| Literature DB >> 36236302 |
Ning Chen1, Fuhai Hu1, Jiayao Chen1, Kai Wang1, Chunhua Yang1, Weihua Gui1.
Abstract
In industrial processes, the composition of raw material and the production environment are complex and changeable, which makes the production process have multiple steady states. In this situation, it is difficult for the traditional single-mode monitoring methods to accurately detect the process abnormalities. To this end, a multimode monitoring method based on the factor dynamic autoregressive hidden variable model (FDALM) for industrial processes is proposed in this paper. First, an improved affine propagation clustering algorithm to learn the model modal factors is adopted, and the FDALM is constructed by combining multiple high-order hidden state Markov chains through the factor modeling technology. Secondly, a fusion algorithm based on Bayesian filtering, smoothing, and expectation-maximization is adopted to identify model parameters. The Lagrange multiplier formula is additionally constructed to update the factor coefficients by using the factor constraints in the solving. Moreover, the online Bayesian inference is adopted to fuse the information of different factor modes and obtain the fault posterior probability, which can improve the overall monitoring effect of the model. Finally, the proposed method is applied in the sintering process of ternary cathode material. The results show that the fault detection rate and false alarm rate of this method are improved obviously compared with the traditional methods.Entities:
Keywords: FDALM; factor modeling; multimodality; process monitoring
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236302 PMCID: PMC9573695 DOI: 10.3390/s22197203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Sectional view of a roller kiln.
Figure 2Variation trend of the internal temperature of a roller kiln.
Figure 3Topology of FDALM.
Figure 4The flow chart of model training.
Process data descriptions.
| Type | Data Description | Sampling Number |
|---|---|---|
| Normal | This interval is normal data | 1st−1000th |
| Fault 1 | 1001st–1200th is normal data; 1201st–1400th is the abnormal temperature increase in the third temperature zone | 1001st−1400th |
| Fault 2 | 1401st–1600th is normal data; 1601st–1800th is the abnormal temperature drop in the third temperature zone | 1401st−1800th |
| Fault 3 | 1801st–2000th is normal data; 2001st–2200th is shutdown fault | 1801st−2200th |
Figure 5Flow chart of the process monitoring method based on FDALM.
FDALM monitoring results for different K.
| K | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FAR | 0.150 | 0.020 | 0.055 |
| FDR | 0.945 | 0.965 | 0.940 |
Figure 6Process data classification diagram.
Monitoring results for different faults.
| Type | PPLSR | DALM | FDALM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Fault 1 | 0.240 | 0.120 | 0.120 | 0.925 | 0.020 | 0.965 |
| Fault 2 | 0.100 | 0.350 | 0.090 | 0.970 | 0.045 | 0.985 |
| Fault 3 | 0.315 | 0.980 | 0.085 | 1.000 | 0.040 | 1.000 |
Figure 7FDALM results at different K.
Figure 8Monitoring results of fault 1.
Figure 9Monitoring results of fault 2.
Figure 10Monitoring results of fault 3.