Automated Fault Diagnosis

A Machine Learning Approach to
Multicomponent Fault Diagnosis of Rotating

Machines Using Sound and Vibration Signals
3/12/16
Objective
Multicomponent fault diagnosis of rotating
machines was modeled as a machine learning
problem and to develop a systematic approach to
identify the best feature-classifier combination for
automated fault diagnosis.
3/12/16
Contents
3/12/16
Introduction
Machine learning
Literature survey
Methodology
Experimental Study
Fault Diagnosis using Statistical features
Fault Diagnosis using Wavelet features
Conclusion
Introduction(1)
Rotating Machines
Pumps,
turbines, compressors, fans, gear boxes, etc.
Rotating
machine components -
Shafts, rotors, bearings, gears, etc.

Condition
based maintenance -
prevent break down, increase productivity and reduce

maintenance cost.
3/12/16
Introduction(2)
Fault Diagnosis
The machine condition can be analyzed in detail to indicate
the most likely cause of the problem.
Techniques:
3/12/16
Wear debris Analysis
Acoustic emission
Vibration analysis
Sound signal, etc.
Introduction(3)
Vibration and Sound Signal Analysis
Time domain analysis
Frequency domain analysis
Order analysis
Time-Frequency analysis
Wavelet analysis, etc.
.Alternate approach?
3/12/16
Frequency domain Analysis

The "FFT" of the time waveform produces the spectrum
3/12/16
Order Analysis
mm/s
mm/s
3/12/16
Machine learning.(1)
Both Learning + Labeling Subsequently
Learning?
- Learning to Label
3/12/16
Labeling?
Identifying the Object as a
member of a class to which it
belongs
Machine Learning .(2)
Feature extraction Statistical features,

Histogram features,
Wavelet features etc.,
Feature selection/reduction Decision Tree,

Principal Component Analysis, etc.
Feature classification Artificial Neural Network,

Fuzzy logic,
Support Vector Machine etc.,
3/12/16
10
Literature Survey
Literature Survey.(1)
Author, Year
Summary
Dyer and Stewart,

1978
The statistical parameters such as probability density and kurtosis
Randall, 1980
For gearbox fault diagnosis, Randall proved the effectiveness of
can be effectively used for identification of bearing fault

cepstrum analysis through several case studies.
Qingfend et al.,
1994
Qingfend et al., describes the advantage of using wigner-ville

distribution in fault diagnosis of rotating machines with practical
examples.
Donoho, 1995.
Morlet wavelet was applied to extract the engine sound features

and these extracted features are more effective in identification of
various faults in the engine
3/12/16
12
Author, Year
Kuo, 1995.
Summary
Artificial neural network (ANN) and Fuzzy logic can be used for
automatic detection of two main faults of turbine blades
Subrahmanyam and Three different ball bearing defects are classified using neural
Sujatha, 1997.
network with 95% accuracy
Baydar and Ball ,
Sound signal is a powerful tool in detection of various types of
2001
progressing faults in gear boxes.
Pennacchi et al.,
The machine learning-based methods can be effectively used to
2006.
identify the shaft cracks in rotating machines
3/12/16
13
Author, Year
Shi et al., 1998.
Summary
Research work reported uses the statistical features in
combinations to elicit information regarding the bearing faults
Heng and Nor,

1998.
Studied the effectiveness of sound and vibration signal in

detecting the presence of faults in rolling element bearing using
statistical analysis method.
Statistical parameters such as crest factor, skewness and kurtosis
was used.
Quek et al., 2001.
Wavelet transform filtering can be used to remove the unwanted

noise from the sound signals for the identification of faults
3/12/16
14
Author, Year
Saravanan et al.,
2009.
Summary
The decision tree algorithm is used in selecting the prominent
features and the same algorithm performs the classification
process for automated fault diagnosis of spur bevel gearbox .
Sun et al., 2007.
The redundant twelve features were effectively removed from

eighteen features using PCA without decrease in classification
accuracy.
The paper also reported that 33.3% reduction of data is possible
in PCA.
Widodo, 2007
In the fault identification of induction motor, the discrimination

ability of SVM is improved when ICA is used for feature
reduction.
3/12/16
15
Author, Year
Summary
Samanta et al., 2003 Reported the effectiveness of ANN and support vector
machine SVM in identification of bearing faults.
The performance of SVM is better than ANN.
Sugumaran et al.,
2007
PSVM yielded 100% classification efficiency in the roller

bearing fault diagnosis.
Gan et al., 2009.
The clone-selection programming effective in identification

of mechanical and electrical faults.
Wu and Liao, 2010.
The various faults in the automotive air conditioner blower

can be effectively detected from the noise emission signal
using neural network
Singh et al., 2013
The various width sizes (0.5776 to 1.9614 mm) of the outer

race defect in taper roller bearing have been detected with
the help of 'symlet5' wavelet coefficients
3/12/16
16
Scope of present work . . .(1)
Most of the research work done in this area considered one or

two components with small number of fault classes.
In this study, the rotational elements shaft, bearing, gear and
rotor are considered together with 24 fault classes.
The influence of number of components or fault classes on the
capability of machine learning methods for rotating machine
fault diagnosis is found.
3/12/16
17
Machine learning based sound signal analysis was not well

explored in rotating machine fault diagnosis.
The behavior of statistical features and wavelet features of the
sound signal is studied in detail and compare with vibration
signal.
3/12/16
18
There is a need for identification of the best suited feature

selection technique for fault diagnosis of multi component
rotating machine.
The use of three dimensionality reduction techniques such as
decision tree, principal component analysis and independent
component analysis in rotating machine fault diagnosis is
discussed and compared in this research work.
3/12/16
19
Clonal selection classification algorithm (CSCA) is a newly

developed technique. But very few works were carried out in
machine fault diagnosis
CSCA has been extensively studied using sound and vibration
signal.
3/12/16
20
Feature-Classifier combination is essential for automated

fault diagnosis.
The best feature-classifier pair of both the vibration signal and
sound signal was identified for multicomponent fault
diagnosis.
3/12/16
21
Machine Learning Techniques
Feature extraction Statistical features and

Wavelet features
Feature selection/reduction Decision Tree (DT),

Principal Component Analysis(PCA) and
Independent Component Analysis(ICA).
Feature classification Decision Tree(DT),

Support Vector Machine(SVM),
Clonal selection classification algorithm(CSCA) and
Proximal support vector machine(PSVM).
3/12/16
22
Methodology
Rotating machines with Sensors
(accelerometer and microphone)
Data Acquisition and
Signal Conditioning
Feature Extraction Statistical and Wavelet features
Feature Selection DT, PCA and ICA
Feature Classification DT, SVM, CSCA and PSVM
Machine Fault Diagnosis
23
Experimental Studies
Experimental Setup
Rotating machine fault simulator

3/12/16
25
Location of accelerometer and microphone
3/12/16
26
Spur bevel gearbox
3/12/16
27
Specification of accelerometer
Make
: Dytran Instruments Inc. USA
Model Number
: 3035B1
Weight
: 2.5 grams
Description
: 500 g range
Frequency
: 0.5 20 kHz
Resonance Frequency: 45 kHz

Sensitivity
3/12/16
: 10 mV/g
28
Specification of microphone
Make
: Zebronics, India
Model Number
: ZEB-100 SM
Sensitivity
: 62 dB
Directivity
: Omni-directional
Frequency Response
Impedance
3/12/16
: 50-15000Hz
: 32 ohms
29
Dactron FFT Analyzer
3/12/16
30
Good and fault conditions of rotating elements (1)
Good bearing and good gear
3/12/16
31
Inner race fault bearing
3/12/16
Outer race fault bearing
32
Pinion wheel with tooth broken
3/12/16
Disc with unbalancing mass
33
Experimental Study
Phase-I
12 fault classes of shaft, rotor and bearing
-Vibration signal
-Sound signal
Phase-II
24 fault classes of shaft, rotor, bearing and gear.
-Vibration signal
-Sound signal
3/12/16
34
Details of 12 fault conditions of shaft, rotor and bearing

Notation used
3/12/16
Fault description
a1
good shaft + good bearing
a2
good shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing
a3
good shaft + inner race fault (IRF) bearing
a4
good shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing
a5
good shaft + outer race fault(ORF) bearing
a6
good shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing
a7
bent shaft + good bearing
a8
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing
a9
bent shaft + IRF bearing
a10
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing
a11
bent shaft + ORF bearing
a12
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing
35
Details of 24 fault conditions of shaft, rotor, bearing and gear

Notations used
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
Fault description
good shaft + good bearing + good gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing + good gear
good shaft + IRF bearing + good gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing + good gear
good shaft + ORF bearing + good gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing + good gear
bent shaft + good bearing + good gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing + good gear
bent shaft + IRF bearing + good gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing + good gear
bent shaft + ORF bearing + good gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing + good gear
good shaft + good bearing + fault gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing + fault gear
good shaft + IRF bearing + fault gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing + fault gear
good shaft + ORF bearing + fault gear
good shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing + fault gear
bent shaft + good bearing + fault gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + good bearing + fault gear
bent shaft + IRF bearing + fault gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + IRF bearing + fault gear
bent shaft + ORF bearing + fault gear
bent shaft with rotor unbalance + ORF bearing + fault gear
36
Time domain plots of vibration signals(1)
3/12/16
37
Time domain plots of vibration signals(2)
3/12/16
38
Time domain plots of sound signals(1)
3/12/16
39
Time domain plots of sound signals(2)
3/12/16
40
Fault Diagnosis using

Statistical Features
Fault diagnosis using statistical features
Feature extraction Statistical features
Feature selection/reduction Decision Tree,

Principal Component Analysis and
Independent Component Analysis.
Feature classification Decision Tree,

Support Vector Machine,
Clonal selection classification algorithm and
Proximal support vector machine.
3/12/16
42
Feature Extraction - Statistical features
3/12/16
1.
Mean
2.
Standard Error
3.
Median
4.
Standard Deviation
5.
Sample Variance
6.
Kurtosis
7.
Skewness
8.
Range
9.
Minimum
10.
Maximum
11.
Sum
43
Feature Selection - Decision Tree(1)

Feature selection using decision tree involves two steps.
They are
1.
Arrange the eleven statistical features in the order of their

importance from the decision tree representation.
2.
The optimum number of features are chosen based on the

classification accuracy

Set
of If-Then rules
It is a tree based knowledge representation methodology
3/12/16
45
3/12/16
46
Application of Decision Tree(1)

Vibration signals for 12 fault classes at Speed 500 rpm
3/12/16
47

3/12/16
48

3/12/16
49

3/12/16
50

Vibration signals for 12 fault classes
The
order of importance of ten features is standard error, sample
variance, median, standard deviation, skewness, maximum,

minimum, kurtosis, range and mean.
The
feature sum was not used in all the four decision tree
representation.
The
same decision tree algorithm was used to select the best
number of features by input these ordered eleven features with

the removal of least important feature every time.
3/12/16
51

Decision tree - Classification Efficiency %
Sl. No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
3/12/16
Number
of features Speed 500 Speed
rpm
700 rpm
Speed 900
rpm
Speed
1100 rpm
Mean
classification
efficiency %
11
96.75
97.92
98.33
99.00
10
96.75
97.92
98.33
99.00
9
96.83
98.00
98.25
98.83
8
96.92
98.00
98.08
98.83
7
97.08
98.17
98.25
98.83
6
97.25
97.83
98.58
98.83
5
97.33
97.58
98.58
98.58
4
91.58
93.83
94.08
98.17
3
91.833
93.67
91.08
97.92
2
64.58
66.08
66.00
72.08
1
41.58
33.33
33.33
50.00
Performance of decision tree in dimensionality reduction
52
98.00
98.00
97.98
97.96
98.08
98.12
98.02
94.42
93.63
67.19
39.56

Conditions to select the number of dominant features for

classification study are
Choose
the number of features which maximizes classification

efficiency
Choose
the number which satisfies the consequence of

dimensionality reduction.
3/12/16
53

95.00
Mean Classification Efficiency %
85.00
75.00
65.00
55.00
45.00
35.00
10
Classification efficiency of decision tree in dimensionality reduction

3/12/16
54
11

24 fault classes of shaft, rotor, bearing and gear.
The
eleven statistical features were arranged in the descending order
of importance with the help of decision tree representation of the

four speeds.
They
are skewness, standard error, minimum, median, sample
deviation, range, minimum, kurtosis, maximum, mean and sum.

Number
of dominant features required for classification can be chosen
with the help of same decision tree algorithm.

3/12/16
55

85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
10

3/12/16
56
11

Sound signals for 12 fault classes
The eleven statistical features were arranged in the descending order of

importance with the help of decision tree representation of the four speeds.
They are standard deviation, sample variance, range, kurtosis, skewness,

minimum, median, maximum, standard error, mean and sum.
Number of dominant features required for classification can be chosen with

the help of same decision tree algorithm.
3/12/16
57

80.00

75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
10

3/12/16
58
11

Sl. No
Number
of
features
11
Decision tree - Classification Efficiency

%
Speed
Speed
Speed
Speed
500 rpm 700 rpm 900 rpm 1100 rpm
37.92
27.67
32.42
33.83
Performance of decision tree
3/12/16
59
Mean
classification
efficiency %
32.96
Principal Component Analysis
Dimensionality reduction technique.
The PCA reduces the higher dimensional inter-related redundant

data to lower dimensional uncorrelated principal components.
Feature reduction involves two steps. They are

1.
Arrange the principal components in the order of their

importance using eigen values.
2.
The optimum number of components are chosen based on the

classification accuracy using decision tree algorithm.
3/12/16
60
Application of PCA(1)
SPEED
rpm
EIGEN VALUE
PC 1 PC 2 PC 3 PC 4 PC 5 PC 6 PC 7 PC 8
PC 9 PC 10 PC 11
500
7.777 2.000 0.800 0.337 0.057 0.02 0.009
700
7.941 2.000 0.729 0.239 0.046 0.033 0.011
900
7.915 2.002 0.706 0.177 0.146 0.04 0.013
1100
8.213 1.963 0.538 0.159 0.063 0.048 0.014
Eigen values of the principal components
3/12/16
61
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
Classification efficiency of DT with PCA in dimensionality reduction

3/12/16
62
Speed
rpm
Eigen value
PC 1
PC 2
PC 3
PC 4
PC 5
PC 6
500
6.694 2.007 1.536 0.664
0.07
0.016 0.011 0.002
700
7.485 2.005 0.945 0.426 0.102 0.025 0.009
900
7.662 2.003 0.843 0.333 0.121 0.023 0.011 0.001
1100 7.588 2.009 0.953 0.299 0.121 0.017
PC 7
0.01
PC 8
PC 9
PC 10
PC 11
3/12/16
63
80.00
75.00
Mean Classification
Efficiency %
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00

3/12/16
64
Eigen value
Speed
rpm
PC1
PC2
PC3
PC4
PC5
PC6
PC7
PC8
PC9 PC10 PC11
500
5.354 2.26 1.456 1.251 0.338 0.188 0.151 0.002
700
5.209 2.478 1.46 1.085 0.396 0.245 0.123 0.004
900
5.669 2.317 1.514 0.897 0.384 0.122 0.086 0.011
1100 5.468 2.541 1.645 0.875 0.324 0.077 0.064 0.006
3/12/16
65
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
40.00
3/12/16
66
Speed
rpm
Eigen value
PC1
PC2
PC3
PC4
PC5
PC6
PC7
PC8
PC9
500
5.391 2.284 1.565 0.985 0.507
0.15
0.114 0.004
700
4.687
2.36
1.706 1.329 0.499 0.221 0.194 0.004
900
5.17
2.296 1.621 1.152 0.406 0.216 0.135 0.004
1100 4.999 2.313 1.758 1.127 0.389 0.266 0.146 0.003
3/12/16
67
PC10 PC11
Sl. No
Number
of
features
PCA + DT - Classification Efficiency

%
Speed
500
rpm
Speed
700
rpm
Speed
900
rpm
Speed
1100
rpm
40.92
31.33
41.67
38
Mean
classification
efficiency %
37.98
Performance of DT with PCA
3/12/16
68
Independent Component Analysis

Dimensionality reduction technique.
Transforms multivariate random signals into statistically
independent components without much information loss.
Feature
1.
reduction involves two steps. They are
Arrange the independent components in the order of their

importance using eigen values.
2.
The optimum number of components are chosen based on the

classification accuracy using decision tree algorithm.
3/12/16
69
Application of ICA(1)
Vibration signal for 12 fault classes
SPEED
rpm
EIGEN VALUE
IC 1
IC 2
IC 3
IC 4
IC 5
IC 6
500
3.746
1.713
0.034
0.005
7
0.000
13
700
2.99
0.983
0.0374
0.003
3
900
2.992
0.3536 0.0484
1100
3.365
1.437
0.0585
IC 7
IC 8
IC 9
1.30E 1.90E-06
06
0.000
12
9.65E 8.86E-06
07
0.001
9
0.000
17
9.64E 3.59E-06
07
0.002
7
0.000
12
8.97E 5.49E-06
07
Eigen values of the independent components
3/12/16
70
IC 10 IC 11
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
Classification efficiency of DT with ICA in dimensionality reduction

3/12/16
71
Speed
rpm
Eigen value
IC1
IC2
IC3
IC4
IC5
IC6
IC7
IC8
IC9
IC
10
IC11
500
478.299
46.42
5
1.341
0.015
4
0.0041
0.0001
4
4.77E05
3.08E-05
700
488.11
45.76
1.28
0.019
1
0.0116
0.0002
7
5.21E05
3.50E-05
900
480.491
46.18
3
1.514
0.023
1
0.0186
0.0003
3
8.33E05
4.68E-05
1100
475.494
46.74
6
1.26
0.024
7
0.0129
0.0002
9
7.21E05
4.36E-05
3/12/16
72
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00

3/12/16
73
Sound signal for 12 fault classes
Eigen value
Speed
rpm
900
IC1
8.66274
2
8.18227
4
5.54925
7
1100
5.1947
500
700
IC2
0.0678
2
0.2063
0.2061
8
0.3395
8
IC3
0.0102
1
0.0061
2
0.0054
7
0.0092
3
IC4
0.00106
IC5
5.61E05
0.0036
0.00024
0.0032
0.00022
0.00279
0.00014
IC6
2.78E06
3.92E06
4.47E06
3.62E06
IC
IC1 IC1
8 IC9 0
1
IC7
2.73E07
1.46E07
1.60E07
1.04E07
3/12/16
74
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00

3/12/16
75
Eigen value
Speed
rpm
IC1
IC2
IC3
IC4
60.05 05
0.1409
4
0.0860
8
0.0176
9
41.08682
0.1510
9
0.0825
2
0.0044
9
900
45.31359 0.19113
0.1252
6
0.0077
3
1100
0.2353
7
0.0817
3
0.0100
4
500
700
48.79117
IC5
0.0008
0.00096
0.00128
0.00164
IC8
IC9
IC
10
6.71E-05 1.89E-05
3.00E06
5.65E-05 9.80E-06
5.62E06
1.03E-05
8.69E06
8.28E-05 1.09E-05
7.65E06
IC6
0.0001
IC7
3/12/16
76
IC
11
Sl.
No
Number
of
features
ICA + Decision tree - Classification

Efficiency %
Speed
500 rpm
Speed
700 rpm
Speed
900 rpm
Speed
1100 rpm
33.17
26.46
29.86
31.58
Performance of DT with ICA
3/12/16
77
Mean
classification
efficiency %
30.27
Selection of dimensionality reduction technique(1)

Comparison of dimensionality reduction techniques

3/12/16
78

The five most discriminating ability features are

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Standard error,
Sample variance,
Median,
Standard deviation and
Skewness.


3/12/16
80

The four most discriminating ability features are

1.
2.
3.
4.
Skewness,
Standard error,
Minimum and
Median.


3/12/16
82

The five features can be chosen for the classification

analysis using sound signal for twelve fault classes. They are
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Standard Deviation,
Sample variance,
Kurtosis,
Skewness and
Range.
Fault classification
The chosen features of the four cases were used for classification study.
There are two main ways of classification of data.
The one way is to train the algorithm by passing all the data set with their
class and test the trained algorithm by sending only the particular class
dataset for identification of the class to which the dataset belongs.
In the next one, input all the data set with their class to the algorithm. The
algorithm gets trained with the dataset and does the cross fold validation
with the help of same dataset.
Fault Classification - Decision tree(1)

Testing Parameter
Time taken (sec)
Total number of
instances
Correctly classified
instances
Misclassified instances
Classification
efficiency %
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
0.05
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.0375
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1168
1171
1183
1183
1176
32
29
17
17
24
97.33
97.58
98.58
98.58
98.0175
Fault classification results of decision tree
3/12/16
85
Mean

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
94
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
96
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
97
Confusion matrix of decision tree at 1100 rpm
3/12/16
86

Testing Parameter
Speed in rpm
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
0.16
0.14
0.11
0.17
0.145
Total number of instances
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
Correctly classified instances
2025
1952
1999
1828
1951
375
448
401
572
449
84.38
81.33
83.29
76.17
81.28
Classification efficiency %
3/12/16
87
A4
A
A A
1 A2 3 4
9
4 4 0 2
2 74 0 23
9
0 1 1 6
6
1 27 7 5
A5
A6
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
A7
0 0 0
9
8 0 0
0 87 0
9
0 0 3
A8
0
9
5
A9
A1
0
A1
1
A1
2
A1
3
A1
4
A1
5
A1
17
0 42 54
97
99
79
86
A1
A2
A3
A
A
5 A6 7
A
8
A
9
A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
9
Confusion matrix of decision tree at 1100 rpm 0 0 0 Vibration

0 0 0 signal
0
0 for1 24 0fault
74 classes
17 0
0
0

500
0.23
Speed in rpm
700
900
0.11
0.11
1100
0.13
Total number of
instances
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
instances
734
967
943
959
901
466
233
257
241
299
61.16
80.58
78.58
79.92
75.06
Testing Parameter
Time taken (sec)
Classification
efficiency %
3/12/16
89
Mean
0.145

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a1
96
1
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
a2
0
93
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
a3
0
0
88
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
1
a4
0
0
0
89
0
0
0
0
3
9
0
a5
0
0
4
0
59
13
0
0
0
0
10
a6
0
0
0
0
13
68
0
0
0
0
22
a7
4
6
0
0
0
0
76
4
0
0
0
a8
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
96
0
0
0
a9
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
71
23
5
a10
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
19
67
0
a11
0
0
1
1
21
19
0
0
2
1
62
a12
0
0
2
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
a12
94
Confusion matrix of decision tree at 1100 rpm

Testing Parameter
Speed in rpm
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
1.03
0.87
0.87
0.86
0.9075
Total number of
instances
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
instances
910
664
778
812
791
1490
1736
1622
1588
1609
Classification
efficiency %
37.92
27.67
32.42
33.83
32.96
3/12/16
91
Support Vector Machine(1)
belongs to a class of supervised learning algorithm
constructs an optimal hyperplane for linearly separable

patterns to classify the data into two categories.
extends to patterns that are not linearly separable by

transformations of original data to map into new space with
the help of kernel functions.
3/12/16
93
3/12/16
94
The objective function of the problem is to maximizes the

margin and minimizes the error.
We combine this and form a single minimization problem.
Min
w, y
wTw
T
e y
SVM Model
C-SVC and nu-SVC
Kernel Functions
Linear
Three degree polynomial
Radial basis function and
Sigmoid
Fault Classification SVM(1)

Classification Efficiency %
Sl. No
SVM
Kernel
Function
c-SVC
nuSVC
Linear
98.833
98
Speed 500 rpm
Speed 700 rpm

c-SVC
Three degree
98.833 98.917
polynomial
98
Radial Basis
Function
99.333 99.333
(RBF)
98.25
Sigmoid
98.917
98.25
nuSVC
c-SVC
98.083
93.917
nuSVC
99.667
97.833 99.833
99.833
97.833 99.417 99.333 99.917
99.833
96
99.5
99.167 94.917 99.833
Performance of SVM kernel functions
3/12/16
c-SVC
98.083 95.583 99.167 98.917 99.833
nuSVC
Speed 900 rpm Speed 1100 rpm
97
98.5

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Time taken (sec)
Total number of
instances
instances
Classification
efficiency %
700
900
1100
9.31
10.47
9.03
8.28
9.2725
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1189
1179
1192
1198
1190
11
21
10
99.08
98.25
99.33
99.83
99.12
Fault classification results of SVM
3/12/16
Mean
500
98

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
100
a2
100
a3
99
a4
100
a5
100
a6
100
a7
99
a8
100
a9
100
a10
100
a11
100
a12
100
Confusion matrix of SVM at 1100 rpm

3/12/16
99

Testing Parameter
Speed in rpm
Mean
500
700
900
1100
54
162
210
131
139.25
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
2140
2027
2033
1913
2028
260
373
367
487
372
89.17
84.46
84.7
79.71
84.51
Time taken (min)
3/12/16
100
A1
A1 70
A2 14
A3
0
A4
8
A5
2
A6
2
A7
0
A8
0
A9
0
A10 0
A2
14
65
1
9
0
1
0
0
0
0
A3
1
6
94
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
A4
14
14
5
79
0
0
0
0
0
0
A5
0
0
0
0
76
13
0
0
0
0
A6
1
1
0
0
19
84
0
0
0
0
A11
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
A18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A19
A20
A21
A22
A23
A24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2
A7 A8 A9 A10 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
97 2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3 97 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0 75 22 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0 29 70 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 69 13 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 11 7
0
0
0
0
0
0
8 79 0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
7
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 97 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 12 86 0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 92 8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6 94 0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0 69 1 22 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2 89 8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
6 85 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2 86 3
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6 83
Confusion matrix of SVM at 1100 rpm Vibration signal for 24 fault classes

Testing Parameter
Time taken (min)
Total number of
instances
instances
Classification
efficiency %
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
107
67
35
32
44.66667
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
879
1071
1011
1015
994
321
129
189
185
206
73.25
89.25
84.25
84.58
82.8325
1100
3/12/16
102
Mean

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
95
a2
97
a3
95
a4
96
a5
66
10
22
a6
77
17
a7
78
a8
99
a9
73
20
a10
11
22
67
a11
21
77
a12
95
Confusion matrix of SVM at 1100 rpm
3/12/16
103

Testing Parameter
Speed in rpm
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
284
480
502
278
386
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
1173
872
940
1009
999
1227
1528
1460
1391
1401
48.88
36.33
39.17
42.04
41.60
3/12/16
104
Clonal Selection Classification Algorithm
Supervised learning algorithm
Based on natural immune system
Our biological immune system protects our body against

foreign cells called antigens.
To recognize and eliminate the antigens, each B-cell secretes

variety of antibodies .
B cells produce large numbers of antigen-specific antibodies
Each antibody recognize and bind to antigens.
Fault Classification CSCA (1)

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
6.86
6.71
6.16
6.30
6.51
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
969
1056
975
1031
1008
231
144
225
169
192
80.75
88.00
81.25
85.92
83.98
Fault classification results of CSCA
3/12/16
106

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
100
a2
100
a3
94
a4
100
a5
97
a6
100
a7
56
33
a8
94
a9
86
a10
28
68
a11
85
a12
17
19
13
51
Confusion matrix of CSCA at 1100 rpm

3/12/16
107

Testing Parameter
Speed in rpm
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
21.82
21.23
22.92
20.92
21.7225
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
1456
1424
1287
1013
1295
944
976
1113
1387
1105
60.67
59.31
53.63
42.21
53.95
3/12/16
108

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
5.71
10.03
8.77
10.05
8.64
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
452
655
683
650
610
748
545
517
550
590
37.67
54.58
56.92
54.17
50.83
3/12/16
109
Proximal Support Vector Machine
The SVM design the hyperplane to divide the space into two half spaces
which separate the data points into two different classes.
The computational complexity increases when the number of classes and

the training samples will increase.
In proximal support vector machine, the data points are assigned according
to the proximity to the hyperplanes that are separated as far as possible.
PSVM is a fast and simple algorithm to generate a linear or nonlinear

classifier by solving the linear equations.
Fault Classification PSVM (1)

Condi
tion
Classification Method
C1
a1
Vs
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
C2
a2
Vs
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C3
a3
Vs
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C4
a4
Vs
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C5
a5
Vs
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C6
a6
Vs
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C7
a7
Vs
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
C8
a8
Vs
a9
a10
a11
a12
C9
a9
Vs
a10
a11
a12
C10
a10
Vs
a11
a12
C11
a11
Vs
a12
Method of classification in PSVM
3/12/16
111
a12

Classification Efficiency
Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
Mean
Time(sec)
3/12/16
500 rpm
700 rpm
900 rpm
91.67
91.67
91.67
97.82
99.63
90.90
90.00
90.00
90.00
88.89
88.88
88.88
100
100
100
100
100
100
95.33
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96.70
97.29
96.50
12
12
12
Fault classification results of PSVM
1100 rpm
100
100
90.00
88.89
100
100
99.93
100
100
100
98.00
97.89
12
112

3/12/16
Condition
500 rpm
700 rpm
900 rpm
1100 rpm
C1
95.83
95.83
95.83
95.83
C2
95.65
95.65
95.65
95.65
C3
95.45
95.45
95.45
95.45
C4
95.24
95.24
95.24
95.24
C5
95.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
C6
94.74
94.74
94.74
94.74
C7
94.44
94.44
94.44
94.44
C8
94.12
94.12
94.12
94.12
C9
93.75
94.00
97.25
93.75
C10
93.33
93.33
96.80
98.93
C11
92.86
92.86
92.86
92.57
C12
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
C13
91.67
92.67
92.67
91.67
C14
95.27
98.91
100.00
98.91
C15
90.40
98.00
92.80
89.60
C16
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
C17
100.00
88.00
95.00
91.50
C18
86.29
100.00
100.00
100.00
C19
100.00
97.33
85.33
90.00
C20
100.00
98.40
80.00
96.80
C21
100.00
100.00
100.00
94.00
C22
93.33
62.67
92.00
98.67
C23
70.00
62.00
78.00
68.00
Mean
94.23
92.98
94.05
94.12
Time(sec)
54
55
54
61
113

Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
Mean
Time(sec)
3/12/16
500 rpm 700 rpm

91.67
91.67
92.36
90.91
90.00
96.40
89.33
88.89
91.50
92.50
98.29
98.86
100.00
99.33
98.40
99.20
99.00
98.00
98.67
97.33
84.00
94.00
93.93
95.19
13
12
900 rpm
94.33
90.91
92.80
98.67
92.50
97.14
100.00
100.00
100.00
93.33
96.00
95.97
13
1100 rpm
91.67
90.91
90.00
92.44
99.50
100.00
98.67
100.00
100.00
98.67
96.00
96.17
12
114

Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21
C22
C23
Mean
Time(sec)
3/12/16
500 rpm
95.83
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
92.86
97.85
91.67
99.27
94.00
100.00
88.00
93.71
84.00
89.60
80.00
97.33
60.00
91.99
59
700 rpm
95.83
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
92.86
92.31
91.67
93.45
93.20
100.00
87.00
97.71
94.00
96.00
97.00
93.33
88.00
94.09
58
900 rpm
95.83
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.20
94.74
94.44
94.12
94.25
93.33
92.86
94.15
91.67
94.55
93.60
100.00
87.50
94.29
93.33
97.60
94.00
98.67
98.00
94.72
63
1100 rpm
95.83
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
95.29
94.25
93.33
92.86
93.23
91.67
91.64
92.00
100.00
88.50
94.29
95.33
96.00
97.00
94.67
96.00
94.45
62
115
Fault diagnosis using statistical features

Classification
algorithm
Vibration signals
Sound Signals
12 classes
24 classes
12 classes
24 classes
DT
98.01
81.28
75.06
32.96
SVM
99.12
84.51
82.83
41.61
CSCA
83.98
53.95
50.83
PSVM
97.00
93.85
95.31
93.81
Mean classification efficiency of the classification algorithm using statistical features
116
Fault Diagnosis using

Wavelet Features
Wavelet features(1)
Procedure of four level wavelet decomposition (Gao and Yan, 2011)

3/12/16
118
Wavelet features(2)
Wavelet family for performing DWT are
Haar wavelet,
Meyer wavelet,
Daubechies wavelet,
Coiflet wavelet,
Symlet wavelet,
Biorthogonal and
Reverse biorthogonal wavelet.
59 wavelets are considered in this work.
3/12/16
119
Wavelet features(3)
The wavelets are selected on the basis of following criteria:
1. The wavelet that extracts large amount of energy from
the signal
- Wavelet energy features
2. The wavelet that minimizes the shanon entropy of the
wavelet coefficients
3. The wavelet that has produced the maximum energy to
shanon entropy ratio should be chosen as the most
appropriate wavelet
- Wavelet energy to entropy ratio features
3/12/16
120
Fault Diagnosis using Wavelet features

Feature
Wavelet
extraction Wavelet features - Energy features

- Energy to Entropy features
Selection Decision Tree.
Feature
selection Decision Tree.
Feature
ClassificationDecision Tree,
Support Vector Machine,
Clonal selection classification algorithm and
Proximal support vector machine.
3/12/16
Selection of wavelet(1)
The wavelet decomposition of vibration signal for good conditions of 12 fault classes
using 'rbio3.9' wavelet at 1100 rpm.
122
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3/12/16
Wavelet Speed 500 Speed 700 Speed 900 Speed 1100
rpm
rpm
rpm
rpm
bior1.1
bior1.3
bior1.5
bior2.2
bior2.4
bior2.6
bior2.8
bior3.1
bior3.3
bior3.5
bior3.7
bior3.9
bior4.4
bior5.5
bior6.8
coif1
coif2
coif3
coif4
coif5
dmey
Haar
DB1
DB2
DB3
DB4
DB5
DB6
DB7
DB8
89.17
94.17
95.17
89.00
96.08
96.58
96.17
67.50
84.67
91.67
91.75
93.50
97.50
97.67
98.08
94.33
96.25
96.00
96.00
94.42
96.83
89.17
89.17
95.08
95.58
95.42
94.17
96.08
95.83
96.25
89.17
93.92
95.92
79.00
90.42
92.42
91.58
56.75
85.42
91.33
93.92
92.83
91.50
93.00
92.25
89.50
92.50
92.67
92.67
94.25
95.33
89.17
89.17
88.58
92.50
93.75
93.00
94.42
93.50
93.42
84.85
87.54
87.21
81.31
90.40
91.33
90.32
57.58
79.97
87.88
90.57
90.15
89.81
88.97
88.97
86.03
88.13
88.05
88.64
88.30
86.78
84.85
84.85
84.93
88.55
86.95
84.6
86.45
85.77
86.28
79.71
87.04
86.36
77.27
83.59
86.78
87.12
68.10
81.57
87.54
87.12
85.94
87.79
89.98
89.14
85.27
86.78
86.45
88.8
88.05
89.65
79.71
79.71
83.59
85.19
84.76
87.79
86.36
86.36
86.70
S.No Wavelet Speed 500 Speed 700 Speed 900 Speed 1100
Mean
rpm
rpm
rpm
rpm
Mean
85.72
90.67
91.16
81.65
90.12
91.78
91.30
62.48
82.90
89.61
90.84
90.61
91.65
92.41
92.11
88.78
90.92
90.79
91.53
91.25
92.15
85.72
85.72
88.05
90.46
90.22
89.89
90.83
90.37
90.66
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
DB9
DB10
DB11
DB12
DB13
DB14
DB15
rbio1.1
rbio1.3
rbio1.5
rbio2.2
rbio2.4
rbio2.6
rbio2.8
rbio3.1
rbio3.3
rbio3.5
rbio3.7
rbio3.9
rbio4.4
rbio5.5
rbio6.8
sym2
sym3
sym4
sym5
sym6
sym7
sym8
96.42
94.67
95.17
94.50
95.75
96.00
95.00
89.17
91.83
93.25
94.92
95.83
95.75
96.92
96.42
96.25
95.92
96.17
97.25
96.58
97.50
97.42
95.08
95.58
93.17
96.58
95.92
96.17
96.50
95.08
93.00
92.83
93.92
94.92
92.50
93.17
89.17
86.42
89.75
93.08
93.92
93.17
95.92
95.5
93.75
95.25
96.00
95.67
93.75
93.17
93.33
88.58
92.5
94.75
95.92
94.67
95.08
94.17
87.12
87.71
87.37
87.79
87.63
86.45
88.72
84.85
85.10
84.09
85.69
90.49
88.47
88.80
90.49
90.74
90.99
89.81
91.08
89.14
88.89
88.80
84.93
88.55
88.80
87.63
87.96
89.73
89.56
86.53
85.44
86.45
87.29
89.73
90.40
88.13
79.71
84.68
84.60
87.21
88.47
88.30
87.71
87.21
88.55
86.62
86.70
88.64
87.96
85.10
88.30
83.59
85.19
85.94
89.31
87.88
85.69
89.98
Classification efficiency for the wavelet energy features - Vibration signal for 12 fault classes
123
91.29
90.20
90.46
90.88
92.01
91.34
91.25
85.72
87.01
87.92
90.22
92.18
91.42
92.34
92.40
92.32
92.19
92.17
93.16
91.86
91.16
91.96
88.05
90.46
90.67
92.36
91.61
91.67
92.55
S.No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Wavelet Speed 500 Speed 700 Speed 900 Speed
rpm
rpm
rpm
1100 rpm
bior1.1
91.25
87.08
88.17
88.08
bior1.3
91.92
91.25
86.92
83.25
bior1.5
91.5
90.25
87.08
83.17
bior2.2
88
85.08
81.75
80.42
bior2.4
92
91.67
89.75
85.17
bior2.6
92.17
90.42
86.25
85.17
bior2.8
92
89.58
88
84.42
bior3.1
59
51.5
47.67
58.33
bior3.3
87
83.33
79.42
84.75
bior3.5
91.83
89.83
85.5
86.5
bior3.7
92.92
90.83
88.25
86.33
bior3.9
92.33
91
87.75
84.5
bior4.4
90.58
90.83
86.75
87.17
bior5.5
90.25
90.75
84.75
86.67
bior6.8
91.25
90.25
86
88.33
coif1
91.08
91.58
86.83
86.42
coif2
91.25
92
85.75
86.33
coif3
91.5
91.42
84.92
86.75
coif4
90.25
90.08
86.08
87.5
coif5
88.67
89.58
83.08
86.67
dmey
87.5
88.92
82
86.5
Haar
91.25
87.08
88.17
88.08
DB1
91.25
87.08
88.17
88.08
DB2
91.58
91.75
90.25
85.58
DB3
91.58
91.08
88.08
88.17
DB4
92.5
91.08
84.42
85.25
DB5
91.33
91.17
85.75
85.25
DB6
90.83
91.75
86.83
86.17
DB7
89.92
91.17
87.67
87.25
Mean
88.65
88.33
88
83.81
89.65
88.5
88.5
54.13
83.63
88.42
89.58
88.9
88.83
88.1
88.96
88.98
88.83
88.65
88.48
87
86.23
88.65
88.65
89.79
89.73
88.31
88.38
88.9
89
S.No Wavelet Speed 500 Speed 700 Speed 900 Speed
rpm
rpm
rpm
1100 rpm
31
DB9
90.42
92.5
87.08
86.5
32 DB10
92.08
92.17
86.25
88
33
DB11
89.5
90.25
87.42
89.33
34 DB12
89.33
91.5
86.08
88.42
35 DB13
91.33
91.58
84.17
89.92
36 DB14
88.33
89.58
84
89.83
37 DB15
88.92
89.25
83.92
89.58
38 rbio1.1
91.25
87.08
88.17
88.08
39 rbio1.3
91.83
91.33
86.08
82
40 rbio1.5
91.58
89.83
84.83
82.92
41 rbio2.2
93
92.25
89.08
87.5
42 rbio2.4
90.67
92.33
86.92
86.75
43 rbio2.6
90.42
90.5
85.75
86.17
44 rbio2.8
91
91.5
84.42
88
45 rbio3.1
94.67
91.42
93.08
91.5
46 rbio3.3
92.08
91.92
89
89
47 rbio3.5
89.67
91.58
86.42
87.67
48 rbio3.7
90.33
91.17
85.92
86.17
49 rbio3.9
90.67
90.92
85
86.25
50 rbio4.4
90.42
91.33
87.33
88.42
51 rbio5.5
92.08
91
85.92
87.58
52 rbio6.8
91.67
90.33
85.58
87.75
53
sym2
91.58
91.75
90.25
85.58
54
sym3
91.58
91.08
88.08
88.17
55
sym4
92.58
90.83
89.75
87.92
56
sym5
91.58
92.58
86.33
86.08
57
sym6
92.5
92.58
87.83
88.67
58
sym7
92.42
91.75
86.33
85.92
59
sym8
91.92
91.33
84.75
87.75
Mean
89.13
89.63
89.13
88.83
89.25
87.94
87.92
88.65
87.81
87.29
90.46
89.17
88.21
88.73
92.67
90.5
88.83
88.4
88.21
89.38
89.15
88.83
89.79
89.73
90.27
89.15
90.4
89.1
88.94
Classification
efficiency
for
the wavelet
energy
to88.23
entropy features - Vibration signal for 12 fault classes
DB8
90.33
90.75
86.83
85
30
3/12/16
124
Maximum classification efficiency of each wavelet family

3/12/16
125

3/12/16
126

3/12/16
127
Maximum classification efficiency of each wavelet family 3/12/16
128
Feature Selection(1)
Decision tree representation using 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features at 500 rpm
3/12/16
129
3/12/16
130
3/12/16
131
3/12/16
132
Decision tree - Classification Efficiency %
Speed 500
rpm
Speed 700
rpm
Speed 900
rpm
Speed 1100
rpm
Mean
classification
efficiency %
97.25
95.67
96.08
94.42
95.85
97.25
95.83
96.42
93.75
95.81
97.17
96.08
96.5
93.5
95.81
97.17
95.92
96.08
93.17
95.59
96.50
94.67
95.50
90.67
94.34
96.08
89.33
92.83
90.17
92.10
94.08
89.17
92.83
89.75
91.46
90.33
85.17
87.67
85.5
87.17
61.00
58.92
52.58
64.58
59.27
Sl. No
Number of
features
Performance of DT using 'rbio3.6' wavelet energy features in dimensionality reduction
3/12/16
133
100.00
95.00
90.00
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
Dimensionality reduction of 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features

3/12/16
134
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
40.00
Dimensionality reductions of 'dmey' wavelet energy features

3/12/16
135
95.00
90.00
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
Dimensionality reduction of 'coif4' wavelet energy features

3/12/16
136
85.00
80.00
Mean Classification
Efficiency %
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
55.00
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
Dimensionality reduction of 'DB14' wavelet energy features

3/12/16
137
Conditions
Wavelet
Number of prominent features
12 fault conditions of vibration signal
Rbio3.9
Six
24 fault conditions of vibration signal
Dmey
Five
12 fault conditions of sound signal
Coif4
Seven
24 fault conditions of sound signal
DB14
Six
Best wavelet and its number of prominent features
Fault classification Decision Tree(1)

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
0.14
0.11
0.09
0.09
0.1075
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
instances
1166
1151
1153
1118
1147
34
49
47
82
53
97.17
95.92
96.08
93.17
95.59
Fault classification results of decision tree using six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
139
Fault classificationDecisionTree(2)
a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
73
0
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
98
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
26
0
85
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
92
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
96
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
95
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
98
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
3
1
5
2
84
Confusion matrix of decision tree using six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features at 1100 rpm
3/12/16
140

Decision tree representation using six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features at 1100 rpm
3/12/16
141

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken to build a model

(sec)
0.36
0.37
0.36
0.39
0.37
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1870
1934
1760
1691
1814
530
466
640
709
587
77.92
80.58
73.33
70.46
75.57
Fault classification results of decision tree using five 'dmey' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
142
Fault classificationDecision Tree(5)
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
0.13
0.13
0.11
0.09
0.115
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1060
1129
1118
1176
1122
134
71
82
24
78
88.80
94.11
93.18
97.98
93.52
Testing Parameter
Mean
Fault classification results of decision tree using seven 'coif4' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
143
Fault classificationDecision Tree(6)
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
0.34
0.41
0.34
0.31
0.35
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
2086
1892
2006
2120
2026
314
508
394
280
374
86.92
78.83
83.58
88.33
84.42
Testing Parameter
Mean
Fault classification results of decision tree using six 'DB14' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
144
Fault classification SVM(1)

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
19.53
26.01
39.28
23.23
27.01
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1186
1177
1149
1146
1165
14
23
51
54
35
98.83
95.75
98.08
95.5
97.04
Fault classification results of support vector machine using

six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
145

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
100
a2
100
a3
77
23
a4
98
a5
13
87
a6
100
a7
98
a8
97
a9
100
a10
98
a11
100
a12
88
Confusion matrix of support vector machine using

six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
146

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
628
1474
4230
634
1741.5
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
1983
2036
1917
1736
1918
417
364
483
664
482
82.63
84.83
79.875
72.33
79.92

five 'dmey' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
147

Confusion matrix of support vector machine using five 'dmey' wavelet energy features

Testing Parameter
Time taken (sec)
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Mean
22
30
16
23
22.75
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1118
1187
1182
1199
1172
82
13
18
58
93.17
98.92
98.50
99.92
97.63

seven 'coif4' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
149

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
100
a2
100
a3
100
a4
100
a5
100
a6
100
a7
100
a8
99
a9
100
a10
100
a11
100
a12
100
Confusion matrix of support vector machine using seven 'coif4' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
150

Speed in rpm
Testing Parameter
Mean
500
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
195
235
223
119
193
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
2199
2079
2106
2246
2158
201
321
294
154
242
91.63
86.62
87.75
93.58
89.90

six 'DB14' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
151
Fault classification CSCA(1)

500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Time taken (sec)
9.74
8.75
9.47
6.94
8.725
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
1179
1163
1142
1110
1148
21
37
58
90
52
98.25
96.92
95.17
92.50
95.71
Testing Parameter
Mean
Fault classification results of clonal selection classification algorithm using

six 'rbio3.9 wavelet energy features
3/12/16
152

a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
a1
a2
a3
a4
a5
a6
a7
a8
a9
a10
a11
a12
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
69
1
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
98
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
31
1
76
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
92
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
97
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
99
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
3
0
1
0
79
Confusion matrix of clonal selection classification algorithm using

six 'rbio3.9 wavelet energy features
3/12/16
153

Testing Parameter
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Mean
Time taken to build a model

(sec)
28.42
24.74
24.95
28.16
26.57
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
1453
1530
1400
1095
1370
947
870
1000
1305
1030
60.54
63.75
58.33
45.63
57.06

five 'dmey wavelet energy features
3/12/16
154

500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Time taken to build a model (sec)
8.78
10.2
8.66
6.97
8.65
1200
1200
1200
1200
1200
892
1050
1077
1145
1041
308
150
123
55
159
74.33
87.46
89.73
95.45
86.74
Testing Parameter
Mean

seven 'coif4 wavelet energy features
3/12/16
155

Testing Parameter
500
Speed in rpm
700
900
1100
Mean
Time taken (sec)
59.17
30.37
35.91
56.83
45.57
2400
2400
2400
2400
2400
1359
1416
1725
1836
1584
1041
984
675
564
816
56.63
59.00
71.88
76.5
66.00

six 'DB14 wavelet energy features
3/12/16
156
Fault classification PSVM(1)

Vibration for 12 fault classes
Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
Mean
Time(sec)
500 rpm
95.64
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99.60
11
700 rpm
900 rpm
91.64
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
97.72
100
100
100
100
97.60
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99.03
99.78
9
9
1100 rpm
100
100
99.11
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99.92
13
Fault classification results of PSVM using six 'rbio3.9' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
157

Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21
C22
C23
Mean
Time(sec)
500 rpm
700 rpm
900 rpm
1100 rpm
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
99.58
94.44
94.35
93.75
94.13
100.00
92.31
100.00
93.45
98.00
91.56
100.00
100.00
98.00
99.20
100.00
96.00
86.00
72.00
94.96
58
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
94.35
93.75
99.20
100.00
92.31
100.00
99.64
100.00
95.11
100.00
85.71
100.00
96.80
100.00
90.67
76.00
72.00
94.18
59
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
96.80
100.00
92.31
100.00
92.73
99.60
94.67
100.00
88.57
100.00
88.00
98.00
89.33
84.00
64.00
93.32
61
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.00
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
94.40
100.00
92.31
100.00
92.00
100.00
97.78
100.00
85.71
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
60.00
64.00
93.24
57
Fault classification results of PSVM using five 'dmey' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
158

Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
Mean
Time(sec)
700
500 rpm
900 rpm 1100 rpm
rpm
100
99.27
100
100
100
100
100
100
98.22
99.56
100
97.33
100
100
100
100
95.43
100
99.43
98.29
100
100
100
100
100
100
97.6
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
99.42
99.89
99.95
99.60
16
11
12
10
Fault classification results of PSVM using seven 'coif4' wavelet energy features
3/12/16
159

Condition
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21
C22
C23
Mean
500 rpm
95.65
95.45
95.24
95.60
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
92.86
92.31
92.33
98.55
99.60
88.89
100.00
100.00
99.33
100.00
99.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
96.31
700 rpm
95.65
95.45
95.24
98.20
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
92.86
92.31
91.67
95.27
100.00
88.89
100.00
98.86
100.00
87.20
100.00
82.67
94.00
100.00
94.72
900 rpm
95.65
95.45
96.19
100.00
96.21
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
97.14
92.31
100.00
96.73
98.80
88.89
100.00
95.43
100.00
92.80
100.00
92.00
98.00
100.00
96.14
1100 rpm
95.65
95.45
100.00
100.00
94.74
94.44
94.12
93.75
93.33
94.86
92.31
100.00
94.18
99.20
89.33
100.00
89.14
100.00
96.80
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
96.40
Time(sec) of PSVM
75
59
72
Fault classification results
using
six118
'DB14' wavelet
energy features
3/12/16
160
Fault classification using wavelet features

Classification
algorithm
Vibration Signals
Sound Signals
12 classes
24 classes
12 classes
24 classes
DT
95.59
75.57
93.52
84.42
SVM
97.04
79.92
97.63
89.90
CSCA
95.71
57.06
86.74
66
PSVM
99.58
93.93
99.72
95.89
Mean classification efficiency of the classification algorithm using wavelet features
3/12/16
161
Major Contributions
Major Contributions(1)
All the critical rotating elements such as shaft, rotor, bearing and gear with
twenty four fault conditions were considered in this study.
The sound based automated fault diagnosis was well explored in this study.
The behavior of statistical features and wavelet features of the sound
signals were studied in detail.
The sound and vibration based fault diagnosis were studied and compared.
The sound signal based fault diagnosis is better than vibration signal when
discrete wavelet energy features are used.
The classification algorithm results showed that the difficulty in

identification of faults and the time taken are increased when the number
of components or fault classes increases.
The classification accuracy of classifier using wavelet energy features was

improved when compared to the statistical features in both sound and
vibration signals.
The use of three dimensionality reduction techniques such as decision tree,

principal component analysis and independent component analysis on
rotating machine fault diagnosis was discussed and compared in this
research work.
The decision tree algorithm was extensively used for selection of wavelet,
choosing the optimum number of prominent features and classification of
the faults.
The Performance of c-SVC model with the RBF kernel function in support
vector machine is better than nu-SVC and other kernel functions.
The clonal selection classification algorithm was used as a classifier in

machinery fault diagnosis. The CSCA is not very efficient in multi
component fault diagnosis of rotating machine.
PSVM effectively classify the 24 fault classes using wavelet features of

both sound and vibration signals within a short period.
Conclusion
Conclusion(1)
The machine learning approach to rotating machine fault diagnosis using

sound and vibration signals is taken up for study.
Experiments conducted in two phases

Phase-I (12 fault classes of shaft, rotor and bearing)
Vibration signals
Sound signals
Phase-II (24 fault classes of shaft, rotor, bearing and gear)
Vibration signals
Sound signals
3/12/16
167
Conclusion(2)
The following features were used in this study

Statistical features
Wavelet energy features and
Wavelet energy to entropy features
The dimensionality reduction techniques such as Decision Tree (DT),
Principal Component Analysis(PCA) and Independent Component
Analysis(ICA) were used for feature selection in fault diagnosis using
statistical features.
168
Conclusion(3)
The selected features were used for classification of faults.
The classifiers used in the present work are

Decision Tree (DT),
Support Vector Machine (SVM),
Clonal selection classification algorithm (CSCA) and
Proximal support vector machine (PSVM).
3/12/16
169
Conclusion(4)
Vibration signals
Sound signals
Classifier
12 classes
24 classes
12 classes
24 classes
Statistical
Wavelet
Statistical
Wavelet
Statistical
Wavelet
Statistical
Wavelet
Features
Features
Features
Features
Features
Features
Features
Features
DT
98.01
95.59
81.28
75.57
75.06
93.52
32.96
84.42
SVM
99.12
97.04
84.51
79.92
82.83
97.63
41.61
89.90
CSCA
83.98
95.71
53.95
57.06
50.83
86.74
66.00
PSVM
97.00
99.58
93.85
93.93
95.31
99.72
93.81
95.89
Mean classification efficiency of the classifier using

statistical features and wavelet features
3/12/16
170
Conclusion(5)
The PSVM with discrete wavelet energy features was selected as a best
feature-classifier pair to automate the multi component fault diagnosis of
rotating machine using both sound and vibration signals.
3/12/16
171
Scope for Future Work(1)
The features such as wavelet packet features and fractal analysis may
increase the classification ability of the machine learning algorithm.
The kernel principal component analysis, factor analysis, fishers linear

discriminant analysis can be tried out for dimensionality reduction.
The gene expression programming, Hidden Markov model etc., may be

used to increase the classification efficiency for the large number of fault
classes.
3/12/16
172
Scope for Future Work(2)
The development of new classification algorithm for machinery fault

diagnosis.
The machine learning process can be tried with feature fusion or decision
fusion of sound and vibration signals.
The portable hardware kit can be fabricated using best feature-classifier for
the automated fault diagnosis.
3/12/16
173
Thank You

Automated Fault Diagnosis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Automated Fault Diagnosis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Machine Learning Approach to

Multicomponent Fault Diagnosis of Rotating

Fault Diagnosis using Statistical features

Fault Diagnosis using Wavelet features

turbines, compressors, fans, gear boxes, etc.

Shafts, rotors, bearings, gears, etc.

prevent break down, increase productivity and reduce

Wear debris Analysis

Sound signal, etc.

Frequency domain Analysis

Both Learning + Labeling Subsequently

Machine Learning .(2)

Feature extraction Statistical features,

Feature selection/reduction Decision Tree,

Feature classification Artificial Neural Network,

Dyer and Stewart,

The statistical parameters such as probability density and kurtosis

For gearbox fault diagnosis, Randall proved the effectiveness of

can be effectively used for identification of bearing fault

Qingfend et al., describes the advantage of using wigner-ville

Morlet wavelet was applied to extract the engine sound features

network with 95% accuracy

Baydar and Ball ,

Sound signal is a powerful tool in detection of various types of

progressing faults in gear boxes.

The machine learning-based methods can be effectively used to

identify the shaft cracks in rotating machines

Heng and Nor,

Studied the effectiveness of sound and vibration signal in

Quek et al., 2001.

Wavelet transform filtering can be used to remove the unwanted

Sun et al., 2007.

The redundant twelve features were effectively removed from

In the fault identification of induction motor, the discrimination

PSVM yielded 100% classification efficiency in the roller

Gan et al., 2009.

The clone-selection programming effective in identification

Wu and Liao, 2010.

The various faults in the automotive air conditioner blower

Singh et al., 2013

The various width sizes (0.5776 to 1.9614 mm) of the outer

Scope of present work . . .(1)

Most of the research work done in this area considered one or

Scope of present work . . .(2)

Machine learning based sound signal analysis was not well

Scope of present work . . .(3)

There is a need for identification of the best suited feature

Scope of present work . . .(4)

Clonal selection classification algorithm (CSCA) is a newly

Scope of present work . . .(5)

Feature-Classifier combination is essential for automated

Machine Learning Techniques

Feature extraction Statistical features and

Feature selection/reduction Decision Tree (DT),

Feature classification Decision Tree(DT),

Machine Fault Diagnosis

Rotating machine fault simulator

Location of accelerometer and microphone

Spur bevel gearbox

: Dytran Instruments Inc. USA

Resonance Frequency: 45 kHz

Dactron FFT Analyzer

Good and fault conditions of rotating elements (1)

Good bearing and good gear