Gearbox Fault Diagnosis Based on Multi-Sensor and Multi-Channel Decision-Level Fusion Based on SDP

Abstract

In order to deal with the shortcomings (such as poor robustness) of the traditional single-channel vibration signal in the comprehensive monitoring of the gearbox fault state, a multi-channel decision-level fusion algorithm was proposed based on symmetrized dot pattern (SDP) analysis, with the visual geometry group 16 network (VGG16) fault diagnosis model. Firstly, the SDP method was used to convert the vibration signal of a single multi-channel sensor into an imaging arm. Secondly, the obtained image arm was input into the VGG16 convolutional neural network in order to train the fault diagnosis model that can be obtained. Then, the SDP images of the signals that were to be measured from multiple multi-channel sensors were input into the fault diagnosis model, and the diagnosis results of multiple multi-channel sensors could then be obtained. Experimentally, it was demonstrated that the diagnostic results of multi-channel sensors one, two, and three were more accurate than those of single-channel sensors one, two, and three, by 3.01%, 16.7%, and 5.17%, respectively. However, the fault generation was not generated in a single direction, but rather multiple directions. In order to improve the comprehensiveness of the raw vibration data, a fusion method using DS (Dempster–Shafer) evidence theory was proposed in order to fuse multiple multi-channel sensors, in which the accuracy achieved 99.93% when sensor one and sensor two were fused, which was an improvement of 8.88% and 1.02% over single sensors one and two, respectively. When sensor one and sensor three were fused, the accuracy reached 99.31%, which was an improvement of 8.31% and 6.17% over single sensors one and three, respectively. When sensor two and sensor three were fused, the accuracy reached 99.91%, which was an improvement of 1.00% and 6.74% over single sensors two and three, respectively. When three sensors were fused simultaneously, the accuracy reached 99.99%, which was 8.93%, 1.08%, and 6.81% better than single sensors one, two, and three, respectively. Therefore, it can be proved that the number of sensor channels has a great influence on the diagnosis results.