| Literature DB >> 36010718 |
Jiaying Li1,2,3, Han Liu1,2,3, Jiaxun Liang1,2,3, Jiahao Dong1,2,3, Bin Pang1,2,3, Ziyang Hao1,2,3, Xin Zhao1,2,3.
Abstract
Multipoint Optimal Minimum Entropy Deconvolution Adjusted (MOMEDA) is an advanced deconvolution method, which can effectively inhibit the interference of background noise and distinguish the fault period by calculating the multipoint kurtosis values. However, multipoint kurtosis (MKurt) could lead to misjudgment since it is sensitive to spurious noise spikes. Considering that L-kurtosis has good robustness with noise, this paper proposes a multipoint envelope L-kurtosis (MELkurt) method for establishing the temporal features. Then, an enhanced image representation method of vibration signals is proposed by employing the Gramian Angular Difference Field (GADF) method to convert the MELkurt series into images. Furthermore, to effectively learn and extract the features of GADF images, this paper develops a deep learning method named Conditional Super Token Transformer (CSTT) by incorporating the Super Token Transformer block, Super Token Mixer module, and Conditional Positional Encoding mechanism into Vision Transformer appropriately. Transfer learning is introduced to enhance the diagnostic accuracy and generalization capability of the designed CSTT. Consequently, a novel bearing fault diagnosis framework is established based on the presented enhanced image representation and CSTT. The proposed method is compared with Vision Transformer and some CNN-based models to verify the recognition effect by two experimental datasets. The results show that MELkurt significantly improves the fault feature enhancement ability with superior noise robustness to kurtosis, and the proposed CSTT achieves the highest diagnostic accuracy and stability.Entities:
Keywords: Vision Transformer; fault diagnosis; fault visualization; multipoint envelope L-kurtosis; rolling bearing
Year: 2022 PMID: 36010718 PMCID: PMC9407573 DOI: 10.3390/e24081055
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Entropy (Basel) ISSN: 1099-4300 Impact factor: 2.738
Figure 1Simulation signal: (a) the pure bearing fault impact signal; (b) the noise signal; (c) the bearing fault composite signal.
Figure 2Multipoint Kurtosis spectra.
Figure 3Multipoint Envelope L-kurtosis spectra.
Figure 4Baseline Correction of MELkurt spectra.
Figure 5Structure of Vision Transformer.
Figure 6Structure of the Transformer Encoder.
Figure 7Structure of STT block.
Figure 8Structure of Conditional Super Token Transformer.
Detailed parameters of CSTT.
| Layers | Input Size | Window Size | Heads |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | 224 × 224 | 7 × 7 | 8 |
Figure 9Flowchart of the proposed method.
Figure 10Test-bed of CWRU.
The composition of the dataset.
| Bearing State | Data Number | Fault Size (mm) | Label |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal (N) | 97 | - | N |
| Inner-race fault (IF) | 105 | 0.1778 | IF1 |
| 169 | 0.3556 | IF2 | |
| 209 | 0.5334 | IF3 | |
| Ball fault (BF) | 118 | 0.1778 | BF1 |
| 185 | 0.3556 | BF2 | |
| 222 | 0.5334 | BF3 | |
| Outer-race fault (OF) | 130 | 0.1778 | OF1 |
| 197 | 0.3556 | OF2 | |
| 234 | 0.5334 | OF3 |
Figure 11GADF images obtained through MELkurt in Case 1.
Figure 12GADF images obtained through MKurt in Case 1.
Figure 13The training process with using MELkurt and MKurt in Case 1: (a) validation accuracy curves; (b) training loss curves.
The testing results using MELkurt and MKurt in Case 1 (%).
| Methods | Max | Min | Mean | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MELkurt | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 0 |
| MKurt | 99.03 | 97.48 | 98.32 | 0.23 |
Figure 14The training process among different models in Case 1: (a) validation accuracy curves; (b) training loss curves.
Figure 15Visualization results of CSTT in Case 1.
The results of the testing dataset among different models in Case 1 (%).
| Methods | Max | Min | Mean | Std | Testing Time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conditional Super Token Transformer (CSTT) | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 0 | 3.62 |
| Vision Transformer (ViT) | 100.00 | 99.91 | 99.95 | 0.03 | 5.32 |
| SE-CNN | 99.25 | 98.52 | 98.86 | 0.18 | 4.12 |
| BFT-MobileNetV3 | 99.21 | 98.46 | 98.85 | 0.26 | 5.71 |
| TCNN (VGG-19) | 98.94 | 98.33 | 98.62 | 0.24 | 6.75 |
| EfficientNet | 98.79 | 97.54 | 98.21 | 0.43 | 3.28 |
| ResNet-50 | 98.42 | 96.43 | 97.52 | 0.89 | 4.05 |
Figure 16Test-bed of Case 2.
Figure 17Bearing damage pictures: (a) Inner-race fault; (b) Outer-race fault; (c) Ball fault.
Figure 18GADF images obtained through MELkurt in Case 2.
Figure 19GADF images obtained through MKurt in Case 2.
Figure 20The training process with using MELkurt and MKurt in Case 2: (a) validation accuracy curves; (b) training loss curves.
The testing results using MELkurt and MKurt in Case 2 (%).
| Methods | Max | Min | Mean | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MELkurt | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 0 |
| MKurt | 98.95 | 97.34 | 98.15 | 0.24 |
Figure 21The training process among different models in Case 2: (a) validation accuracy curves; (b) training loss curves.
The results of the testing dataset among different models in Case 2 (%).
| Methods | Max | Min | Mean | SD | Testing Time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conditional Super Token Transformer (CSTT) | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 0 | 3.74 |
| Vision Transformer (ViT) | 100.00 | 99.84 | 99.93 | 0.03 | 5.03 |
| SE-CNN | 98.97 | 98.42 | 98.70 | 0.21 | 4.96 |
| BFT-MobileNetV3 | 98.81 | 98.31 | 98.55 | 0.22 | 5.19 |
| TCNN (VGG-19) | 98.73 | 97.92 | 98.41 | 0.11 | 6.05 |
| EfficientNet | 98.59 | 97.23 | 98.35 | 0.52 | 3.59 |
| ResNet-50 | 98.68 | 96.59 | 97.81 | 0.92 | 5.37 |
Figure 22Visualization results of CSTT in Case 2.