SETIT 2007

4th International Conference: Sciences of Electronic,

Technologies of Information and Telecommunications
March 25-29, 2007 – TUNISIA

On-line diagnosis of induction motor faults

LEBAROUD Abdesselam
CLERC Guy
Université Claude Bernard, Lyon 1 – CEGELY – Bâtiment OMEGA 43, boulevard du 11
novembre 1918 69622 VILLEURBANNE cedex France
E.mail : lebaroud@yahoo.fr

Abstract: A new method of automatic diagnosis of induction motor faults based on the time-frequency ambiguity plane
analysis of the current waveforms. This method is composed of two sequential processes: a feature extraction and a
classification. In the process features extraction, the time-frequency representation (TFR) have been designed for
maximizing the separability between classes representing the different faults; bearing fault, stator fault and rotor fault.
The classification of a new signal is based on the Mahalanobis distance.
Key words: automatic diagnosis, time-frequency representation, bearing fault, stator fault, rotor fault

1.1. Bearing Faults

INTRODUCTION
In many classification applications, features are
traditionally extracted from standard Time-Frequency
Representations (TFRs) [1]. Quadratic class of time–
frequency representations can be uniquely
characterized by an underlying function called a
kernel. In previous time-frequency research, kernels
have been derived in order to fulfil properties, such
minimizing quadratic interference. Although some of
the resulting TFRs can offer advantages for
classification of certain types of signals the goal of
sensitive detection or accurate classification is rarely
an explicit goal of kernel design [2]. Those few
methods that optimize the kernel for classification
purpose, constrain the form of the kernel to predefined
parametric functions with symmetries that can not be
suitable to detection or classification [3], [4].
Traditionally, the objective of time–frequency research
is to create a function that will describe the energy
density of a signal simultaneously in time and
frequency. For explicit classification, it is not
necessarily desirable to accurately represent the
energy distribution of a signal in time and frequency.
In fact, such a representation may conflict with the
goal of classification, generating a TFR that
maximizes the separability of TFRs from different
classes. It may be advantageous to design TFRs that
specifically highlight differences between classes
[5],[6]. In this paper we propose a technique for
designing an optimized time-frequency representation
(TFR) from a time-frequency ambiguity plane applied
for a precise classification of motor faults; such as;
bearing fault, stator faults and broken bars.
1. INDUCTION MACHINE FAULTS
Bearing faults such as outer race, inner race, ball
fault, and train fault cause machine vibration. These
faults have vibration frequency components, fv, that
are characteristic of each fault type. The mechanical
vibration caused by the bearing fault results in air gap
eccentricity. Oscillations in air gap length induce
variations in flux density. These variations produce
harmonics on the stator current. The characteristic
current frequencies, f c , due to bearing characteristic
vibration frequencies are calculate by [7]:
f c = f s ± mfν (1)
Where f s is fundamental frequency, fν
Characteristic vibration, frequency m Positive integer
multiplier.
1.2. Rotor faults
A fault on the rotor, such as a broken rotor bars,
causes asymmetrical working conditions within the
rotor. The current rotor bars, which are at the
frequency s f , can be expressed into positive and
negative sequence components ± s f within the rotor,
where s is the slip. Consequently, the negative
sequence rotor current results in stator currents at
frequency [8]:
− sf + f r = − sf + f − sf = (1 − 2 s) f (2)
The interaction of the (1 − 2 s) f harmonic of the
motor current with the fundamental air-gap flux
produces speed ripple at 2sf and gives rise to
additional motor current harmonics at frequencies
(1 ± 2ks) f , k=1,2,3.. [9] with k = 1 , the frequency
sidebands (1 ± 2s) f of the fundamental are very

-1-
SETIT2007
commonly used to detect broken bar faults. The
motor-load inertia also affects the magnitude of these
sidebands [10].
1.3 STATOR FAULTS
In ideal conditions, the motor supply current
contains only a positive-sequence component, leading
to a constant space vector current modulus. If there is
inter-turn short circuit in the motor stator winding, the
supply current will exhibits some sort of unbalance.
When explained by symmetrical components theory,
the stator asymmetry produces a component at
frequency − f (i.e., a negative sequence component).
This component gives rise to torque ripples at
frequencies of 2sf and consequently produce speed
ripples of different amplitude, being differently
filtered by the machine-load inertia [11].
2. USE OF THE KERNEL AND AMBIGUITY
PLANE FOR CLASSIFICATION
The discrete version of ambiguity function [5] is:
N −1 2π
A[η ,τ ] = Fn→η {R[n,τ ]} = ∑R[n,τ ]e
-j nη
N
n=0
Where F represents the Fourier
η represents discrete frequency shift, and τ
represents discrete time lag. The instantaneous
autocorrelation function R[n,τ ] is defined as:
R[n,τ ] = x * [n ]. x[(n + τ )N ] (4)
This method, used to design kernels (and thus
TFRs), optimizes the discrimination between
predefined sets of classes. The resulting kernels are
not restricted to any predefined function but, rather,
are arbitrary in shape. This approach requires the
necessary smoothing in order to achieve best
classification performance. The use of the kernel and
ambiguity plane includes two sequential processes:
feature extraction and classification. Our goal is to
design a classification-optimal representation that
specifically emphasizes the differences between
classes. It is not necessary for the representation to
accurately describe the time-frequency information of
the signal. This technique has been successfully
applied for tool-wear monitoring and radar transmitter
identification [5].
The kernel determines the representations and its
properties. A kernel function is a generating function
that operates upon the signal to produce the TFR. The
characteristic function for each TFR is A(η ,τ )φ (η ,τ )
In other words, for a given a signal, a TFR can be
uniquely mapped from a kernel [3]. The classification-
optimal representation TFRi can be obtained by
smoothing the ambiguity plane with an appropriate
kernel φ opt , which is a classification-optimal kernel.
The problem of designing the TFRi becomes
equivalent to designing the classification-optimal
kernel φ opt (η , τ ) .
3. INDUCTION MACHINE FAULTS
CLASSIFICATION
The optimal TFR method is applied to classification
of three kinds of induction machine faults, which are;
bearing fault, stator fault and rotor fault. Thus, four
classes are considered: healthy motor, bearing fault,
stator fault and broken bars. The goal of the feature
extraction is to generate a N-point feature vector from
the original 10000-point current signal. The feature
vectors are classified with Mahalanobis distance. The
characteristic frequencies of the three faults
considered, are located near to the fundamental
frequency and, in order to preserve relevant
information, the original signal is resample with a
downsampling rate 25. Only the range of the required
frequencies is preserved. By downsampling, the signal
dimension has been reduced greatly. This leads to a
great reduction of the computation complexity. In
addition, electrical noise has also been attenuated.
After this step, a new 200-point signal that keeps the
signature of the original signal is obtained. The time-
frequency ambiguity plane of the signal is calculated
by eq. (3). We will construct the TFR optimal for our
classification task by smoothing the ambiguity plane
with a class-dependant kernel. Here, the dimension of
(3) ambiguity plane is 200*200. Basically we will directly
select N points from this plane as our feature vector.
transform, is1 i s2 i si
(TFR)1 (TFR)2 … (TFR)i
Classification
Level 1
Stator fault Bearing Fault Rotor fault
Level 2 Severity degree
Figure.1 Procedure of Faults classification
3.1 Fisher’s discriminant ratio kernel (FDR)
The kernel φ opt (η ,τ ) is designed for each specific
classification task. We determine N locations from the
200*200 ambiguity plane, in such a way that the
values in these locations are very similar for signals
from the same class, while they vary significantly for
signals from different classes. The notation
Aij [η ,τ ] represents the ambiguity plane of the jth
training example in the ith class. We design and use
Fisher’s Discriminant Ratio kernel to get those N
locations.
-2-
SETIT2007

The kernels are designed by I training example Feature points are ambiguity plane points of
signals from each class with the equation as follows: locations (η ,τ ) where φopt
(c)
[η ,τ ] = 1 . Therefore, the
process of feature extraction is to select points that are

FDR(η ,τ ) =
(m [η ,τ ] − mFault Healthy
[η ,τ ]) 2

(5)
optimal for the classification task from the ambiguity
2
VFault [η ,τ ] + VHealthy
2
[η ,τ ] plane. The optimal number of nonzero points is
determined by evaluating the classifier performance
Where using the K best kernel points (i.e., the K points with
N1 N2
the largest Fisher’s discriminant ratio). Kopt is selected
m Fault [η ,τ ] = ∑∑ A [η ,τ ]
1 to be the number K for which the probability of
ij Fault
(6)
I i =1 j =1 correct classification is the greatest. Selection of
points in the Doppler-delay plane is interpreted as
N1 N2

m Healthy [η ,τ ] = ∑∑ A [η ,τ ]
1 masking of ambiguity function of the signal by an
ij Healthy
(7)
I i =1 j =1 adapted binary function providing an optimal kernel
According to the symmetries of the ambiguity plane,
mFault [η ,τ ] and mHealthy [η ,τ ] average of fault and only points on a quarter plane are considered.
healthy classes of ambiguity plane
I = N1.N 2 number of examples per class 3.3 Classification by Mahalanobis distance
N 2 : Number of current examples of same load level
N1 : Number of load levels After designing the kernels, using examples from
2
VFault [η ,τ ]2 and VHealthy
2
[η ,τ ] variances of the fault and each of the C classes, actual classification is
healthy classes in the ambiguity plane performed. Given a particular unknown test signal
vector (the classifier is not trained on this example),
[η ,τ ] = ∑ (A [η ,τ ] − m [η ,τ ])
N
2 1 2
the classifier estimates the class membership of this
VFault ij Fault Fault
(8)
I j =1 example. The classification of the point x in one of c
classes can be realized by standard classification
[η ,τ ] = ∑ (A [η ,τ ] − m [η ,τ ])
N
2 1 2 techniques (e.g. linear or quadratic discriminant
VHealtyn ij Healthy Healthy
(9)
I j =1 functions, distance, neural networks, ..). We choose to
classify with a Mahalanobis distance. The feature
The system is trained by using ten current signals at vector of signal x given by:
0% and 100% load levels. We take N 1 = 2 in order to
FVx = φopt
(c)
o Ax (12)
solve the problem of the load levels. Test is then
performed on current signals collected at the 25% and Where Ax Ambiguity Plane of signal x
70% load levels. For C -classes must be designed x is affected to the class ci ⇔ i = arg min {d M (FVx )}
C − 1 kernels. As we have four classes (three fault Where d M (FV x ) is the FVx Mahalanobis i =1...c
distance of
cases and the healthy case of the machine), we must class ci, arg min {d M (FV x )} is the minimal value of the
design three kernels: bearing fault kernel, stator fault d M (FV x ) i =1...c

kernel and rotor fault kernel. Each kernel separates the

healthy case of the fault case. (
d M (FVx ) = (FVx − FVtrain
(c)
) .∑c (FVx − FVtrain
(c )
T
) −1
)12
(13)
Where (.) denotes matrix transpose. Covariance
T
3.2. Features Extraction
∑c are estimated from the training data. A reject
We transform the Fisher’s Discriminant Ratio decision is taken when the response x(t ) to be classified
(FDR) to φ opt kernel in a binary matrix by replacing is far from any class.

the maximum N points with 1‘s and the other points

with 0’s. Features can be extracted directly ⎧ x is affected if d M (FVx ) p η
from φ opt [η , τ ]o A[η ,τ ] where o is an element-by- ⎨ (14)
⎩ x is reject otherwise
element matrix product. The kernel has the same
dimensions as the ambiguity plane. By multiplying the Where η is a given reject threshold
φopt kernel with a certain signal’s ambiguity plane, we The error of the badly classified points of the feature
vectors FVx is calculated by:
will find k feature points for this signal. We put them
into a vector in order to create the training feature N1 N2 FV train − FV x
(k ) of class c: e(i, j )% = ∑∑
(c)
vector FVtrain 1 i, j i, j
.100 (15)
I i =1 j =1 FVtrain i , j
(c)
FVtrain (k ) = φopt(c ) [η ,τ ] o A (c ) [η ,τ ] (10)

φopt(c ) [η ,τ ] Training optimal kernel Where

A (c ) [η ,τ ] Mean class of ambiguity plane I = N1.N 2 Examples number per class
Where N 2 : Current examples number of same load level
N1 : load level number
⎧⎪ A ( c ) [η ,τ ], if φ opt
(c )
[η ,τ ]= 1
φ opt( c ) [η ,τ ]o A ( c ) [η ,τ ] = ⎨ (11)
if φ opt [η ,τ ]= 0
4. EXPERIMENT RESULTS
⎪⎩0,
(c)

-3-
SETIT2007
An acquisition of current signals was carried out on
a test bench, which is made of a 5.5 KW induction
motor (fig.2).
Fig.2. test bench of induction motor
Fig.3. Broken bars Fig.4. Bearing faults
The sampling rate is 10 KHz. The number of
samples per signal is N=10000. The data acquisition
set on the machine consists of 15 examples of stator
current recorded with different levels (0%, 25%, 50%,
75%, 100%). Different operating conditions from the
machine were considered; healthy, bearing fault
(fig.4), stator fault (fig.2) and rotor fault (fig.3) .The
training set is carried out on 10 current examples. The
last five current examples are used to test the system
classification.
The training set for the three faults and for the
healthy machine was made, each one, from 10
examples of no-load current and 10 other examples for
full load. Consequently we have 20 examples of
training for each of three faults and 20 examples of
training for the healthy machine. The bearing fault
kernel is designed for obtaining the points location of
maximum separation between two classes: fault
bearing class and the healthy motor class. The
dimension of ambiguity plane contains initially 200 x
200 = 40000 points; considering symmetry compared
to the origin, we take the quarter of ambiguity plane,
which corresponds to N=10000. The stator fault kernel
is designed for obtaining the points location of
maximum separation between stator fault class and the
healthy motor class. Rotor fault kernel is designed
also for obtaining the points location of maximum
separation between rotor fault class and the healthy
motor class. Ambiguity plane of three kernels is
computed from N=10000 points. The classification
consists on the separation of faults classes. The
Fisher’s point locations are represented in the
Doppler-delay plane (Fig.5). We retained 03 points
location per kernel {(ξ ,τ )1 ,L, (ξ ,τ )9 } of stronger
contrast. These locations are ranged in the feature
vector for training {FV1 ,L, FV9 } . This selection is
made on the basis of contrast value and a compact
localization in the ambiguity plane. We also removed
-4-
the locations which have values close or similar of
points those of other classes.
150
Bearing fault
Doppler (Hz)
100
50
Rotor fault
Stator fault
0
0 50 100 150
Delay (points)
Fig.5. Ambiguity plane smoothed by three kernel
The features vector of the signal to be classified
FVx was compared with features vectors of the
training by using the Mahalanobis distance from
eq.14. The decision rule of signal assignment is made
by eq.15. The threshold λ = 0.4 was tested
successfully on several signals in order to obtain a
correct classification. We have tested signals which do
not belong to the training set of the three faults;
bearing fault, stator fault and rotor fault with various
levels of load (25%, 50%, 75%). Five signals
examples are taken for each fault and for each load
level. Thus we will have 5 X 3=15 signals test for
each fault. After extraction, the features vectors of
signal to be classified, we took 50 points at each
feature vector with various levels of load. The
calculation of the Mahalanobis distance d M (Vx ) is
done along these features vectors. The figure 8 shows
that the error is null for the first eight points of the
vectors tests concerning the bearing fault. This is for
25% 50% and 75%.levels of load. Finally, bearing
fault is only characterized by three points that are
belonging to the first eight points. Consequently the
signals tested are identified with precision.
50
25%
50%
40 75%
30
Error %
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Fisher’s Points
Fig.8. Classification errors for bearing fault
For stator fault, the figure 9 shows that the
classification error is null for the first twelve points of
the vectors tests. Different load level 25% 50% and
75% are considered. The stator fault is characterized
by three points that belong to the first twelve points.
Consequently the signals are identified with precision.
SETIT2007

Current," IEEE Trans. Industry Applications, vol.

80
25% 35, no. 2, March/April 1999
70 50%
75% [2] L. Atlas, J. Droppo, and J. McLaughlin,
60
"Optimizing time-frequency distributions via
Error %

50 operator theory", in Proceedings of the 1997 SPIE,

40 vol. 3162, pp. 161–171.
30 [3] C. Heitz, "Optimum time-frequency
20 representations for the classification and
10 detection of signals," Appl. Signal Process., 1995,
0 vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 124–143.
0 10 20 30 40 50
[4] M. Davy and C. Doncarli, "Optimal kernels of
Fisher’s Points time-frequency representations for signal
Fig.9. Classification errors for stator fault classification," in Proc. IEEE-SP Int. Symp.
Time-Freq. Time-Scale Anal., 1998, pp. 581–
Figure 10 shows that for the rotor fault the 584.
classification mean error is null for the first thirteen [5] B.W. Gillespie and L. Atlas, "Optimizing Time–
points of the vectors tests for different load level 25% Frequency Kernels for Classification," IEEE
50% and 75%. The rotor fault is characterized by three Trans. Signal Processing, March 2001, VOL. 49,
points that belong to the first thirteen points. NO. 3,
Consequently the signals tested are also identified [6] M. Wang, G. I. Rowe, and A. V. Mamishev,
with precision. "Classification of power quality events using
optimal time-frequency representations—Part 1:
60
25%
50%
application," IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, 2004,
75%
50 vol. 19, pp. 1496–1503,
[7] M J. Devaneyand L. Eren, "Detecting Motor Bearing
Error %

40
30
20
10
0 pp 388-394,
0 10 20 30
Fisher’s Points
Fig.10. Classification error for rotor fault
CONCLUSION
In this study we proposed a method based on time-
frequency representation (TFR) for the diagnostic of
induction motor faults. We demonstrate that the
classical TFR have parametric kernel and a priori
preset which are inappropriate for classification. Thus,
we use the plane of ambiguity where all the TFR can
be derived by a suitable choice of the kernel. It gives a
precise classification of the signal. The diagnosis
system classifies the different faults : bearing fault,
stator fault and rotor fault. Each fault was
characterized by a kernel. The optimized kernels allow
extracting nine discriminated locations in the Doppler
delay plane {(ξ ,τ )1 , L , (ξ ,τ )9 } . The assignment of an
unclassified signal was made with the Mahalanobis
distance. The mean error of points which are badly
classified is null. The diagnosis by TFR takes into
account the level of load and provides a reduced
computing time and an accurate classification.
faults”, IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement
Magazine", December 2004
[8] D.K. Perovic, M. Arkan, and P. Unsworth.
"Induction motor fault detection by space vector
angular fluctuation," IEEE IAS, Rome 2000, Vol 1,
40 50
[9] F. Filipetti, G. Franceschini, C. Tassoni, and P. Vas, "
AI techniques in induction machine diagnosis
including the speed ripple effect," vol 1, IEEE IAS,
California 1996, pp 655-662,
[10] A. Lebaroud, A. Bentounsi, G. Clerc, "Detailed
Study of the Rotor Asymmetry Effects of Induction
Machine Under Different Supply Conditions,” 11th
European conference of power electronics and
applications (EPE’05), Dresden, Germany, 11-14
September 2005.
[11] A. Lebaroud, A. Bentounsi, A. Kkhezzar, M.
Boucherma, " Effects of Broken Bar Induction
Motor with Stator Asymmetry and Distorted
Supply," International conference in electrical
machines (ICEM’04), Poland, September 2004.
[12] L. Cohen, "Time-Frequency Analysis," Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1995.

REFERENCE

[1] B. Yazıcı, G. B. Kliman, "An Adaptive Statistical

Time–Frequency Method for Detection of Broken
Bars and Bearing Faults in Motors Using Stator

-5-