| Literature DB >> 33266797 |
Haikun Shang1, Feng Li2, Yingjie Wu3.
Abstract
Partial discharge (PD) fault analysis is an important tool for insulation condition diagnosis of electrical equipment. In order to conquer the limitations of traditional PD fault diagnosis, a novel feature extraction approach based on variational mode decomposition (VMD) and multi-scale dispersion entropy (MDE) is proposed. Besides, a hypersphere multiclass support vector machine (HMSVM) is used for PD pattern recognition with extracted PD features. Firstly, the original PD signal is decomposed with VMD to obtain intrinsic mode functions (IMFs). Secondly proper IMFs are selected according to central frequency observation and MDE values in each IMF are calculated. And then principal component analysis (PCA) is introduced to extract effective principle components in MDE. Finally, the extracted principle factors are used as PD features and sent to HMSVM classifier. Experiment results demonstrate that, PD feature extraction method based on VMD-MDE can extract effective characteristic parameters that representing dominant PD features. Recognition results verify the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed PD fault diagnosis method.Entities:
Keywords: HMSVM; PD; fault diagnosis; multi-scale dispersion entropy; variational mode decomposition
Year: 2019 PMID: 33266797 PMCID: PMC7514191 DOI: 10.3390/e21010081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.524
Figure 1Classification model of HMSVM.
Figure 2PD fault diagnosis procedure based on VMD-MDE and HMSVM.
Figure 3PD models.
Figure 4Photograph of experimental setup.
Test condition of PD models.
| PD Types | Initial Voltage/kV | Breakdown Voltage/kV | Testing Voltage/kV | Sample Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FD | 2 | 7 | 3/4 | 50/50 |
| ND | 8.8 | 12 | 9/10 | 50/50 |
| BD | 3.5 | 10 | 5/6 | 50/50 |
| CD | 4.5 | 10 | 6/7 | 50/50 |
Figure 5The connection diagram of PD experiment. 1—AC power source; 2—step up transformer; 3—resistance; 4—capacitor; 5—high voltage bushing; 6—small bushing; 7—PD model; 8—UHF sensor; 9—current sensor; 10—console.
Figure 6PD signals.
Central frequency.
| Number of IMFs | Central Frequency/MHz | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 0.0079 | 7.3682 | |||||
| 3 | 0.0073 | 6.9573 | 12.3268 | ||||
| 4 | 0.0059 | 6. 8232 | 11.9803 | 13.2581 | |||
| 5 | 0.0055 | 6. 8041 | 12.0256 | 13.1263 | 13.3572 | ||
| 6 | 0.0059 | 6. 7855 | 11.7785 | 13.5579 | 13.2602 | 13.9348 | |
| 7 | 0.0053 | 6. 8034 | 12.1379 | 13.7877 | 13.9021 | 13.9975 | 14.2814 |
Figure 7Results of EMD decomposition. (a) IMF of decomposition; (b) Frequency spectrum of decomposition.
Figure 8Results of VMD decomposition. (a) IMF of decomposition; (b) Frequency spectrum of decomposition.
CC values.
| VMD | 0.6809 | 0.5129 | 0.3583 | 0.0083 | - | - | - | - | - |
| EMD | 0.7362 | 0.6035 | 0.4231 | 0.3026 | 0.2092 | 0.1123 | 0.0365 | 0.0086 | 0.0025 |
VMD decomposition parameters.
| PD Type |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FD | 4 | 2000 | 0.1 | 3 |
| ND | 5 | 2000 | 0.1 | 3 |
| BD | 4 | 2000 | 0.1 | 4 |
| CD | 4 | 2000 | 0.1 | 4 |
Figure 9MDE variation with scale factors.
Figure 10MDE values of IMFs using VMD and EMD.
Initial feature vectors.
| IMF | Vectors |
|---|---|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Eigenvalues and corresponding contribution rates.
| Vectors | Eigenvalue | Contribution Rate/% | Accumulated Contribution Rate/% |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 3.732 | 66.738 | 66.738 |
|
| 2.169 | 25.843 | 92.581 |
|
| 0.852 | 3.560 | 96.141 |
|
| 0.603 | 1.435 | 97.576 |
|
| 0.304 | 1.064 | 98.64 |
|
| 0.124 | 0.626 | 99.266 |
|
| 0.102 | 0.441 | 99.707 |
|
| 0.075 | 0.152 | 99.859 |
|
| 0.052 | 0.086 | 99.945 |
|
| 0.036 | 0.027 | 99.972 |
|
| 0.029 | 0.024 | 99.996 |
|
| 0.003 | 0.004 | 100.00 |
Figure 11The variation of contribution rate with principle components.
Principle components with different IMFs.
| IMF | KMO | Contribution Rate/% | Principle Component |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.852 | 92.581 | |
|
| 0.767 | 88.379 | |
|
| 0.734 | 80.232 | |
|
| 0.752 | 83.368 |
Principle components with different IMFs.
| PD Type | Parameters | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| FD | - | ||||
| ND | |||||
| BD | - | ||||
| CD | - | ||||
Parameters selection.
| EMD Decomposition | VMD Decomposition | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level | Scale | Principle Components Number | Level | Scale | Principle Components Number | |
| MSE | 4 | 14 | 10 | 3 | 12 | 8 |
| MPE | 3 | 10 | 8 | 3 | 10 | 8 |
| MDE | 3 | 12 | 9 | 4 | 12 | 9 |
HMSVM parameters.
| EMD-MSE | EMD-MPE | EMD-MDE | VMD-MSE | VMD-MPE | VMD-MDE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.43 | 0.31 | 0.27 | 0.46 | 0.33 | 0.35 |
| σ | 10.38 | 11.86 | 10.19 | 12.05 | 9.37 | 12.26 |
Figure 12Recognition results using EMD decomposition.
Figure 13Recognition results using VMD decomposition.
Parameters of ANN and SVM.
| Classifier | Type | EMD-MSE | EMD-MPE | EMD-MDE | VMD-MSE | VMD-MPE | VMD-MDE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SVM |
| 0.25 | 0.28 | 0.45 | 0.44 | 0.38 | 0.46 |
|
| 8.39 | 10.57 | 8.32 | 9.18 | 8.25 | 10.22 | |
| ANN | Input | 10 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 9 |
| Output | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | |
| Hidden layer | 16 | 12 | 14 | 12 | 10 | 12 |
Figure 14Recognition results using VMD-MDE method.
Recognition result with different PD features.
| Feature Types | ANN | SVM | HMSVM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recognition Accuracy/% | Running Time/s | Recognition Accuracy/% | Running Time/s | Recognition Accuracy/% | Running Time/s | |
| EMD- MSE | 86.00 | 6.88 × 10−4 | 88.50 | 6.92 × 10−4 | 86.50 | 6.75 × 10−4 |
| EMD- MPE | 86.50 | 3.45 × 10−3 | 84.00 | 3.21 × 10−3 | 86.00 | 3.51 × 10−3 |
| EMD- MDE | 88.00 | 5.39 × 10−4 | 90.50 | 5.36 × 10−4 | 91.50 | 1.68 × 10−3 |
| VMD- MSE | 95.00 | 8.16 × 10−4 | 96.50 | 7.29 × 10−4 | 97.50 | 7.80 × 10−4 |
| VMD- MPE | 98.00 | 7.45 × 10−4 | 97.50 | 7.12 × 10−4 | 99.00 | 7.42 × 10−4 |
| VMD- MDE | 98.00 | 5.36 × 10−4 | 99.00 | 5.32 × 10−4 | 100.00 | 5.27 × 10−4 |