Submitted:
09 February 2023
Posted:
09 February 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
- 1)
- Limitations of application objects: Each fault diagnosis method can only be applied to specific research objects, and cannot be extended to the diagnosis of various faults in other manufacturing equipment.
- 2)
- Limitations of application functions: In equipment management, there are no real-time online monitoring and fault prediction functions, which affect the reliability of equipment operation and the continuity of production system work.
2. Manufacturing equipment operating condition assessment methods
2.1. fundamental principle
2.2. Implementation steps of the method
- 1)
- The main motion units that affect the running state of the equipment were analyzed according to the type of manufacturing equipment.
- 2)
- The operation law of the main motion units was analyzed, and the motion unit with the shortest life cycle was selected.
- 3)
- The main parameters affecting the running state of the motion unit and their value ranges under different working states were analyzed.
- 4)
- Obtain high-precision detection data for important motion parameters when the motion unit works normally in real time.
- 5)
- The running state of the motion unit is determined by comparing the high-precision parameter values obtained in real time with the above value range.
2.3. Premise of method implementation
- 1)
- The judgment technology of the shortest life cycle motion unit among many motion units;
- 2)
- Real-time detection technology for the main parameters that affect the running state of the motion unit.
- 3)
- High precision acquisition technology of main detection information data in complex environment.
3. High-precision information data acquisition technology
- 1)
- The detection accuracy of information data depends on the performance of the detection equipment. With improvements in detection accuracy, the cost of the detection system is higher. Therefore, they have low-cost performance.
- 2)
- Their essence is to reduce the signal distortion caused by energy loss and signal interference in the information transmission process by improving signal strength. However, when collecting information, the measurement error of the information data cannot be eliminated owing to the differences in equipment performance and working environment.
- 1)
- However, they do not improve the detection information strength and cannot solve the problems of energy loss and signal interference during information transmission. Therefore, it is difficult to apply this method in engineering practice.
- 2)
- They did not analyze the cause of the information data detection error, the change rule of each influencing factor, or its influence on the detection value. Therefore, it is difficult to improve the detection accuracy of information data by reducing the detection error caused by various influencing factors.
4. Fractional order differentiation
4.1. Definition of fractional order differentiation
4.1.1. R-L definition of fractional differential the fractional
4.1.2. G-L definition of fractional differential the fractional
4.1.3. Caputo definition of fractional differential the fractional
4.2. Properties and applications of fractional order differentiation
- 1)
- The signal shows different levels of signal enhancement for different fractional differential operators so that the very-low-frequency components of the signal can be preserved nonlinearly.
- 2)
- From a physics perspective, signal processing by the fractional differential operator can be understood as the generalized amplitude phase modulation of the signal. Thus, the fractional differential operator can significantly improve signal strength when processing the high-frequency part of the signal.
- 3)
- The fractional differential operator significantly improves the high-frequency signal strength. It also improves low-frequency signals.
5. Fractional order differentiation based fusion model of equipment operation parameters
5.1. Characteristics of manufacturing equipment inspection information data
5.2. Fractional order differential based operational state evaluation model
6. Application of assessment methods
6.1. Experimental platform construction
6.2. Information Data Collection
6.2.1. Data collection methods
6.2.2. Experimental data collection
6.3. Analysis and processing of detection data
6.3.1. Selection of the influence factor of the detection value
6.3.2. The functional relationship between the detection value Fi and the impact factor xi
6.3.3. Selection of fractional order v and step size h values
- 1)
- Selection of order v:
- 2)
- Selection of step h:
6.3.4. Information Data Processing Techniques Based on Fractional Order Differential Operators
6.4. Analysis of operating condition assessment results
6.4.1. Evaluation criteria for bearing wear
6.4.2. Evaluation of operation status
6.5. Application analysis of experimental results

7. Conclusions
Acknowlelgments
References
- Maliuk, A.S.; Prosvirin, A.E.; Ahmad, Z.; Kim, C.H.; Kim, J.-M. Novel Bearing Fault Diagnosis Using Gaussian Mixture Model-Based Fault Band Selection. Sensors 2021, 21, 6579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karmakar, S.; Chattopadhyay, S.; Mitra, M.; Sengupta, S. Induction Motor Fault Diagnosis; Power Systems; Springer: Singapore, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Toma, R.N.; Kim, J.-M. Bearing Fault Classification of Induction Motors Using Discrete Wavelet Transform and Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithms. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toma, R.N.; Kim, C.-H.; Kim, J.-M. Bearing Fault Classification Using Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition and Convolutional Neural Network. Electronics 2021, 10, 1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kecik, K.; Smagala, A.; Lyubitska, K. Ball Bearing Fault Diagnosis Using Recurrence Analysis. Materials 2022, 15, 5940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- RUIXIANG DENG, ZHENBANG WANG AND YUNPENG FAN. Fault Relevant Variable Selection for Fault Diagnosis. Access 2020, 8, 23134–23142. [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.; Yan, X. Ensemble model of wastewater treatment plant based on rich diversity of principal component determining by genetic algorithm for status monitoring. Control. Eng. Pr. 2019, 88, 38–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, J.; Yan, S.; Yan, X. Robust chemical process monitoring based on CDC-MVT-PCA eliminating outliers and optimally selecting principal component. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2018, 97, 1848–1857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WANG Heng, ZHOU Yiwen,QU Jiaming,et al. A prognostic method of mechanical equipment based on HDP-HMM. J. Vib. Shock. 2019, 38, 173–179. [Google Scholar]
- YU Ren, XIE Xu-yang, WANG Tian-shu,et al. Faul diagnosis method for bearing based on deep learning waveform image recognition. J. Nav. Univ. Eng. [11] LIANG Yun, WANG Qin Jiang, CHAO Hewei. Fault diagnosis method of weapon equipment based on Bayesian network. Defense Manufacturing Technology.. 2021, 33, 76–82. [Google Scholar]
- YAN Bin,LIN Xing-xing,TIAN Wen-jing,et al. A fault monitoring method for mechanical equipment using noise energy detection. Manufacturing Automation, 2021, 43(8): 8-11.
- Qi, H.-T.; Zhao, D.-A.; Liu, D.; Liu, X. Double Redundancy Electro-Hydrostatic Actuator Fault Diagnosis Method Based on Progressive Fault Diagnosis Method. Actuators 2022, 11, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, M.-S. Design and development of a high-precision automatic safety valve testing system. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2020, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, H.; Wu, X.; Shi, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Ye, Y.; Zhang, L.; Fu, Y. A comprehensive cycloid pin-wheel precision reducer test platform integrated with a new dynamic measurement method of lost motion. Metrol. Meas. Syst. 2021, 29, 207–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- W. Li, B. Li , C. Shu, et al. New muti-resolotion and muti-scale electromagnetic detection methods for urban underground spaces. Journal of Applied Geophysics 2018, 159, 742–753. [CrossRef]
- W. Li, B. Li , C. Shu, et al. Study on muti-resolotion imaging of urban underground spaces based on high performnce transient electromagnetic source. Chinese Lournal of Applied Geophysics 2020, 63, 4553–4564.
- Eslami, M.; Vajargah, B.F.; Mirzazadeh, M.; Biswas, A. Application of first integral method to fractional partial differential equations. Indian J. Phys. 2013, 88, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, N.; Radchenko, A.; Pommerenke, D.; Zheng, Y.R. Design and Evaluation of Low-Cost and Energy-Efficient Magneto-Inductive Sensor Nodes for Wireless Sensor Networks. IEEE Syst. J. 2018, 13, 1135–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, A.; Kant, K. NFMI: Near Field Magnetic Induction based communication. Comput. Networks 2020, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, H.; Sun, Z.; Zhou, C. Practical Design and Implementation of Metamaterial-Enhanced Magnetic Induction Communication. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 17213–17229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Gong, Z.; Liu, X.; Guo, H.; Lu, J.; Yu, D.; Lin, Y. Multi-Feature Information Complementary Detector: A High-Precision Object Detection Model for Remote Sensing Images. Remote. Sens. 2022, 14, 4519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muñoz, J.; Molero-Castillo, G.; Benítez-Guerrero, E.; Bárcenas, E. Data fusion as source for the generation of useful knowledge in context-aware systems. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2018, 34, 3165–3176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou Xin, Zhang Dongwen, Zhong Ming. Data Aggregation of Wireless Sensor Network Based on Event-Driven and Neural Network. Chin. J. Sens. Actuators 2014, 27, 142–148. [Google Scholar]
- Hedjazi M H, Ghari M. Abolmaesumi P. Distribution of Fiducial Registration Error in Rigid-body Point-based Registration. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 2009, 28, 1791–1801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- He r, Wang YJ, Wang Q, Zhou Jh, Hu CY. An improved particle swarm optimization based on self-adaptive escape velocity. J. Softw. (in Chinese with English abstract). 2005, 16, 2036–2044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huo, L.; Wu, Z.; Wu, J.; Gao, S.; Chen, Y.; Song, Y.; Wang, S. High-Precision Log-Ratio Spot Position Detection Algorithm with a Quadrant Detector under Different SNR Environments. Sensors 2022, 22, 3092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Z.; Wang, Q. A High-Precision Spectrum-Detection Algorithm Based on the Normalized Variance of Nonreconstruction Compression Sensing. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2020, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Jia, R.; Li, W.; Ma, F.; Abdullah, H.M.; Ma, H.; Mohamed, M.A. High precision detection algorithm based on improved RetinaNet for defect recognition of transmission lines. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 2430–2440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ru, C.; Zhang, S.; Qu, C.; Zhang, Z. The High-Precision Detection Method for Insulators’ Self-Explosion Defect Based on the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with Improved Lightweight ECA-YOLOX-Tiny Model. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 9314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu Wenqiang, Liu Zhigang, Li Qiao, et al. High-Precision Detection Method for Structure Parameters of Catenary Cantilever Devices using 3D Point Cloud Data. Ieee Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2021, 70.
- LU YIN, SHUANGZHI LI, ZHONGLIANG DENG, et al. A Novel Cycle Slips Detection Model for the High Precision Positioning. Access 2018, 2890694. [Google Scholar]
- Shao, L.; Hu, Y.; Xu, G. A High Precision On-Line Detection Method for IGBT Junction Temperature Based on Stepwise Regression Algorithm. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 186172–186180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ZUO Yan-hong, CHENG Hua, ZHU Yin-feng. The Algorithm for Multi-sensors Detection Data Fusion Based on Fractional Differential. Sci. Technol. Eng. 2019, 19, 189–194. [Google Scholar]
- ZUO Yanhong, CHENG Hua, CHENG Tangchun. Application of fractional differential operator in coal mine detection data fusion processing. J. China Coal Soc. 2020, 45, 819–826. [Google Scholar]
- ZUO Yan-hong, ZUO Cheng-ji, FANG Ji-gen. Engine On-line Detection Data Fusion Technology Based on Fractional Integral. Sci. Technol. Eng. 2021, 21, 644–650. [Google Scholar]
- Yanhong, Z.; Hua, C.; Keren, Z. Fusion algorithm of discrete manufacturing system detection data based on fractional partial differential. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2015, 21, 3256–3262. [Google Scholar]
- Yanhong, Z. Research on discrete manufacturing inspection data fusion technology based on fractional calculus. Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Mechanics Eng., Hefei University of technology, HeFei, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Yanhong, Z.; Hua, C.; Tangchun, C. On-Line Detection Data Fusion Algorithm of Underground Mobile Equipment Based on Fractional Order Partial Differential. Chin. J. Sens. Actuators 2021, 34, 237–243. [Google Scholar]
- Yanhong, Z.; Yansheng, Y.; Guoqing, G. Application of fractional partial differential in fault diagnosis of industrial robots. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huo, L.; Wu, Z.; Wu, J.; et al. High-Precision Log-Ratio Spot Position Detection Algorithm with a Quadrant Detector under Different SNR Environments. Sensors 2022, 22, 3092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Z.; Wang, Q. A High-Precision Spectrum-Detection Algorithm Based on the Normalized Variance of Nonreconstruction Compression Sensing. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2020, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Sensor No. | Number of measurement | Mean value Sc | Standard deviation Si | |||||
| 1 st | 2 st | 3 st | 4 st | 5 st | 6 st | |||
| 1# | 0.164 | 0.158 | 0.168 | 0.166 | 0.171 | 0.158 | 0.1642 | 0.0048 |
| 2# | 0.162 | 0.171 | 0.168 | 0.175 | 0.165 | 0.173 | 0.1690 | 0.0045 |
| 3# | 0.162 | 0.173 | 0.165 | 0.163 | 0.171 | 0.165 | 0.1665 | 0.0041 |
| 4# | 0.172 | 0.165 | 0.174 | 0.162 | 0.169 | 0.165 | 0.1678 | 0.0042 |
| 5# | 0.168 | 0.162 | 0.165 | 0.163 | 0.165 | 0.173 | 0.1660 | 0.0037 |
| Location of sampling points |
Sensor No. | Average value | Standard deviation before fusion |
||||
| 1# | 2# | 3# | 4# | 5# | |||
| A | 0.112 | 0.105 | 0.108 | 0.118 | 0.114 | 0.1114 | 0.00454 |
| B | 0.158 | 0.162 | 0.165 | 0.162 | 0.156 | 0.1606 | 0.00320 |
| C | 0.175 | 0.172 | 0.178 | 0.171 | 0.177 | 0.1746 | 0.00273 |
| D | 0.213 | 0.198 | 0.204 | 0.212 | 0.208 | 0.2070 | 0.00632 |
| E | 0.152 | 0.147 | 0.145 | 0.149 | 0.146 | 0.1478 | 0.00248 |
| Standard deviation of sensors |
0.0048 | 0.0045 | 0.0041 | 0.0042 | 0.0037 | Total average 0.1603 | |
| Sampling site location | Sensor No. | Average value | Magnification factor K | ||||
| 1# | 2# | 3# | 4# | 5# | |||
| A | 1.7734 | 1.7918 | 1.8163 | 1.8102 | 1.8408 | 1.8065 | 17.05 |
| B | 2.7310 | 2.7258 | 2.7188 | 2.7205 | 2.7118 | 2.7216 | |
| C | 2.8543 | 2.8695 | 2.8897 | 2.8846 | 2.9099 | 2.8816 | |
| D | 3.6784 | 3.6939 | 3.6545 | 3.6694 | 3.6452 | 3.6683 | |
| E | 2.6244 | 2.5991 | 2.5655 | 2.5739 | 2.5318 | 2.5789 | |
| Standard deviation of sensors |
0.0048 | 0.0045 | 0.0041 | 0.0042 | 0.0037 | Average value after fusion |
2.733 |
| Sampling site location | Sensor No. | Average value | Standard deviation after fusion |
||||
| 1# | 2# | 3# | 4# | 5# | |||
| A | 0.1040 | 0.1051 | 0.1065 | 0.1062 | 0.1080 | 0.1060 | 0.00144 |
| B | 0.1602 | 0.1599 | 0.1595 | 0.1596 | 0.1590 | 0.1596 | 0.00038 |
| C | 0.1674 | 0.1683 | 0.1695 | 0.1692 | 0.1707 | 0.1690 | 0.00111 |
| D | 0.2157 | 0.2178 | 0.2143 | 0.2152 | 0.2109 | 0.2148 | 0.00128 |
| E | 0.1539 | 0.1524 | 0.1505 | 0.1510 | 0.1485 | 0.1513 | 0.00184 |
| Standard deviation of sensors |
0.0048 | 0.0045 | 0.0041 | 0.0042 | 0.0037 | ||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).