Induction Motor Fault Detection and Diagnosis Using Artifical Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates induction motor fault detection and diagnosis using Artificial Neural Networks (ANN). The ANN techniques include feedforward backpropagation networks (FFBPN) and self organizing maps (SOM), used individually and in combination. Common induction motor faults such as bearing faults, stator winding fault, unbalanced rotor and broken rotor bars are considered. The ANNs were trained and tested using dynamic measurements of stator currents and mechanical vibration signals. The effects of different network structures and the training set sizes on the performance of the ANNs are discussed. This study shows that, while the feedforward ANNs give satisfactory results and the SOMs can classify the type of motor fault during steady state working conditions, using a combination of SOM and FFBPN techniques yields superior fault detection and diagnostic accuracy. In addition, incipient motor fault detection has been investigated. The above results show that improved induction motor maintenance strategies may be possible through the use of comprehensive on-line induction motor condition monitoring and fault diagnosis systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".