MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A DFFT and Coherence Analysis-Based Fault Diagnosis Approach for Induction Motors Fed by Variable Frequency Drives

2020· article· en· W3107903456 on OpenAlexaff
Md Nasmus Sakib Khan Shabbir, Xiaodong Liang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsInduction motorStatorHarmonic analysisFault (geology)Control theory (sociology)Variable-frequency driveSignature (topology)HarmonicVoltageFundamental frequencyCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer scienceFault detection and isolationElectronic engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)MathematicsPhysicsElectrical engineeringAcousticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For faults diagnosis in a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD)-fed induction motor, a Discrete Fast Fourier Transform (DFFT) and coherence analysis-based approach is proposed in this paper. To identify signature harmonics that maintain a strong correlation between a healthy and a faulty cases and are present under various conditions, a coherence analysis is conducted. After signature harmonics are identified, fault diagnosis can be carried out by comparing magnitudes of the fundamental and signature harmonics under various healthy and faulty conditions. Magnitudes of the fundamental voltage and the third harmonic voltage can serve as parameters to detect the five types of faults. The fifth harmonic current can effectively detect the occurrence of a fault although it cannot distinguish the fault types. The combination of the fundamental voltage and the third harmonic voltage from the stator voltage and the fifth harmonic current from the stator current can lead to effective fault diagnosis. The proposed approach is verified using two motor loading conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207