4.7 Article

Diagnosis of wind turbine faults with transfer learning algorithms

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 163, 期 -, 页码 2053-2067

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.10.121

关键词

Wind turbine; Transfer learning; Fault diagnosis; SCADA data

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51505225]
  2. Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Green Vessel Technology [2019Z05]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20131350]
  4. Jiangsu Top Six Talent Summit Fund [ZBZZ-045]
  5. National Key R&D Program of China [2019YFE0104800]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a framework for fault diagnosis of wind turbine faults using transfer learning algorithms Inception V3 and TrAdaBoost, and introduces a new evaluation index 'Comprehensive Index'. Traditional machine learning algorithms perform poorly for unbalanced and differently distributed datasets, while the novel transfer learning algorithm TrAdaBoost shows superior performance in dealing with such challenges.
A framework of using transfer learning algorithms, Inception V3 and TrAdaBoost, for fault diagnosis of two wind turbine faults is presented and verified. Two failure modes, blade icing accretion and gear cog belt fracture, are analyzed using SCADA data. A new index named 'Comprehensive Index' is defined to evaluate performance of different algorithms. Traditional machine learning algorithms do not perform well for data sets that are unbalanced and follow different distributions. The former causes bias in classification and the latter leads to poor adaptability of algorithms. A novel transfer learning algorithm studied in this paper, TrAdaBoost, has been proved to have superior performance on dealing with data imbalance and different distributions. A new approach to calibrate data labels using transfer learning algorithms is also proposed, which provides important insights into unsupervised learning for wind turbine fault diagnosis. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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