Artificial neural network based fault diagnostics for three phase induction motors under similar operating conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) based fault diagnosis methodology for Induction Motors (IM) operating under the same conditions for various speeds and loads. In this study, ten different IM fault conditions are considered. We considered five mechanical faults (bearing fault, unbalanced rotor, misaligned rotor, bowed rotor, rotor with broken bar), four electrical faults (phase unbalance fault with two levels of severity, stator winding fault with two levels of severity), and one healthy motor condition. The current and vibration signals were considered in this work as these signals are generally considered to be the most efficient for the detection of mechanical and electrical faults in IM when used simultaneously. A machine fault simulator was used for the generation of vibration and current signals from different fault conditions. An ANN model was developed in which raw time domain vibration (in three directions) as well as current (in three phases) data are used simultaneously as input and then the fault diagnosis (training and testing) is performed. In this work, the fault diagnosis was attempted when testing was done for the same operating conditions as training. The developed fault diagnosis methods were found to be robust for various operating conditions (speeds and loads) of the IM.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".