A Physics-Based Model-Data-Driven Method for Spindle Health Diagnosis—Part III: Model Training and Fault Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The primary goal of the paper is to monitor the health of the spindle in machine tools to ensure optimal performance and reduce costly downtimes. Spindle health monitoring is essential to detect wear and cracks in spindle bearings, which can be challenging due to their gradual development and hidden locations. The proposed approach combines physics-based modeling and data-driven techniques to monitor spindle health effectively. In Part I and Part II of the paper, mathematical models of bearing faults and spindle imbalance are integrated into the digital model of the spindle. This allows for simulating the operation of the spindle both with and without faults. The integration of fault models enables the generation of vibrations at sensor locations along the spindle shaft. The generated vibration data from the physics-based model are used to train a recurrent neural network-based (RNN) fault detection algorithm. The RNN learns from the labeled vibration spectra to identify different fault conditions. Bayesian optimization is used to automatically tune the hyperparameters governing the accuracy and efficiency of the learning models during the training process. The RNN classifiers are further fine-tuned using a small set of experimentally collected data for the generalization of the model on real-world data. Once the RNN classifier is trained, it can distinguish between different types of damage and identify their specific locations on the spindle assembly. The proposed algorithms achieved an accuracy of 98.43% on experimental data sets that were not used in training the network.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".