4.6 Article

Learning Attention Representation with a Multi-Scale CNN for Gear Fault Diagnosis under Different Working Conditions

期刊

SENSORS
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s20041233

关键词

acoustic-based diagnosis; gear fault diagnosis; attention mechanism; convolutional neural network

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51275325]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gear fault signal under different working conditions is non-linear and non-stationary, which makes it difficult to distinguish faulty signals from normal signals. Currently, gear fault diagnosis under different working conditions is mainly based on vibration signals. However, vibration signal acquisition is limited by its requirement for contact measurement, while vibration signal analysis methods relies heavily on diagnostic expertise and prior knowledge of signal processing technology. To solve this problem, a novel acoustic-based diagnosis (ABD) method for gear fault diagnosis under different working conditions based on a multi-scale convolutional learning structure and attention mechanism is proposed in this paper. The multi-scale convolutional learning structure was designed to automatically mine multiple scale features using different filter banks from raw acoustic signals. Subsequently, the novel attention mechanism, which was based on a multi-scale convolutional learning structure, was established to adaptively allow the multi-scale network to focus on relevant fault pattern information under different working conditions. Finally, a stacked convolutional neural network (CNN) model was proposed to detect the fault mode of gears. The experimental results show that our method achieved much better performance in acoustic based gear fault diagnosis under different working conditions compared with a standard CNN model (without an attention mechanism), an end-to-end CNN model based on time and frequency domain signals, and other traditional fault diagnosis methods involving feature engineering.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据