Advertisement

Bearing fault diagnosis with nonlinear adaptive dictionary learning

  • Yanfei LuEmail author
  • Rui Xie
  • Steven Y. Liang
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

The monitoring of rotating machinery condition has been a critical component of the Industry 4.0 revolution in enhancing machine reliability and facilitating intelligent manufacturing. The introduction of condition-based monitoring has effectively reduced the catastrophic events and maintenance cost across various industries. One of the major challenges of the diagnosis remains as majority of the diagnostic model requires off-line analysis and human intervention. The offline analysis, which is normally done by previous experience, involves tuning model parameters to improve the performance of the diagnostic model. However, for newly developed models, the knowledge of the unknown parameters does not exist. One way to resolve this issue is through learning using adaptation. The adaptation algorithm adjusts itself by newly acquired data. Hence, improvement of the model performance is achieved. In this paper, a nonlinear adaptive dictionary learning algorithm is proposed to achieve early fault detection of bearing elements without using the conventional computation heavy algorithm to update the dictionary. Deterministic and random data separation is implemented using the autoregressive model to reduce the background noise. The filtered data is further analyzed by the Infogram to reveal the impulsiveness and cyclostationary signature of the vibration signal. The dictionary is initialized using random parameters. Instead of using the k means singular value decomposition algorithm to compute the dictionary for adaptation, the unscented Kalman filter (UKF) is implemented to update the dictionaries using the filtered signal from the Infogram. The updating algorithm does not require computation of the dictionary, and no previous knowledge of the dictionary’s parameters is needed. The updated dictionary contains the detected fault signature from the Infogram and, therefore, is used for further fault analysis. The proposed algorithm has the advantage of self-adaptation, the capability to map the non-linear relationship of the signal and dictionary weights. The algorithm can be used in the various condition-based monitoring of rotating machineries to avoid additional human efforts and improve the performance of the diagnostic model.

Keywords

Ball bearing Fault diagnosis Dictionary learning Adaptive algorithm 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Author contributions

Y.L. and R.X. created the model and analyzed the data; S.Y.L. provided feedback of the concept; Y.L. and R.X. wrote the paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Ayhan, B., C. Kwan, and S.Y. Liang. Adaptive remaining useful life prediction algorithm for bearings. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management (ICPHM). 2018. IEEE.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Randall RB, Antoni J (2011) Rolling element bearing diagnostics—a tutorial. Mech Syst Signal Process 25(2):485–520Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Smith WA, Randall RB (2015) Rolling element bearing diagnostics using the Case Western Reserve University data: a benchmark study. Mech Syst Signal Process 64:100–131Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Antoni J, Randall R (2006) The spectral kurtosis: application to the vibratory surveillance and diagnostics of rotating machines. Mech Syst Signal Process 20(2):308–331Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu Y, Li Q, Pan Z, Liang SY (2018) Prognosis of bearing degradation using gradient variable forgetting factor RLS combined with time series model. IEEE Access 6:10986–10,995Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li Y (1999) Dynamic prognostics of rolling element bearing condition. Georgia Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tavner PJ, Penman J (1987) Condition monitoring of electrical machines, vol 1. John Wiley & Sons IncorporatedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Qiu H, Lee J, Lin J, Yu G (2006) Wavelet filter-based weak signature detection method and its application on rolling element bearing prognostics. J Sound Vib 289(4–5):1066–1090Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang NE, Shen Z, Long SR, Wu MC, Shih HH, Zheng Q, Yen N-C, Tung CC, Liu HH (1998) The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non-stationary time series analysis. In Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: mathematical, physical and engineering sciences. The Royal Society 454:903–995zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Borghesani P, Ricci R, Chatterton S, Pennacchi P (2013) A new procedure for using envelope analysis for rolling element bearing diagnostics in variable operating conditions. Mech Syst Signal Process 38(1):23–35Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu R, Yang B, Zio E, Chen X (2018) Artificial intelligence for fault diagnosis of rotating machinery: a review. Mech Syst Signal Process 108:33–47Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lu Y, Xie R, Liang SY (2018) Detection of weak fault using sparse empirical wavelet transform for cyclic fault. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–7Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang Y, Randall R (2009) Rolling element bearing fault diagnosis based on the combination of genetic algorithms and fast kurtogram. Mech Syst Signal Process 23(5):1509–1517Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Randall R, Sawalhi N, Coats M (2011) A comparison of methods for separation of deterministic and random signals. International Journal of Condition Monitoring 1(1):11–19Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fyfe K, Munck E (1997) Analysis of computed order tracking. Mech Syst Signal Process 11(2):187–205Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bossley K, Mckendrick R, Harris C, Mercer C (1999) Hybrid computed order tracking. Mech Syst Signal Process 13(4):627–641Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao M, Lin J, Wang X, Lei Y, Cao J (2013) A tacho-less order tracking technique for large speed variations. Mech Syst Signal Process 40(1):76–90Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ahamed N, Pandya Y, Parey A (2014) Spur gear tooth root crack detection using time synchronous averaging under fluctuating speed. Measurement 52:1–11Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Combet F, Gelman L (2007) An automated methodology for performing time synchronous averaging of a gearbox signal without speed sensor. Mech Syst Signal Process 21(6):2590–2606Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bonnardot F, El Badaoui M, Randall R, Daniere J, Guillet F (2005) Use of the acceleration signal of a gearbox in order to perform angular resampling (with limited speed fluctuation). Mech Syst Signal Process 19(4):766–785Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Elasha F, Ruiz-Carcel C, Mba D, Chandra P (2014) A comparative study of the effectiveness of adaptive filter algorithms, spectral kurtosis and linear prediction in detection of a naturally degraded bearing in a gearbox. J Fail Anal Prev 14(5):623–636Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Akaike H (1969) Fitting autoregressive models for prediction. Ann Inst Stat Math 21(1):243–247MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Box GE, Jenkins GM, Reinsel GC, Ljung GM (2015) Time series analysis: forecasting and control. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Randall RB (2011) Vibration-based condition monitoring: industrial, aerospace and automotive applications. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Daubechies I (1990) The wavelet transform, time-frequency localization and signal analysis. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 36(5):961–1005MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sun Z, Chang C (2002) Structural damage assessment based on wavelet packet transform. J Struct Eng 128(10):1354–1361Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Selesnick IW, Baraniuk RG, Kingsbury NC (2005) The dual-tree complex wavelet transform. IEEE Signal Process Mag 22(6):123–151Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wang D, Tsui K-L (2017) Dynamic Bayesian wavelet transform: new methodology for extraction of repetitive transients. Mech Syst Signal Process 88:137–144Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yan R, Gao RX, Chen X (2014) Wavelets for fault diagnosis of rotary machines: a review with applications. Signal Process 96:1–15Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Antoni J (2007) Fast computation of the kurtogram for the detection of transient faults. Mech Syst Signal Process 21(1):108–124Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Antoni J (2016) The infogram: Entropic evidence of the signature of repetitive transients. Mech Syst Signal Process 74:73–94Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mairal J, Bach F, Ponce J, Sapiro G (2009) Online dictionary learning for sparse coding. In Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning. ACM.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mairal J, Bach F, Ponce J, Sapiro G (2010) Online learning for matrix factorization and sparse coding. J Mach Learn Res 11(Jan):19–60MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhang Q, Li B (2010) Discriminative K-SVD for dictionary learning in face recognition. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2010 IEEE Conference on. IEEE.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aharon M, Elad M, Bruckstein A (2006) K-SVD: an algorithm for designing overcomplete dictionaries for sparse representation. IEEE Trans Signal Process 54(11):4311–4322zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Skretting K, Engan K (2011) Image compression using learned dictionaries by RLS-DLA and compared with K-SVD. In Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 2011 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rubinstein R, Peleg T, Elad M (2013) Analysis K-SVD: a dictionary-learning algorithm for the analysis sparse model. IEEE Trans Signal Process 61(3):661–677MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wang L, Lu K, Liu P, Ranjan R, Chen L (2014) IK-SVD: dictionary learning for spatial big data via incremental atom update. Computing in Science & Engineering 16(4):41–52Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jiang Z, Lin Z, Davis LS (2011) Learning a discriminative dictionary for sparse coding via label consistent K-SVD. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2011 IEEE Conference on. IEEE.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tropp JA, Gilbert AC (2007) Signal recovery from random measurements via orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 53(12):4655–4666MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Donoho DL, Tsaig Y, Drori I, Starck J-L (2012) Sparse solution of underdetermined systems of linear equations by stagewise orthogonal matching pursuit. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 58(2):1094–1121MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rubinstein R, Zibulevsky M, Elad M (2008) Efficient implementation of the K-SVD algorithm using batch orthogonal matching pursuit. Cs Technion 40(8):1–15Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gharavi-Alkhansari, M. and T.S. Huang. A fast orthogonal matching pursuit algorithm. In Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 1998. Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on. 1998. IEEE.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Borghesani P, Pennacchi P, Ricci R, Chatterton S (2013) Testing second order cyclostationarity in the squared envelope spectrum of non-white vibration signals. Mech Syst Signal Process 40(1):38–55Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Feng Z, Ma H, Zuo MJ (2017) Spectral negentropy based sidebands and demodulation analysis for planet bearing fault diagnosis. J Sound Vib 410:124–150Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nocedal J, Wright SJ (2006) Conjugate gradient methods. Numerical optimization:101–134Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Golub GH, Reinsch C (1970) Singular value decomposition and least squares solutions. Numer Math 14(5):403–420MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Julier SJ, Uhlmann JK (1997) New extension of the Kalman filter to nonlinear systems. In Signal processing, sensor fusion, and target recognition VI. International Society for Optics and PhotonicsGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wan EA, Van Der Merwe R (2001) The unscented Kalman filter. Kalman filtering and neural networks:221–280Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Julier SJ, Uhlmann JK (2004) Unscented filtering and nonlinear estimation. Proc IEEE 92(3):401–422Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Box GE, Tiao GC (2011) Bayesian inference in statistical analysis, vol 40. John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  3. 3.College of Mechanical EngineeringDonghua UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations