Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 11 October 2009
Accepted 19 May 2010
Available online 9 June 2010
The rapid expansion of wind farms has drawn attention to operations and maintenance issues. Condition
monitoring solutions have been developed to detect and diagnose abnormalities of various wind turbine
subsystems with the goal of reducing operations and maintenance costs. This paper explores fault data
provided by the supervisory control and data acquisition system and offers fault prediction at three
levels: (1) fault and no-fault prediction; (2) fault category (severity); and (3) the specic fault prediction.
For each level, the emerging faults are predicted 5e60 min before they occur. Various data-mining
algorithms have been applied to develop models predicting possible faults. Computational results validating the models are provided. The research limitations are discussed.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Wind turbine
Fault prediction
Fault identication
Condition monitoring
Predictive modeling
Computational modeling
1. Introduction
Wind power is regarded as a key source in meeting the planned
targets of the carbon emission reductions and the diversity of
energy supply sources [1]. The growing interest in wind energy has
led to the rapid expansion of wind farms [2,3].
The growth of wind power has increased interest in the
operations and maintenance of wind turbines. As wind turbines are
located at remote locations that may be difcult to access, their
maintenance becomes an issue. As indicated in Ref. [4], a $5000
replacement of a bearing can turn into a $250,000 project involving
cranes and a service crew in addition to the loss of power generation. For a turbine with 20 years of operating life, the operations,
maintenance, and part replacement costs were estimated in the
past to be at least 10e15% of the total income from the generation
[5]. Thus, condition monitoring and fault diagnosis of wind turbines
are of high priority.
The state-of-the-art research in wind turbine condition monitoring and fault diagnosis has been covered in the past literature
[6e10] with more recent updates included in Refs. [11,12]. Modern
wind turbines are usually equipped with some form of condition
monitoring systems, including system-level or subsystem-level
fault detection. Subsystem-level fault detection systems are usually
based on monitoring parameters such as the vibration of the wind
turbine drive train [13], bearing temperature, oil particulate
content, optical strain measurements [14], and so on. Some
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: andrew-kusiak@uiowa.edu (A. Kusiak).
0960-1481/$ e see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2010.05.014
17
Table 3
Illustration of data instances with out-of-range values of wind speed.
Status code
Status text
Category
1
2
3
4
5
6
9
21
25
28
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
Date
Time
4/9/2009
4/9/2009
6/25/2009
6/25/2009
4:24:10
4:34:10
1:54:54
1:54:54
AM
AM
AM
AM
Status
code
Wind speed
Power
output
Generator
torque
0
0
183
183
L42946720
L42946720
32509316
27872676
1
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
Denition
Fault time
Status code
Category
Generator
speed
Power
output
Wind speed
Unit
Symbol
tfault
Nm
Category
GS(tfault)
kW
PO(tfault)
m/s
WS(tfault)
Table 4
Fault information for status code 0.
Date
Time
4/7/2009
4/7/2009
4/7/2009
4/7/2009
3:02:43
3:18:05
3:18:05
3:22:46
AM
AM
AM
AM
Status
code
Wind
speed
Power
output
Generator
torque
0
0
0
0
17
16
15
14
3
3
3
0
76
72
47
77
18
Table 5
Duplicate fault information.
Date
Time
5/24/2009
5/24/2009
5/24/2009
5/24/2009
7:20:34
7:20:34
7:20:34
7:20:34
PM
PM
PM
PM
Table 7
Summary of SCADA data for four turbines.
Status
code
Wind
speed
Power
output
Generator
torque
183
183
183
183
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
998
998
998
998
Turbine
Number of
positive power
values
Number of
negative power
values
Number of
erroneous
data values
Total number
of instances
1
2
3
4
24 892
21 035
3504
8466
3415
3844
21 309
16 359
1031
1030
1108
1095
29
25
25
25
338
909
921
920
Table 6
Reduced status/fault data set.
Turbine No.
Status/fault instances
No of status codes
1
2
3
4
2383
2619
817
1329
65
59
49
66
19
Status/Fault frequency
250
200
150
100
50
0
1
31 63 102 124 141 148 157 181 189 276 296 344
Status/Fault code
Fig. 4. Fault frequency of Turbine 4.
If TSCADA t n < Tfault tfault < TSCADA t n 1 Then
Status Codet n Status Code tfault
Categoryt n Category tfault
(1)
Table 8
Detailed information about status codes 181e185.
Fig. 3. Power curve of Turbine 4 and scattered points included in the status/fault le.
Status code
Status text
Category
Frequency
181
182
183
184
185
Idling position
Start-up
Load operation
Shut down
Manual operation of pitch
4
4
4
4
4
214
220
102
130
37
20
Table 9
Distribution of faults and statuses by category.
Turbine
Category 1
1
2
3
4
Sum/Average
Category 2
Category 3
Category 4
Overall
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
40
14
11
42
107
1.68%
0.53%
1.35%
3.16%
1.50%
417
42
40
131
630
17.50%
1.60%
4.90%
9.86%
8.81%
44
36
29
60
169
1.85%
1.37%
3.55%
4.51%
2.36%
1882
2527
737
1096
6242
78.98%
96.49%
90.21%
82.47%
87.33%
1200
2383
2619
817
1329
7148
1096
Frequency
1000
800
600
400
200
131
11 42
20
60
31
0
1
Category
Fault category
Fault
Status code
Status text
Category
Fault frequency
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
31
45
52
63
141
142
296
2
2
2
1
2
2
3
12
20
15
14
18
18
55
21
Table 11
Ignored status code data while matching it with the SCADA data.
Date
Time
4/3/2009
4/3/2009
4/3/2009
4/3/2009
4/3/2009
11:23:27
11:23:27
11:23:27
11:23:27
11:23:27
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
Status code
Status text
Category
Wind speed
Power output
Generator torque
95
156
292
293
296
PC restart
Repair
Malfunction of cabinet heaters
Malfunction of temp switch cabinet
Malfunction of diverter
4
4
3
3
3
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
22
22
22
22
22
Table 12
Training and test data sets.
Level
Level 1
Normal
433
Normal
433
No Fault 296
80
Level 2
Level 3
C3
16
C4
375
Normal
217
Normal
217
No Fault 296
38
C3
9
C4
187
Normal
2007
Normal
2007
No Fault 296
Status/Fault
61
C1
C2
1
2
Fault 296
C3
2
Number of correctly predicted fault instances Number of correctly predicted normal instances
100%
Number of fault instances Number of normal instances
Accuarcy
C4
56
(2)
Sensitivity
(3)
Specification
Algorithm
Accuracy (%)
Sensitivity (%)
Specicity (%)
NN
NN Ensemble
BTA
SVM
74.71
74.56
71.27
69.64
81.00
83.67
84.66
59.97
68.67
65.81
59.50
78.92
22
Table 14
Performance of four algorithms for fault category predictions.
Table 17
Test 2 results for status/fault prediction at six time stamps.
76.66
41.00
96.08
80.88
0.00
22.22
62.50
0.00
0.00
83.33
52.94
0.00
12.00
0.00
56.00
0.00
74.91
72.15
95.20
69.28
Algorithm
Accuracy (%)
Sensitivity (%)
Specication (%)
BTA
NN
NN Ensemble
SVM
69.81
72.00
68.00
70.59
86.67
66.67
82.88
47.06
63.16
70.45
66.67
82.35
Sensitivity (%)
Specication (%)
68.63
66.17
65.88
66.70
65.39
77.42
78.69
93.18
83.61
65.57
73.77
39.34
63.88
65.58
65.37
66.77
65.37
78.57
1
3
6
9
12
Time
Accuracy Normal
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4
instances
t
t
t
t
t
t
93.39
93.39
94.31
92.21
91.86
90.72
1
3
6
9
12
96.08
95.79
92.27
94.79
94.83
94.24
62.50
68.75
50.00
56.25
68.75
56.25
52.94
47.06
70.59
67.65
52.94
38.24
56.00
52.00
56.00
68.00
48.00
40.00
95.20
95.91
94.31
92.70
93.24
92.88
Table 16
Test 1 results for status/fault at six time stamps.
Time stamp
Accuracy (%)
Sensitivity (%)
Specication (%)
t
t
t
t
t
t
74.56
74.42
75.19
75.10
76.03
63.77
83.67
75.98
85.87
86.34
88.38
51.18
65.81
72.93
65.02
64.43
64.40
75.63
1
3
6
9
12
Accuracy (%)
Table 18
Test 1 results for prediction of status/fault category at six time stamps.
Table 15
Performance of four algorithms in prediction of a specic fault.
Time stamp
t
t
t
t
t
t
Time
Accuracy Normal
Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4
instances
t
t
t
t
t
t
99.27
99.17
99.13
99.08
98.87
98.77
1
3
6
9
12
99.75
98.00
99.36
99.90
99.75
99.51
100.00
100.00
50.00
100.00
50
100
100.00
50.00
50.00
100
100.00
100.00
50.00
50.00
100
50
82.14
84.62
77.78
73.21
75.93
76.79
Accuracy (%)
Sensitivity (%)
Specication (%)
t
t
t
t
t
t
69.81
64.15
67.92
67.92
66.04
49.06
86.67
66.67
73.33
73.33
33.33
24.53
63.16
63.16
65.79
65.79
78.95
34.21
1
3
6
9
12
23
[3] Strategic research agenda: Market deployment strategy from 2008 to 2030.
European Wind Energy Technology Platform. Available online: http://www.
windplatform.eu/leadmin/ewetp_docs/Bibliography/SRA_MDS_July_2008.
pdf; July 2008.
[4] Hatch C. Improved wind turbine condition monitoring using acceleration
enveloping. Orbit; 2004. pp. 58e61.
[5] Walford C. Wind turbine reliability: Understanding and minimizing wind
turbine operation and maintenance costs. Sandia National Laboratories;
March 2006. Report No. SAND2006-1100.
[6] Hyers R, McGowan J, Sullivan K, Manwell J, Syrett B. Condition monitoring
and prognosis of utility scale wind turbines. Energy Materials 2006;1(3):
187e203.
[7] Hameed Z, Hong Y, Cho Y, Ahn S, Song CK. Condition monitoring and fault
detection of wind turbines and related algorithms: A review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13(1):1e39.
[8] Amirat Y, Benbouzid M, Bensaker B, Wamkeue R. Condition monitoring and
fault diagnosis in wind energy conversion systems: a review. In: Proc. 2007
IEEE International Electric Machines and Drives Conference, vol. 2; May 2007.
p. 1434e9.
[9] Tavner P, Bussel GW, Spinato F. Machine and converter reliabilities in wind
turbines,. In: Proc. third IET international conference on power electronics,
machines and drives; 2006. p. 127e30.
[10] Wilkinson M, Spinato F, Tavner P. Condition monitoring of generators and
other subassemblies in wind turbine drive trains. In: Proc. 2007 IEEE International symposium on diagnostics for electric machines, power electronics
and drives; Sep 2007. p. 388e92.
[11] Amirat Y, Benbouzid M, Al-Ahmar E, Bensaker B, Turri S. A brief status on
condition monitoring and fault diagnosis in wind energy conversation
systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2009;13(9):2629e36.
[12] Lu B, Li Y, Wu X, Yang Z. A review of recent advances in wind turbine
condition monitoring and fault diagnosis. In: Proc. IEEE conference on power
electronics and machines in wind applications. 2009. p. 1e7.
[13] Becker E, Posta P. Keeping the blades turning: condition monitoring of wind
turbine gears. Refocus 2006;7(2):26e32.
[14] Editorial. Managing the wind: reducing kilowattehour costs with condition
monitoring. Refocus 2005;6(3):48e51.
[15] Caselitz P, Giebhardt J. Rotor condition monitoring for improved operational
safety of offshore wind energy converters. Transactions ASME, Journal of Solar
Energy Engineering 2005;127(2):253e61.
[16] Leany V, Sharpe D, Ineld D. Condition monitoring techniques for optimization of wind farm performance. International Journal of COMADEM 1992;2
(1):5e13.
[17] Sanz-Bobi M, Garcia M, Del P. SIMAP: Intelligent system for predictive
maintenance application to the health condition monitoring of a wind turbine
gearbox. Computers in Industry 2006;57(6):552e68.
[18] Rodriguez L, Garcia E, Morant F, Correcher A, Quiles E. Application of latent
nestling method using colored Petri nets for the fault diagnosis in the wind
turbine subsets. In: Proc. 2008 IEEE Int. conf. emerging technologies and
factory automation. p. 767e73.
[19] Echavarria E, Tomiyama T, van Bussel G. Fault diagnosis approach based on
a model-based reasoner and a functional designer for a wind turbine: an
approach towards self-maintenance. Journal of Physics Conference Series
2007;75:012078.
[20] Echavarria E, Tomiyama T, Huberts H, van Bussel G. Fault diagnosis system
for an offshore wind turbine using qualitative physics, In: Proc. EWEC 2008,
Brussels, Belgium; 2008.
[21] Zaher A, McArthur S. A multi-agent fault detection system for wind turbine
defect recognition and diagnosis. In: Proc.2007 IEEE Lausanne POWERTECH.
p. 22e7.
[22] Whelan M, Janoyan K, Tong Q. Integrated monitoring of wind plant systems,
In: Proc. SPIE smart sensor phenomena, technology, networks, and systems,
6933; 2008. p. 69330F.
[23] Kusiak A, Zheng H-Y, Song Z. Short-Term prediction of wind farm power:
a data-mining approach. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 2009;24
(1):125e36.
[24] Kusiak A, Li W. Virtual models for prediction of wind turbine parameters. IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion 2010;25(1):245e52.
[25] Kusiak A, Li W, Song Z. Dynamic control of wind turbines. Renewable Energy
2010;35(2):456e63.
[26] Tarek H, Ehab F, Magdy M. One day ahead prediction of wind speed and
direction. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 2009;23(1):191e201.
[27] Mohandes M, Halawani T, Rehman S, Hussain A. Support vector machines for
wind speed prediction. Renewable Energy 2004;29(6):939e47.
[28] Kusiak A, Zheng H-Y, Song Z. On-line monitoring of power curves. Renewable
Energy 2009;34(6):1487e93.