allows one to deduce that, if the quality factor Q of the excited
resonance (the transducer resonance, for example) is equal to 20 (26 dB) to obtain a crest
factor value equal to at least 6, the frequency of the excited resonance needs to be more
than 62 times the shock repetition frequency. Conversely, and in absence of noise, a crest
factor value equal to 6 requires that the shock repetition frequency not exceed 403 Hz. This
frequency corresponds to the outer ring defect frequency of a rolling elements bearing
whose rotational speed would be equal to 3000 rpm. On the other hand, a kurtosis value
equal to 5 requires that the resonance frequency be more than 21 times the shock repetition
frequency. This example illustrates the inherent difficulties in the surveillance of rolling
bearings in simple machines such as gas turbines or a compressors whose defect frequencies
may reach, indeed even surpass, 4 kHz. It is difficult to specify a maximum rotational speed
beyond which these indicators are inoperative. The speed limit depends not only on the
damping factor of the excited resonances, the real resonance frequency of the used
accelerometer and its fixing mode, the upper cut-off frequency of the acquisition and
treatment system, but also on the geometrical characteristics of the rolling bearing nd the
number of elements. For a 6320 bearing containing eight bearings; this rotation speed limit
will be double that of a QJ220 bearing made up of 16 bearings.
These indicators are sensitive to the appearance of defects inducing periodic impulse
excitation forces, but none of them are dedicated to the detection of rolling bearing
degradations. On the contrary, just as the value of these indicators is much higher than
the shock repetition frequency, these indicators are much more sensitive to defects that
generate shocks whose repetition frequency corresponds to the rotational speed ( tooth
spalling, looseness, etc.) than to defects that generate shocks whose repetition frequency
is higher such as rolling bearing spalling. Remember that in the case of a bearing outer
ring spalling, the defect frequency is between 0.35 and 0.45 times the product of the
rotational frequency, the number of rolling elements. For most current roller bearings, this
element number is between eight and 32. Gear tooth spalling, spline looseness, friction of
a fan blade are also defects which generate periodic impulse forces. So, a lot of
rolling bearings that are in good condition are replaced each year due to incorrect
interpretation of these indicators, commercially called rolling bearing defects detectors.
Only by determining the shock repetition frequency which is within the competence of the
spectral analysis of the ‘envelope’ signal allows one to discover the nature of the
anormality.
The model used does not take into account the ‘noise’ generated by the response of the
structure and of the transducer to a random impulse excitation induced by the wear of
contact surfaces, by their poor lubrication, or by turbulent flow (such as cavitation), which,
in practice, is always associated with the ‘useful’ signal. The kurtosis is therefore much
more sensitive to the ‘noise’ than the crest factor. Indeed, the crest factor is inversely
proportional to the rms amplitude of the signal whereas the kurtosis is inversely
proportional to its fourth power. In practice, the filtering of the signal plays a determining
role in the sensitivity of the kurtosis and, more generally, in the detection of the periodical
impulse in a signal. The amplitude demodulation reduces the background noise associated
with the signal, therefore lowering its rms amplitude. Thus, the crest factor or the kurtosis
        911
of the ‘envelope’ signal (although, in theory, lower than that of the ‘response’ signal) often
turns out to be a more interesting indicator.
The rms amplitude of the signal delivered by the transductor represents not only the
rms amplitude of the ‘useful’ signal but also that of the signal induced by the normal or
abnormal operation of the other parts of the machine. By increasing slightly the rms
amplitude of the signal without affecting most often its peak amplitude, the ‘noise’ causes
a considerable reduction in the ‘useful’ signal’s crest factor and therefore makes this
indicator rather insensitive, indeed inoperative. If F represents the ‘‘useful’’ signal’s crest
factor, Aeff its r.m.s. amplitude, and A1eff the r.m.s. amplitude of the signal induced by the
normal or abnormal operation of the other parts, the crest factor of the signal delivered
by the transducer is equal to:
F
F1 =
z1 + (A1eff /Aeff )2
This relationship shows that if these two rms amplitudes are only equal, the crest factor
of the resulting signal is z2 times lower than that of the signal induced by the defect. To
make up for this drawback, it is essential to high-pass filter the signal delivered by the
transducer with a very selective filter whose cut-off frequency is sufficiently high to
eliminate all the undesirable components generated by the rotation of the considered shaft
line. This capacity exists in all monitoring systems, but, for most of them, the cut-off
frequency of the high-pass filter is fixed and cannot be adapted to the kinematic
particularities of each installation.
In practice, the structure on which the accelerometer is fixed presents a large number
of resonances whose frequencies are distributed over a very wide range. Therefore, the
signal delivered by the transducer represents the response of all the stimulated resonances.
This signal presents, however, characteristics which are close to those of the signal induced
by the response of the dominant excited resonance. The readability of the signal may be
poor if the response of this resonance cannot be sufficiently damped between two successive
excitations. The analysis of the time signal requires a preliminary identification in the
spectral domain of the frequencies of the different excited resonances and a band-pass
filtering of the signal around the highest frequencies. The band-pass filtering of the signal
around the resonance frequency has an effect on the value of the calculated crest factor
using the considered model. Indeed, about three-quarters of the power of the signal
representing the response of this resonance is concentrated on a frequential band of width
equal to 2f0 /Q centred around its resonance frquency, but the band-pass filtering affect also
the value of the peak amplitude of this signal. The values of the crest factor and the kurtosis
of the filtered band-pass signal around the resonance frequency are therefore slightly lower
(about 40% for the crest factor and 55% for the kurtosis) than those calculated using the
previously cited expressions. However, in practice, just as the value of the quality factor
of a resonance is often unknown, the bandwidth filter is chosen approximately, making
it difficult to know precisely the exact effect of the band-pass filtering on the crest factor
and kurtosis values.
Just as the crest factor is measured on a wide range of frequencies, the signal delivered
by the transducer does not present the response of a resonance to an impulse excitation
but rather one of a large number of resonances with very different frequency and damping.
In fact, the form of the signal to be analysed has characteristics close to those of
the signal induced by the response of the preponderant resonance in the considered
range of frequencies. The contribution of the other excited resonances may jam the
readability of the preponderant resonance and lower the value of the crest factor. The
measured peak amplitude corresponds to the response of the excited operative resonance
912 .   .
while the rms amplitude represents the total power of the vibratory signal induced by the
response of all of the excited modes. As a result, there is a reduction in the readability
of the information conveyed by the preponderant mode. However, it is not required that
this resonance convey the defined information or the information in a ‘readable’ form.
Indeed, if the resonance frequency is too low in relation to the shock repetition frequency,
the crest factor value is low and the information is not identifiable. The preponderant
resonance may not be excited by the defect but, for example, by the random shocks induced
by a slight wear of rolling bearing ring, by a poor lubrication or cavitation. In this case,
the crest factor value is low and the sought-after defect is not detectable. The response
of the preponderant resonance then totally masks the responses of the secondary
resonances which convey more useful information. These considerations clearly show the
necessity of characterising the signal not by a single crest factor or kurtosis measured in
a wide range of frequencies but by several crest factors measured along different ranges
more narrow of frequencies. Unfortunately, few monitoring systems allow one to define
such indicators and to follow their evolution in time.
The adopted model of the excitation forces in the framework of this study satisfactorily
represents shocks induced by looseness or isolated spalling or rolling bearing rings, or
tooth gears of small dimension. It models correctly the first stage of degradation in both.
The second stage of degradation of these parts is translated often by the multiplication
of the number of spallings and an extension of the area spalling. Although, in the
frequential domain, the shock repetition frequency remains identical, the number of shocks
by unit of time increases considerably. The space of time between two consecutive shocks
become inferior to three times the relaxation time and the hypotheses upon which the
validity of the different established relationships rests are no longer verified. The
readability of the information contained in the vibratory signal becomes weaker and
weaker. The values of the crest factor and the kurtosis become inferior or equal to 5
(or 3 for the kurtosis) and are no longer typical of a periodic impulse signal.
The established relationships also show that the resonance of the transducer may
present in the detection of this defects and that the choice of an accelerometer presenting
the highest possible resonance frequency allows one to excite its resonance. However, the
value of the crest factor and the kurtosis is an increasing function of the ratio f0 /Q. The
weak value of the damping of an accelerometer (Q between 10 and 30) limits the interest
of analysing the signal around its resonance frequency.

6. EXPERIMENTAL CASES

6.1.  1
A gear box for a chairlift, power 308 kW, had a shaft speed of 1062 rpm, and a defect
frequency of the internal ring of the roll bearing Fag22320 of 148.5 Hz.
Figure 6(a) shows the signal given by the accelerometer mounted on the bearing in
a horizontal radial direction. Figure 6(b) represents the signal spectrum (0–20 kHz) can
be established that translates the resonance response to the impulse force stimulations.
Table 1 shows the effect of the resonance to relax between two consecutive stimulates on
the crest factor and on kurtosis. If the amplicator factors of each resonance were close,
the kurtosis and crest factor values were also high since the major frequency in the analysis
band was higher.
Figure 6(c) and (d) presents the signal envelope obtained by filtering the signal around
the resonance frequencies, 4350 and 1330 Hz, by a band-pass filter (width 2250 Hz).
These figures show clearly that the lisibility of the two signals increased. Figure 7(b) allows
        913

Figure 6. (a) Time signal of a gear box, and (b) its fast Fourier transform. Envelope of signal filtered about
(c) 4350 and (d) 13 300 Hz.

the identification of the shocks for each crossing of the roller on spall of the internal ring.
The kurtosis values of the two signal envelopes, respectively equal to 9.11 and 25.5, show
the last affirmation. The resonance frequency changed in a ratio of 3.06 and the kurtosis
changed in a ratio of 2.75. The difference between these two values can be explained by
the fact that Q was unknown and also, by the probable resonance in the study frequency
bands.

6.2.  2

This case concerns a vertical scourcer with a rotational speed of 1.8–5 rpm. The
internal ring of ball bearing of the inferior bearing was severed under an excessive thermal
strain.

T 1
Kurtosis and crest factor values for case 1
Frequency (Hz) Kurtosis rms Crest factor
0–20 2.06 1.315 1.30
0–5 1.88 1.184 1.21
5–10 2.86 0.545 1.64
10–15 5.70 0.145 1.45
15–20 5.80 0.049 3.32
914 .   .

Figure 7. (a) Time signal of a vertical sourcer for a rotation speed of 1.9 rpm, and (b) its fast Fourier transform.
(c) Time signal of a vertical sourcer for a rotation speed of 3.3 rpm, and (d) its fast Fourier transform.

Figure 7 shows the vibrating signal (0–20 Hz) for a rotation speed equal to 1.9 rpm. The
kurtosis of this signal was equal to 4.01. The signal spectrum [Fig. 7(b)] constituted a set
of lines where the step (350 mHz) between the sequence of equidistant impulse functions
fitted the defect frequency; shown by a preponderant response resonance with a frequency
of around 5.2 Hz. Figure 7(c) presents the signal for a speed of 3.3 rpm. In this case, the
kurtosis value was equal to 2.3. The frequency repeat of the shock was equal to 648 mHz
and the resonance frequency of the stimulate model was the same [Fig. 7(d)].
The study of the signal showed clearly that the response resonance could not relax
between two successive stimulations [Fig. 8(c)]. The kurtosis value of these two signals
express perfectively this situation. The ratio of the excitation frequency (1.85) and the
inverse ratio of the kurtosis (1.88) are correlated.
This example shows that the kurtosis value is inversely proportional to the shock
frequency or to the speed, when the stimulate resonance are equal. This confirms the
theoretical development of this article, and contradicts the hypothesis that kurtosis is
independent of speed.

7. CONCLUSIONS
This study has shown that the crest factor of the ‘response’ signal induced by the
response of a resonance to a periodic impulse excitation is proportional to the square root
of the ratio of the shock repetition period on the relaxation time and that the kurtosis is
proportional to the square of the crest factor. The ability of the crest factor on identifying
        915
the existence of a structure excitation by periodic shocks requires that the shock repetition
period be according to the quality factor at least between seven and 13 times the relaxation
time, while that of the kurtosis only requires that it be at least equal to three times the
relaxation time. The kurtosis is therefore a much more sensitive indicator than the crest
factor in detecting the appearance of defects inducing periodic excitation forces.
On the other hand, kurtosis is extremely sensitive to noise and, in practice, a preliminary
treatment of the signal (band-pass filtering, envelope detection) is essential in order to
benefit fully from this indicator’s performance. Furthermore, contrary to previous findings
[1–3], the kurtosis is an indicator which is very sensitive to rotational speed. Halving the
rotation speed reduces the value of the kurtosis by half.
Since the signal delivered by an accelerometer is made up of the response of many
resonances, the measurement or calculation of these indicators along a wide frequency
band reduces considerably because of mask effects, and indeed inhibits their capacity to
detect the existence of defects inducing periodic shocks. The solution consists of measuring
or calculating these indicators along a certain number of rather narrow frequency bands,
defined in relation to the kinematic characteristics of each machine. The operation may
be easily automated through the automatic calculation of the kurtosis of the filtered
band-pass signal around previously identified principal excited resonances in the spectrum
of the signal to be analysed.

REFERENCES
1. D. D and R. M. S 1978 Journal of Mechanical Design 100, 229–235. Detection of
rolling element bearing damage by statistical vibration alaysis.
2. A. A. R 1979 Iron and Steel International, February. Kurtosis, a crystal ball for maintenance
engineers.
3. J. P. D 1995 Thèse de doctorat, Université de Reims Champagne Ardenne 21, France.
Elaboration et adaptation d’outils pour l’étude et le suivi de l’endomagement de composants
mécaniques par analyse vibratoire–application à la maintenance conditionnelle des paliers à
roulements.

APPENDIX OVERLEAF
916 .   .
APPENDIX A: COEFFICIENT VALUES k(Q), FC(Q), Kurt(Q), Kurt1 (Q)
Q k(Q) FC(Q) Kurt(Q) Kurt1 (Q)
2 0.712 1.803 1.984 0.610
3 0.789 1.620 1.450 0.553
4 0.834 1.479 1.125 0.514
5 0.863 1.369 0.915 0.489
6 0.883 1.278 0.769 0.471
7 0.898 1.204 0.663 0.458
8 0.910 1.141 0.582 0.448
9 0.919 1.086 0.519 0.440
10 0.927 1.039 0.468 0.433
11 0.933 0.997 0.426 0.428
12 0.938 0.960 0.391 0.424
13 0.943 0.927 0.361 0.420
14 0.947 0.897 0.335 0.417
15 0.950 0.870 0.313 0.414
16 0.953 0.845 0.294 0.412
17 0.956 0.822 0.276 0.410
18 0.958 0.800 0.261 0.408
19 0.960 0.781 0.248 0.406
20 0.962 0.763 0.235 0.404
21 0.964 0.746 0.224 0.403
22 0.965 0.730 0.214 0.402
23 0.967 0.715 0.205 0.401
24 0.968 0.701 0.196 0.399
25 0.969 0.687 0.188 0.399
26 0.971 0.675 0.181 0.398
27 0.972 0.663 0.174 0.397
28 0.973 0.652 0.168 0.396
29 0.974 0.641 0.162 0.395
30 0.974 0.631 0.157 0.395
35 0.978 0.586 0.135 0.392
40 0.981 0.550 0.118 0.390
45 0.983 0.519 0.105 0.388
50 0.985 0.494 0.094 0.387
10 000 1.000 0.035 0.000 0.375

FC(Q) =
x4pQ k(ce).
x
a 4Q2

x 4Q 2 −

4Q 2 − 1 sin a e
k(Q) = 2Q 4Q2 − 1.

6pQ
Kurt(Q) = .
4Q 2 + 3
3 4Q2 − 1 x −a 4Q2

Kurt(Q) = sin a c 2Q 4Q2 − 1 .

8 4Q2 + 3

a = arc tan 2Q.