Artificial neural network–based fault diagnosis for induction motors under similar, interpolated and extrapolated operating conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diagnosis of mechanical and electrical faults of induction motors (IMs) has been performed using artificial neural networks (ANN) for similar, interpolated and extrapolated operating speeds. The current and vibration signals of faulty and healthy IMs measured from a Machinery Fault Simulator are used in this work. In total, ten different IM fault conditions have been considered: four mechanical faults (bearing fault, unbalanced rotor, misaligned rotor, and bowed rotor), five electrical faults (broken rotor bar, phase unbalanced fault with two severity levels, and stator winding fault with two severity levels), and one healthy motor condition. An ANN model is developed in which raw time domain data of faulty IMs are used and the fault diagnosis is then performed for the motor’s various operating conditions. Initially, diagnosis is performed to predict and classify the motor faults, for the same operating conditions for which we trained ANN. The diagnosis is then extended for interpolated and extrapolated speeds in order to accomplish the diagnosis when data are not available at all the required operating speeds. From the results, it is found that the present ANN-based diagnosis is effective in the same speed case for various operating conditions (seven speeds as well as three loads). In addition, the diagnosis is found to be satisfactory for all interpolated and extrapolated speed cases. It is also observed that the present IM fault diagnosis is better in the interpolation speed cases than the extrapolation speed cases.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".