Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
Rub-Impact Fault Diagnosis Using an Effective IMF Selection Technique in Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition and Hybrid Feature Models. |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
The complex nature of rubbing faults makes it difficult to use traditional signal analysis methods for feature extraction. Various time-frequency analysis approaches based on signal decomposition, such as empirical mode decomposition (EMD) and ensemble EMD (EEMD), have been widely utilized recently to analyze rub-impact faults. However, traditional EMD suffers from "mode-mixing", and in both EMD and EEMD the relevance of the extracted components to rubbing processes must be determined. In this paper, we introduce a new informative intrinsic mode function (IMF) selection method for EEMD and a hybrid feature model for diagnosing rub-impact faults of various intensities. Our method uses a novel selection procedure that combines the degree-of-presence ratio of rub impact and a Kullback Leibler divergence-based similarity measure into an IMF quality metric with adaptive threshold-based selection to pick the meaningful signal-dominant modes. Signals reconstructed using the selected IMFs contained explicit information about the rubbing faults and are used for hybrid feature extraction. Experimental results demonstrated that the proposed approach effectively defines meaningful IMFs for rubbing processes, and the presented hybrid feature model allows for the classification of rub-impact faults of various intensities with good accuracy. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2018 | 10.3390/s18072040 | SENSORS |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
degree-of-presence ratio,ensemble empirical mode decomposition,fault diagnosis,feature extraction,intrinsic mode function selection,Kullback-Leibler divergence,rotating machinery,rub-impact faults | Algorithm,Electronic engineering,Engineering,Hilbert–Huang transform | Journal |
Volume | Issue | Citations |
18 | 7.0 | 2 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.40 | 9 | 4 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander E. Prosvirin | 1 | 13 | 4.47 |
| M. M. Manjurul Islam | 2 | 18 | 3.11 |
| Jaeyoung Kim | 3 | 77 | 7.21 |
| Jong Myon Kim | 4 | 144 | 32.36 |