| Literature DB >> 36081086 |
Wei Yan1,2, Chenxun Lu3,4, Ying Liu2, Xumei Zhang1, Hua Zhang4.
Abstract
Machine tools, as an indispensable equipment in the manufacturing industry, are widely used in industrial production. The harsh and complex working environment can easily cause the failure of machine tools during operation, and there is an urgent requirement to improve the fault diagnosis ability of machine tools. Through the identification of the operating state (OS) of the machine tools, defining the time point of machine tool failure and the working energy-consuming unit can be assessed. In this way, the fault diagnosis time of the machine tool is shortened and the fault diagnosis ability is improved. Aiming at the problems of low recognition accuracy, slow convergence speed and weak generalization ability of traditional OS recognition methods, a deep learning method based on data-driven machine tool OS recognition is proposed. Various power data (such as signals or images) of CNC machine tools can be used to recognize the OS of the machine tool, followed by an intuitive judgement regarding whether the energy-consuming units included in the OS are faulty. First, the power data are collected, and the data are preprocessed by noise reduction and cropping using the data preprocessing method of wavelet transform (WT). Then, an AlexNet Convolutional Neural Network (ACNN) is built to identify the OS of the machine tool. In addition, a parameter adaptive adjustment mechanism of the ACNN is studied to improve identification performance. Finally, a case study is presented to verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach. To illustrate the superiority of this method, the approach was compared with traditional classification methods, and the results reveal the superiority in the recognition accuracy and computing speed of this AI technology. Moreover, the technique uses power data as a dataset, and also demonstrates good progress in portability and anti-interference.Entities:
Keywords: deep learning; energy data-driven; fault diagnosis; machine tools; operating status recognition
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36081086 PMCID: PMC9460611 DOI: 10.3390/s22176628
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Power curve of the XK713 machine tool process.
Figure 2The general framework of the proposed approach.
Figure 3Example of machine tool OS images after data augmentation.
Figure 4Overall framework for the improved network.
Figure 5The process of Convolution.
Figure 6The process of Pooling.
Figure 7Equipment used at the experimental site.
Main parameters of cutting activity.
| Activities | Tool Diameter |
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12 | 800 | 225 | 1.5 | 600 | 200 |
| 2 | 12 | 450 | 150 | 6 | 464 | 32 |
| 3 | 12 | 450 | 150 | 2 | 600 | 45 |
| 4 | 12 | 950 | 262.5 | 0.2 | 582 | 56 |
| 5 | 12 | 950 | 262.5 | 6 | 324 | 28 |
| 6 | 12 | 600 | 187.5 | 2 | 159 | 72 |
| 7 | 12 | 600 | 187.5 | 2 | 159 | 72 |
Figure 8The variance curve of the detail signal D3 obtained by wavelet decomposition of the W-phase electric current signal. (a) S1 state wavelet decomposition time-frequency image; (b) S2 state wavelet decomposition time-frequency image; (c) S3 state wavelet decomposition time-frequency image; (d) S4 state wavelet decomposition time-frequency image; (e) S5 state wavelet decomposition time-frequency image.
Figure 9The effect of hyperparameters on accuracy and loss. (a) The effect of initial learning rate value on accuracy value and loss; (b) The effect of batch size value on accuracy and loss.
Figure 10Confusion matrix of the proposed approach.
Accuracy of different models and time spent modeling and generating samples.
| Type of Comparison | Linear Regression | BP | LeNet-5 | ACNN | ResNet-18 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
|
| / | / | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
|
| 85.17 | 89.17 | 91.56 | 97.89 | 98.14 | |
|
|
| 0.016 | 0.055 | 0.028 | 0.040 | 0.184 |
|
| 20.357 | 28.387 | 30.489 | 39.224 | 111.874 | |
|
| 16.872 | 17.5780 | 20.784 | 33.874 | 109.477 | |
|
|
| 0.014 | 0.041 | 0.046 | 0.102 | 0.544 |
|
| 0.014 | 0.058 | 0.027 | 0.093 | 0.578 | |
|
| 0.026 | 0.034 | 0.029 | 0.031 | 0.129 | |