| Literature DB >> 31336974 |
Faris Elasha1, Suliman Shanbr2, Xiaochuan Li3, David Mba4,5.
Abstract
Deployment of large-scale wind turbines requires sophisticated operation and maintenance strategies to ensure the devices are safe, profitable and cost-effective. Prognostics aims to predict the remaining useful life (RUL) of physical systems based on condition measurements. Analyzing condition monitoring data, implementing diagnostic techniques and using machinery prognostic algorithms will bring about accurate estimation of the remaining life and possible failures that may occur. This paper proposes to combine two supervised machine learning techniques, namely, regression model and multilayer artificial neural network model, to predict the RUL of an operational wind turbine gearbox using vibration measurements. Root Mean Square (RMS), Kurtosis (KU) and Energy Index (EI) were analysed to define the bearing failure stages. The proposed methodology was evaluated through a case study involving vibration measurements of a high-speed shaft bearing used in a wind turbine gearbox.Entities:
Keywords: artificial neural network; high-speed shaft bearing; prognosis; regression; remaining useful life; vibration measurement; wind turbine
Year: 2019 PMID: 31336974 PMCID: PMC6679281 DOI: 10.3390/s19143092
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Main Prognostics Approaches.
Figure 2Bearing life process.
Figure 3Schematic of regression process.
Figure 4Multiple-layer neural network.
Wind turbine operating details.
| Machine State | Increasing Inner Race Bearing Fault |
|---|---|
| Power rating | 2 MW flux |
| Nominal speed | 1800 rpm |
| Measurement Channel | Sensor |
| Sample rate | 97656 Hz |
| Record length | 6 s |
| Sensor type | Accelerometer |
Figure 5Fitted condition indicators using exponential functions.
Figure 6Fitted condition indicators using polynomial functions.
General optimal estimated exponential model constants.
| Condition Indicators | Model Constants | RMSE | R2 | Adj. R2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | ||||
| RMS | 2.235 | 0.0511 | 0.0525 | 0.958 | 0.957 |
| KU | 3.439 | 0.112 | 0.947 | 0.977 | 0.975 |
| EI | 54.07 | 0.634 | 9.711 | 0.968 | 0.967 |
General optimal estimated polynomial model constants.
| Condition Indicators | Model Constants | RMSE | R2 | Adj. R2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a0 | a1 | a2 | ||||
| RMS | 2.19 | 0.117 | 0.0044 | 0.164 | 0.595 | 0.577 |
| KU | 3.24 | 0.572 | 0.3004 | 0.217 | 0.881 | 0.875 |
| EI | 53.8 | 38.81 | 11.2 | 13.94 | 0.945 | 0.942 |
Figure 7Evaluation of the condition indicators.
Figure 8Neural network training stage.
Figure 9Neural Network Training Regression: (a) training results.; (b) validation results.; (c) test results.; (d) results obtained using all data.
Sum Square Error Results.
| Model | SSE |
|---|---|
| Polynomial | 8427 |
| Exponential | 5419 |
| ANN | 661.198 |
Figure 10Regression Model RUL results.
Figure 11Artificial neural network RUL results.
Error results.
| Model | MSE |
|---|---|
| Polynomial | 15.61 |
| Exponential | 12.56 |
| ANN | 5.62 |