4.7 Article

Model-Based Fault Diagnosis of a Planetary Gear: A Novel Approach Using Transmission Error

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY
卷 65, 期 4, 页码 1830-1841

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TR.2016.2590997

关键词

Condition monitoring; dynamic analysis; fault diagnosis; planetary gear; prognostics and health management

资金

  1. Technology Innovation Program - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MI, Korea) [10050980]
  2. Institute of Advanced Machinery and Design at Seoul National University (SNU-IAMD)
  3. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10050980] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Extensive prior studies aimed at the development of diagnostic methods for planetary gearboxes have mainly examined acceleration and acoustic emission signals. Recently, due to the relationship between gear mesh stiffness and transmission error (TE), TE-based techniques have emerged as a promising way to analyze dynamic behavior of spur and helical gears. However, to date, TE has not been used as a measure to detect faults in planetary gears. In this paper, we propose a new methodology for model-based fault diagnostics of planetary gears using TE signals. A lumped parametric model of planetary gear dynamics was built to extract simulated TE signals, while accounting for the planet phasing effect, which is a peculiar characteristic of the planetary gear. Next, gear dynamic analysis was performed using TE signals, and TE-based damage features were calculated from the processed TE signals to quantitatively represent health conditions. The procedures described aforesaid were then applied to a case study of a planetary gear in a wind turbine gear train. From the results, we conclude that TE signals can be used to detect the faults, while enhancing understanding of the complex dynamic behaviors of planetary gears.

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