| Literature DB >> 29795046 |
Zhipeng Wang1,2,3, Limin Jia4,5,6, Linlin Kou7,8,9, Yong Qin10,11,12.
Abstract
Bogies are crucial for the safe operation of rail transit systems and usually work under uncertain and variable operating conditions. However, the diagnosis of bogie faults under variable conditions has barely been discussed until now. Thus, it is valuable to develop effective methods to deal with variable conditions. Besides, considering that the normal data for training are much more than the faulty data in practice, there is another problem in that only a small amount of data is available that includes faults. Concerning these issues, this paper proposes two new algorithms: (1) A novel feature parameter named spectral kurtosis entropy (SKE) is proposed based on the protrugram. The SKE not only avoids the manual post-processing of the protrugram but also has strong robustness to the operating conditions and parameter configurations, which have been validated by a simulation experiment in this paper. In this paper, the SKE, in conjunction with variational mode decomposition (VMD), is employed for feature extraction under variable conditions. (2) A new learning algorithm named weighted self-adaptive evolutionary extreme learning machine (WSaE-ELM) is proposed. WSaE-ELM gives each sample an extra sample weight to rebalance the training data and optimizes these weights along with the parameters of hidden neurons by means of the self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm. Finally, the hybrid method based on VMD, SKE, and WSaE-ELM is verified by using the vibration signals gathered from real bogies with speed variations. It is demonstrated that the proposed method of bogie fault diagnosis outperforms the conventional methods by up to 4.42% and 6.22%, respectively, in percentages of accuracy under variable conditions.Entities:
Keywords: bogie fault diagnosis; protrugram; spectral kurtosis entropy; variational mode decomposition; weighted self-adaptive evolutionary extreme learning machine
Year: 2018 PMID: 29795046 PMCID: PMC6022050 DOI: 10.3390/s18061705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
The list of acronyms.
| Acronym | Full Name |
|---|---|
| VMD | variational mode decomposition |
| IMF | intrinsic mode function |
| SKE | spectral kurtosis entropy |
| ELM | extreme learning machine |
| SaE-ELM | self-adaptive evolutionary extreme learning machine |
| WELM | weighted extreme learning machine |
| WSaE-ELM | weighted self-adaptive evolutionary extreme learning machine |
| BW | bandwidth |
| FK | spectral kurtosis |
| CF | center frequency |
| FT | Fourier transform |
| SNR | signal-to-noise ratio |
| RMSE | root mean squared error |
Figure 1The procedure of spectral kurtosis entropy.
Figure 2The structure of the extreme learning machine (ELM).
Figure 3The procedure of weighted self-adaptive evolutionary extreme learning machine (WSaE-ELM).
Mutation strategies.
| Strategy | Expression |
|---|---|
| DE/rand/1 |
|
| DE/rand/1-to- best/2 |
|
| DE/rand/2 |
|
| DE/current-to-rand/1 |
|
Figure 4The scheme of the proposed method.
Figure 5The generated simulated signal.
Figure 6The frequency-domain result of the simulated signal.
Figure 7Results of variational mode decomposition (VMD) from the simulated signal.
Figure 8Results of empirical mode decomposition (EMD) from the simulated signal.
Figure 9Results of the protrugram when the bandwidth (BW) = 10 Hz.
The calculated spectral kurtosis entropies.
| Signal | BW(Hz) | Mean | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 15 | 17 | 20 | ||
| IMF1 | 4.9846 | 4.9144 | 4.8798 | 4.8779 | 4.8745 | 4.8631 | 4.8472 | 4.8916 |
| IMF2 | 4.9693 | 4.8807 | 4.8194 | 4.8092 | 4.8211 | 4.8379 | 4.8740 | 4.8588 |
| IMF3 | 4.9974 | 4.9118 | 4.8411 | 4.8197 | 4.8184 | 4.8349 | 4.8898 | 4.8733 |
| IMF4 | 4.8032 | 4.7621 | 4.75766 | 4.7565 | 4.7552 | 4.7679 | 4.7992 | 4.7717 |
Figure 10Locations of the accelerometers.
Figure 11An example of the bogie fault (wheel tread peeling).
Datasets of bogie fault diagnosis.
| Type | Bogie of A-Type Train | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Fault1 | Fault2 | Fault3 | ||
| No. of training samples | 1500 | 60 | 60 | 300 | 1920 |
| No. of test samples | 500 | 30 | 30 | 50 | 610 |
| Sum | 2000 | 90 | 90 | 350 | 2530 |
Figure 12Examples of bogie signals.
Figure 13An example of results by VMD under normal conditions.
Results of bogie fault diagnosis.
| Test Accuracy Rate | False Positive Rate | False Negative Rate | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Fault1 | Fault2 | Fault3 | Total | |||
| ELM | 96.20% | 63.33% | 70.00% | 74.00% | 91.48% | 3.80% | 26.36% |
| SaE-ELM | 96.80% | 70.00% | 73.33% | 82.00% | 93.11% | 3.20% | 20.91% |
| WELM | 94.80% | 80.00% | 86.67% | 90.00% | 93.28% | 5.20% | 8.18% |
| WSaE-ELM | 98.40% | 90.00% | 96.66% | 96.00% | 97.70% | 1.60% | 4.55% |