2014
DOI: 10.1007/s13369-014-1004-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved Structure of PNN Using PCA in Transformer Fault Diagnostic

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Energies 2019, 12, 4170 2 of 18 DGA interpretation methods [1], including key gas method [2,3], IEC three-ratio method [4,5], Duval triangle method [6], Rogers ratio method [7] and Dornenburg ratio method [8], Duval pentagon [9], Mansour pentagon method [10,11], etc., are available to identify the different types of faults occurring in operating transformers. Although the commonly used methods are simple and effective in transformer fault diagnosis, they suffer from defects such as coding deficiencies, excessive coding boundaries and critical value criterion defects, which will affect the reliability of fault analysis [12].With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and pattern recognition methods have been widely used in power transformer fault diagnosis, including artificial neural network (ANN) [13][14][15], support vector machine (SVM) [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], probabilistic neural network [25,26], Bayesian neural network [27], fuzzy logic [28][29][30], deep belief network [31], expert system [32,33], which make up for the shortcomings of the traditional DGA methods, directly or indirectly improve the accuracy of transformer fault diagnosis, and provide a new idea for high-precision transformer fault diagnosis. Although these methods have achieved good results, there are also some shortcomings.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Energies 2019, 12, 4170 2 of 18 DGA interpretation methods [1], including key gas method [2,3], IEC three-ratio method [4,5], Duval triangle method [6], Rogers ratio method [7] and Dornenburg ratio method [8], Duval pentagon [9], Mansour pentagon method [10,11], etc., are available to identify the different types of faults occurring in operating transformers. Although the commonly used methods are simple and effective in transformer fault diagnosis, they suffer from defects such as coding deficiencies, excessive coding boundaries and critical value criterion defects, which will affect the reliability of fault analysis [12].With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning and pattern recognition methods have been widely used in power transformer fault diagnosis, including artificial neural network (ANN) [13][14][15], support vector machine (SVM) [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], probabilistic neural network [25,26], Bayesian neural network [27], fuzzy logic [28][29][30], deep belief network [31], expert system [32,33], which make up for the shortcomings of the traditional DGA methods, directly or indirectly improve the accuracy of transformer fault diagnosis, and provide a new idea for high-precision transformer fault diagnosis. Although these methods have achieved good results, there are also some shortcomings.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Few of conventional approaches in the literature have been assessed on the TEP benchmark in terms of the detectability abilities. We cite, among them, the principal component analysis (PCA) and its varieties [23][24][25][26]30,35]. We name as well the multivariate exponentially weighted moving average (MEWMA) [27,28] and MEWMA-PCA [32] that combines between PCA and MEWMA.…”
Section: Detectabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The leakage flux fault detection strategies are classified into the vibration-based method (VBM) and search coil-based method (SCBM), and flux leakage-based methods; they were studied and compared. This modelling aims to achieve an FRA -The capacitive effect can be detected at high frequency -This method needs previous data on the transformer -This method needs complicated tools for detection -Offline method -Needs expert's opinion and sophisticated instruments [12,[16][17][18] Negative sequence -The signal for fault detection is available -Unable to locate the fault [19,20] Partial discharge -Well-established method in power utilities -This method is under the influence of tank and windings [21][22][23] Flux-based method -Precise and accurate -Exact fault location detection -Changes in the transformer structure -Models developed for verification purposes -Requires the details of the transformer structure and sensors [7,8,11,24] Voltage and current measurement -Models developed for verification purpose -Unable to locate the fault [9,25,26] Differential protection -Classical robust method -Online monitoring is possible -Unable to detect inter-turn faults at initial levels -Mainly depends on the precision of the current transformer -Sensitive to winding insulations breakdown -Sensitive to the structure of the transformer [27][28][29] Intelligent approach -Detect minute faults -Robust against missing data…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%