2022
DOI: 10.3390/s22114266
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Vibration Fault Identification Framework for Shafting Systems of Hydropower Units: Nonlinear Modeling, Signal Processing, and Holographic Identification

Abstract: The shafting systems of hydropower units work as the core component for the conversion of water energy to electric energy and have been running for a long time in the hostile hydraulic–mechanical–electrical-coupled environment—their vibration faults are frequent. How to quickly and accurately identify vibration faults to improve the reliability of the unit is a key issue. This study proposes a novel shafting vibration fault identification framework, which is divided into three coordinated stages: nonlinear mod… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The method proposed in this experiment has a high AUC value, with AUC values of 0.7365, 0.7335, 0.9232, and 0.9141 for fan, water pump, slide rail, and valve sound detection, respectively, with an average AUC value of 0.8268. This paper's method increased the AUC value by 11.8722% compared to the method in [18], 35.6518% compared to the method in [19], and 38.4322% compared to the method in [20]. At the same time, the accuracy rate of the model proposed in this experiment is 90.1%, and the loss function value is 0.27, both higher than those of the methods in the literature.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 49%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The method proposed in this experiment has a high AUC value, with AUC values of 0.7365, 0.7335, 0.9232, and 0.9141 for fan, water pump, slide rail, and valve sound detection, respectively, with an average AUC value of 0.8268. This paper's method increased the AUC value by 11.8722% compared to the method in [18], 35.6518% compared to the method in [19], and 38.4322% compared to the method in [20]. At the same time, the accuracy rate of the model proposed in this experiment is 90.1%, and the loss function value is 0.27, both higher than those of the methods in the literature.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 49%
“…Most of the features extracted from fault signals are time-frequency features, and the vibration signals of hydroelectric units are essentially nonlinear and nonstationary [18]. Wavelet analysis has had certain advantages in processing such signals, but it has two shortcomings in application.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The potential energy equation of hydropower units' shafting is [27]: In order to facilitate the analysis, this paper adopts appropriate simplified assumptions: (1) In the modeling stage, the torsional motion and axial vibration of shafting are ignored, and only the radial displacement and inclination of the spindle system are analyzed.…”
Section: Dynamics Modeling Of Shafting Of Hydropower Unitsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Huang et al [12] improved the transfer function method and built a nonlinear flexible model using Simulink for the simulation of hydraulic-mechanical-electrical coupling dynamics containing fault characteristics. Although Shi et al [13] have not established the system coupling model, they have proposed that shafting is the core component of coupling problem in hydropower unit in their research on fault diagnosis. Yang et al [14] studied the coupling mechanism in the hydraulic system of hydropower station, and the research results show that the coupling relationship between the pump and the motor in the system cannot be ignored.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%