4.6 Article

Application of the blind source separation method to feature extraction of machine sound signals

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00170-004-2353-7

关键词

blind source separation; feature extraction; Gerschgorin disk estimator; machine sound; mechanical fault diagnosis; partial singular value decomposition; time-frequency separation algorithm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As the result of vibration emission in air, a machine sound signal carries important information about the working condition of machinery. But in practice, the sound signal is typically received with a very low signal-to-noise ratio. To obtain features of the original sound signal, uncorrelated sound signals must be removed and the wavelet coefficients related to fault condition must be retrieved. In this paper, the blind source separation technique is used to recover the wavelet coefficients of a monitored source from complex observed signals. Since in the proposed blind source separation (BSS) algorithms it is generally assumed that the number of sources is known, the Gerschgorin disk estimator method is introduced to determine the number of sound sources before applying the BSS method. This method can estimate the number of sound sources under non-Gaussian and non-white noise conditions. Then, the partial singular value analysis method is used to select these significant observations for BSS analysis. This method ensures that signals are separated with the smallest distortion. Afterwards, the time-frequency separation algorithm, converted to a suitable BSS algorithm for the separation of a non-stationary signal, is introduced. The transfer channel between observations and sources and the wavelet coefficients of the source signals can be blindly identified via this algorithm. The reconstructed wavelet coefficients can be used for diagnosis. Finally, the separation results obtained from the observed signals recorded in a semi-anechoic chamber demonstrate the effectiveness of the presented methods.

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