Article

Journal of Vibration and Control

2020, Vol. 26(11–12) 1081–1091

Identification of unbalance in © The Author(s) 2019

Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
a rotor-bearing system using Kalman DOI: 10.1177/1077546319891642

filter–based input estimation technique

journals.sagepub.com/home/jvc

Akash Shrivastava and Amiya R Mohanty

Abstract
Unbalance is a common machinery fault, which occurs because of uneven distribution of mass of a rotating component
about its axis. Vibration-based monitoring techniques have been widely accepted for machinery fault diagnosis. This article
presents experimental verification of a recently developed Kalman filter–based method for the identification of unbalance
in rotor systems. The method is tested on an experimental test rig for different unbalance configurations and shaft speeds.
The proposed technique is a model-based method, which requires a mathematical model of the rotor system along with
response measurements. A rigid rotor model is used, and measured accelerations at bearing pedestals are used for
unbalance parameter estimation. Bearing stiffnesses are estimated using a frequency domain parameter estimation
technique with measured unbalance responses. Sensitivity analysis is also performed by altering the values of these es-
timated stiffnesses.

Keywords
Experimental test rig, unbalance identification, sensitivity analysis, parameter estimation, rigid rotor model

1. Introduction
with signal-based techniques, model-based approaches can
A typical rotating machine consists of a rotor, disk(s), and provide more information about a machine’s fault, such as
bearings. Unbalance exists in a rotor when the mass center type and location.
axis does not coincide with the rotating center axis. It is In the field of vibration control of rotors, estimation of
a common practice to balance a rotor system before in- unbalance parameters has been an active area of research
stallation. However, a rotating system cannot be completely (De Queiroz, 2009). For unbalance identification, some
balanced because of the nonuniform density of materials, model-based approaches have been proposed by researchers
manufacturing tolerances, etc. Furthermore, unbalance (Jalan and Mohanty, 2009; Sekhar, 2005; Shrivastava and
occurs because of gain or loss of materials during operation. Mohanty, 2018). The model-based approaches use a system
In the field, engineers try to reduce the vibration level to an model, a fault model, and measurements from the rotor
acceptable level using balancing techniques. However, such system. The occurrence of faults in a rotor system changes
techniques require several runs to reduce the vibration level. its dynamic behavior, which leads to changes in machine
The presence of unbalance in the disk generates radial vibrations. In one of the model-based approaches, fault-
forces, which cause vibrations (Mohanty, 2014). Vibration induced changes are represented by virtual forces and
due to an unbalanced rotor causes degradation in the per- moments in a system’s mathematical model. These forces/
formance of rotating machines. For machines operating at moments are identified before fault parameter estimation. In
high speed, even a small amount of unbalance can generate Jalan and Mohanty (2009) and Sekhar (2005), the rotor is
a large force and vibration. There are mainly two ways of
reducing machine vibration caused by unbalance: active or
passive control, and balancing. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, India
Several signal-based methods to detect/identify un- Received: 4 May 2018; accepted: 9 November 2019
balance in rotor systems have been developed over the years
(Fatima et al., 2014). However, recent developments in- Corresponding author:
Akash Shrivastava, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute
dicate that when models (physical or statistical) are com- of Technology, Acoustics and Condition Monitoring Laboratory, Kharagpur,
bined with measurements, prediction of a machine’s West Bengal 721302, India.
dynamic behavior can be enhanced (Lees, 2015). Compared Email: [email protected]
1082 Journal of Vibration and Control 26(11–12)

modeled by a finite element method and responses at all rotor is mounted on flexible bearings. This choice is made
degrees-of-freedom are predicted via modal expansion. The because the system under consideration consists of a short
use of modal expansion causes errors in estimated fault pa- rotor with a single disk located at the center. The system can
rameters when limited responses are available (Sudhakar and also be modeled in other ways, as mentioned earlier.
Sekhar, 2011). In Shrivastava and Mohanty (2018), authors For a constant rotational speed of V rad=s, the equation
of the present article proposed an identification algorithm of motion for the rotor system is given as
where forces are identified using a Kalman filter–based input
estimation technique (Lee and Chen, 2011). This technique M€
z þ ðC þ VGÞ_z þ Kz ¼ W (1)
was originally proposed for inverse heat conduction problems
where M, C, G, and K are the system’s mass, damping,
(Tuan et al., 1996). The Kalman filter–based technique in-
gyroscopic, and stiffness matrices, respectively. For the
corporates modeling errors and measurement noise while
system shown in Figure 1, the system matrices are given in
identifying unknown inputs. The technique was verified using
Appendix 1. Vector W is the excitation force vector (un-
numerical simulations, and effects of different parameters on
balance in the present work) and z is the displacement
estimation results were shown.
vector. The dot over the vector represents derivative with
This article focuses on applying a model-based tech-
respect to time. The displacement vector z consists of
nique based on Kalman filtering proposed by the authors to
transverse displacements in the x and y directions at bearing
estimate disk unbalance. Compared with other model-based
1 and 2 locations. In the test rig under consideration, a small
approaches, the present approach differs in a way that the
disk of thickness 16 mm and outer diameter 152.4 mm is
forces due to unbalance are estimated with an online fil-
used; therefore, the gyroscopic effect is not considered here.
tering technique. In the previous approaches, vibration
Estimation of unbalance forces is required before un-
measurements need to be expanded for all unmeasured
balance parameter estimation. As mentioned in the In-
degrees-of-freedom, which introduces errors in the force
troduction, a Kalman filter –based force estimation technique
estimates. The present approach uses measurements at
is used here, which requires state–space representation of
bearing pedestals only (which are mostly available) and
equations of motion. Transforming equation (1) into its state–
a simple mathematical model. The unbalance identification
space equivalent, we get
approach uses measured acceleration data and a mathe-
matical model of the rotor system. A rigid rotor model is XðtÞ ¼ Ac XðtÞ þ Bc WðtÞ (2)
used in the present work. The technique is tested on an
experimental test rig containing a rotor, a flexible coupling,
YðtÞ ¼ Gc XðtÞ þ Jc WðtÞ (3)
and two ball bearings. The methodology is tested for dif-
ferent unbalance scenarios. Sensitivity analysis is also where XðtÞ ¼ fx1 y1 x2 y2 x_1 y_1 x_2 y_2 g is the
performed by varying system parameters.

0 I
state vector, Ac ¼ is the system
M1 K M1 C


2. Mathematical modeling and unbalance 0
matrix, and Bc ¼ is the input influence matrix.
estimation algorithm M1
For the Kalman filter and recursive least-square–based
The performance of model-based techniques depends on the input estimation algorithm, the output (or measurement)
accuracy of the model of the system under consideration. vector consists of displacement and/or velocity. Therefore,
Comparison of model predictions and measurements is the the feed-through matrix Jc would be zero. The responses are
key concept in model-based techniques. The present tech- measured at the discrete time; therefore, equations (2) and
nique requires a state–space representation of governing (3) need to be converted into their discrete time equivalent.
equations. Finite element method is the most popular Considering the measurement and process noise, the dis-
technique to obtain state equations. But, for a system with crete time state–space equations can be written as
unknown parameters or complicated joints, modeling with
the finite element method may not be accurate. System
identification techniques can be used for system realizations
and to obtain state equations experimentally.
This section presents the mathematical modeling of
a rotor-bearing system and the approach for unbalance pa-
rameter estimation. A typical rotor system consists of rotors,
disks, bearings, and couplings. A rotor system is usually
modeled either as a rigid or as a flexible system. A simple
rotor model is considered in the present work, where a rigid Figure 1. Rigid rotor model.
Shrivastava and Mohanty 1083

xðk þ 1Þ ¼ Ad xðkÞ þ Bd WðkÞ þ wðkÞ (4) 2.2. Estimation of unbalance parameters

The estimated unbalance forces can be expressed as
yðkÞ ¼ Gd xðkÞ þ vðkÞ (5)
^ x ¼ A cosðωt þ δÞ
W (8)
where k is the time index, xðkÞ ¼ XðkΔtÞ, and WðkÞ ¼
WðkΔtÞ. Assuming a zero-order hold for the inter-sample ^ y ¼ A sinðωt þ δÞ
W (9)
behavior of the input, the matrices in equations (4) and (5)
can be given as Ad ¼ eAc Δt , Bd ¼ ½Ad  IA1 The amplitude of estimated forces “A” can be easily
c Bc , and
Gd ¼ Gc . A sampling interval (Δt) should be chosen such obtained and the amount of unbalance can be calculated by
that it obeys the Nyquist–Shannon sampling criterion, that dividing “A” by the square of shaft speed, that is me ¼ A=ω2 .
π
is Δt ≤ maxðω . Using trigonometric identities, the above equations can
iÞ
The vectors wðkÞ and vðkÞ are the process and mea- be rewritten as

surement noise vectors, which contain white Gaussian ^ x A ¼ cosðωtÞcosðδÞ  sinðωtÞsinðδÞ
W (10)
random sequences with variance Q and R, respectively.

The equations for Kalman filter and recursive least- ^ y A ¼ sinðωtÞcosðδÞ þ cosðωtÞsinðδÞ
W (11)
square–based input estimation algorithm are provided in
Appendix 2. For the derivation and details, we refer the The above equations can be grouped as
reader to Tuan et al. (1996).

 

cosðωtÞ sinðωtÞ cosðδÞ ^x
W
¼1 A ^ (12)
sinðωtÞ cosðωtÞ sinðδÞ Wy
2.1. Unbalance modeling
For a model-based fault diagnosis technique, modeling of Solving the above set of equations, we get
the fault under consideration is required. The presence of " !#
^ ^
1 1 Wx sinðωtÞ þ Wy cosðωtÞ
unbalance changes the dynamics of the rotor system and δ ¼ tan (13)
causes excessive vibration. This change can be modeled by A W ^ x cosðωtÞ þ W^ y sinðωtÞ
an equivalent load acting on a balanced rotor. The un-
balance mass rotates at the same speed as the rotor; Finally, the phase angle can be estimated by taking the
therefore, unbalance leads to synchronous excitation. average value of δ over some period
The disk unbalance is shown in Figure 2. Unbalance X
n
forces at disk locations in lateral directions (x and y) can be ^δ ¼ 1 δi (14)
n
expressed by the following equations i¼1

Wx ¼ meω2 cosðωt þ δÞ (6) where n is the number of time steps and δi is the phase angle
corresponding to the ith time step.

Wy ¼ meω2 sinðωt þ δÞ (7)

3. Experiments, data recording, and signal
where “me” is the amplitude of unbalance (also called processing
amount of unbalance), ω is the shaft speed in r/min, t is the
time, and δ is the phase angle. 3.1. Experimental rig
Figure 3 shows a photograph of the experimental test rig
used in the present work. The foundation of the test rig is

Figure 2. Disk unbalance. Figure 3. Experimental test rig.

1084 Journal of Vibration and Control 26(11–12)

a base plate of dimension 915 × 505 × 12.8 mm, which is signal. To generate residual vibration signals, this reference
isolated from the table using six rubber blocks. The shaft is signal helps remove phase shifts between vibration signals
made of mild steel material and has a circular cross section recorded for healthy and faulty conditions.
of diameter 15.875 mm, and is supported by two identical The identification method described in Section 2 requires
ball bearings (MB and ER-10K). The length of the shaft time domain rotor responses (displacement and/or velocity)
between bearing 1 and bearing 2 is 362 mm. The shaft is at bearing pedestals. These responses were measured at
flexibly coupled to a 0.373-kW (0.5-hp) alternating current constant shaft speeds. The presence of unbalance is iden-
(AC) motor using a helical coupling. A variable frequency tified from the synchronous response; therefore, a 1×
drive was used to regulate the speed of the AC motor. component of the measured response is required. The ac-
Mechanical speed of the rotating shaft was measured using celeration signals cannot be used directly in the present
a photo-tachometer. The central disk has an outer diameter approach as opposed to the other balancing techniques.
of 152.4 mm and a thickness of 16 mm. The disk contains However, there are many methods to obtain displacement/
a total of 36 threaded holes at two different pitch diameters velocity from the measured acceleration. Nowadays, even
(100 mm and 140 mm). inbuilt integrators are available in charge amplifiers. In the
present work, the displacement/velocity signals are ob-
3.2. Data recording and signal processing tained by the procedure given below.
The displacement/velocity signals were obtained by
The rotor vibrations were measured using four accel- numerical integration of the measured acceleration signals.
erometers (two Bruel & Kjaer 4370 with a sensitivity of First, raw acceleration signals were filtered through low-
10 pC/ms2 and two Bruel & Kjaer 4526 with a sensitivity of and high-pass filters to avoid any drifting during integrations.
100 mV/g) at bearing pedestals in x and y directions, as A low-pass Butterworth filter with cutoff frequency of
shown in Figure 4. All the vibration data were recorded 50 Hz and a high-pass Chebyshev type II filter with
simultaneously using Bruel & Kjaer Pulse time data re- a cutoff frequency of 6 Hz were used. Later, time in-
corder at a sampling rate of 4096 samples/s for a duration of tegration was performed twice to obtain displacement/
120 s. The vibration signals were measured for the rota- velocity signals.
tional speeds of 649 r/min, 1130 r/min, and 1367 r/min.
Balancing of the rotating machinery was performed at
a constant speed; therefore, we carried out the experiments 4. Results and discussions
on three different constant speeds. The speed values (11, 23, We validate the proposed technique by unbalance identi-
and 31 Hz) are selected so that it becomes easier to detect fication in the rotor system described in Section 3. Table 1
harmonics and subharmonics as they would not be close to represents all the unbalance configurations and rotor speeds.
the harmonics of supply frequency, that is 50 Hz. The first The different test runs correspond to different unbalance
critical speed of the rotor is about 95 Hz. The three oper- masses attached to the disk. Test “0” represents a healthy
ating speeds are much below the critical speed; therefore, rotor condition. The unbalance phase angle (54°) is kept the
modeling as a rigid system is valid. same for all cases.
A reflective tape for the photo-tachometer was attached
to the shaft at 0° location. A once-per-rotation output pulse
obtained from the photo-tachometer was used as a reference
Table 1. Different operating and unbalance conditions.
Speed (r/min) Test runs Added unbalance mass (g)
649 0 —
1 6.03
2 9.04
3 11.91
4 14.78
1367 0 —
1 6.03
2 9.04
3 11.91
4 14.78
1845 0 —
1 6.03
2 9.04
3 11.91
4 14.78
Figure 4. Accelerometers and coordinates.
Shrivastava and Mohanty 1085

Before unbalance estimation, system parameters need to system matrices obtained from the estimated parameters and
be estimated. In the present work, a bearing is modeled as an known unbalance conditions. As shown in Figure 5, the
isotropic bearing; that is stiffness and damping are con- estimated response at x and y directions matches well with
sidered only in x and y directions. For the test rig under the corresponding measured response. The modulation in
consideration, bearing stiffness and damping have been the displacement signal may be due to small misalignments
calculated experimentally (Jalan and Mohanty, 2009). From or due to preload.
the impact test on the stationary system, a damping co- Model updating via stiffness estimation has been carried
efficient of 250 N s/m was obtained; this value is used in the out so that fault parameters (amount of unbalance and phase
present study also. However, stiffnesses are estimated from angle) can be accurately estimated. Alternatively, the the-
the measured response obtained from a known unbalance oretical fault model and estimated unbalance can be
using a frequency domain–based bearing parameter esti- compared via the transition matrix obtained from theoretical
mation technique (Tiwari and Chakravarthy, 2009). This and measured responses (Jalan and Mohanty, 2009).
technique requires a system model and response meas- The Kalman filter and recursive least-square algorithm
urements. For more details about this identification tech- are provided in Appendix 2. Different values of filter pa-
nique, the reader is referred to Tiwari and Chakravarthy rameters need to be selected in advance. Here, the initial state
(2009). The responses obtained from the unbalance con- value ðx½0=0Þ is assumed to be zero. The initial state error
ditions presented in Table 1 are used to estimate stiffnesses. covariance ðP½0=0Þ is set as 1010 × Ins, where I is the unity
Different values of stiffness were estimated for different matrix and “ns” is the number of states. The process noise
unbalance cases, and the average values are calculated, covariance matrix Q is assigned a value of 108 on the
which for bearing 1 are kxx;1 ¼ 1:5 × 105 N=m and kyy;1 ¼ diagonal. Usually, the measurement noise covariance (R) is
2:78 × 105 N=m and for bearing 2 kxx;2 ¼ 7:04 × 105 N=m selected based on the amplitude of the measured response. In
and kyy;2 ¼ 6:05 × 105 N=m. It is noted here that the cross- the present work, the following formula is used to obtain the
coupling terms are not included in any of the parameter sets measurement noise covariance R ¼ ðΔ × maxðyÞÞ2 × Ind ,
(stiffness, mass, and damping, as presented in Appendix 1). where Δ is a small percentage value (1% in the present case),
To check the validity of these parameters, calculated re- maxðyÞ is the amplitude of the measured response, and “nd”
sponses are compared with the responses measured at the is the number of measurements. The value forgetting factor λ
bearing pedestals. The responses are calculated using the is set as 0.1.

Figure 5. Time history of the measured and predicted displacement at bearing 1 in the x direction (a, b) and in the y direction (c, d) for
a speed of 649 r/min and test run 4 (predicted displacement and measured displacement).
1086 Journal of Vibration and Control 26(11–12)

To assess the suitability of the current technique, where Y ðωÞ are the responses measured at n locations,
a comparison is made with an existing model-based tech- WðωÞ are the forces acting at m locations, and HðωÞ is the
nique for excitation force identification. The proposed FRF matrix. The transfer matrix or FRF matrix HðωÞ can be
technique is compared with the method proposed by determined either analytically or experimentally. Once the
Verhoeven (1988), which is based on the inversion of the FRF matrix is obtained, the external forces can be calculated
frequency response function (FRF). The response of the by inverting the FRF matrix
system is related to the excitation by the FRF 1
fWðωÞgm×1 ¼ ½HðωÞm × n  fYðωÞgn×1 (16)
fYðωÞgn×1 ¼ ½HðωÞn×m  fWðωÞgm×1 (15)
Here, a numerical example is presented where a rigid
rotor model of the system shown in Figure 3 is used. The
response is generated by using equations (4) and (5), and
Gaussian noise is added to simulate noisy measurement. All
the parameters are kept the same as used in experimental
verification. Figure 6 shows the actual and estimated un-
balance forces obtained by the present approach and by the
FRF inversion (IFRF) technique for the shaft speed of 600 r/
min and at 1% measurement noise level. It is observed that
the estimated unbalance force obtained from the present
technique matches well with the actual force, whereas the
estimated unbalance force obtained by the IFRF technique
is found to be less accurate.
Figure 7 shows the actual and estimated unbalance forces
for different levels of measurement noise. As the IFRF
technique does not account for measurement noise, it can be
Figure 6. Details of the time history of the measured and es- seen that the fluctuation in the estimated force is more than
timated unbalance forces at bearing one in the x direction for
that in the force obtained by the present technique. Now,
a speed of 600 r/min.

Figure 7. Details of the time history of the measured and estimated unbalance forces at bearing 1 in the x direction for a speed of 1800 r/
min and for the measurement noise level of (a) 1% and (b) 10%.

Table 2. Actual and estimated unbalance for different shaft speeds and techniques.
Estimated unbalance (kg m)
Shaft speed (r/min) Actual unbalance (kg m) Present method Frequency response function inversion
4 4
600 6.33 × 10 @54° 6.33 × 10 @53.7° 6.33 × 10[email protected]°
1200 6.33 × 104@54° 6.48 × 10[email protected]° 7.40 × 10[email protected]°
1800 6.33 × 104@54° 6.35 × 10[email protected]° 7.93 × 10[email protected]°
Shrivastava and Mohanty 1087

Figure 8. Time history of the actual and estimated unbalance forces at bearing 1 in the x direction (a, b) and in the y direction (c, d) for
a speed of 649 r/min and test run 2.

Figure 9. Time history of the actual and estimated unbalance forces at bearing 1 in the x direction (a, b) and in the y direction (c, d) for
a speed of 649 r/min and test run 4.
1088 Journal of Vibration and Control 26(11–12)

unbalance parameters are obtained from the estimated

5.05 × 10[email protected]°
7.71 × 10[email protected]°
9.91 × 10[email protected]°

5.12 × 10[email protected]°
7.31 × 10[email protected]°
9.57 × 10[email protected]°
1.19 × 10[email protected]°
4.16 × 10[email protected]°
6.08 × 10[email protected]°
8.08 × 10[email protected]°
1.2 × 10[email protected]°

1 × 10[email protected]°
forces using the method presented in Section 3. Table 2
presents the actual and estimated unbalance parameters for
different shaft speeds. It can be observed that the unbalance
parameters obtained from the present method are close to
the actual parameters. With the increase in the rotating
15

speed, the IFRF technique was found to be less accurate.

4.83 × 10 @60.2°
7.37 × 10[email protected]°
9.48 × 10[email protected]°
1.15 × 10[email protected]°

9.15 × 10[email protected]°
1.14 × 10[email protected]°
3.98 × 10[email protected]°
5.82 × 10[email protected]°
7.72 × 10[email protected]°
9.68 × 10[email protected]°
4.9 × 10[email protected]°
Figures 8 and 9 show the actual and estimated unbalance

7 × 10[email protected]°
forces for test runs 2 and 4, respectively. The actual un-
4

balance force is obtained from equations (8) and (9). As

stated before, the modulation in the response signal is due to
the presence of misalignment or preload. The modulated
10

signal contains mainly 1× and 2× components. Therefore,

these frequency components are also present in the esti-
4.61 × 10 @59.9°
7.04 × 10[email protected]°
9.05 × 10[email protected]°

4.67 × 10[email protected]°

8.74 × 10[email protected]°
1.09 × 10[email protected]°

5.56 × 10[email protected]°
7.37 × 10[email protected]°
9.24 × 10[email protected]°
1.1 × 10[email protected]°

3.8 × 10[email protected]°
6.68 × 104@63°

mated force. It can be observed that the amplitude of

the estimated force matches well with the actual unbalance
4

force.
The effect of different filter parameters is an important
study in all kinds of Kalman filter-based approaches. The
effects of different filter parameters, for example process
5
4.18 × 10 @59.3°
6.37 × 10[email protected]°

9.99 × 10[email protected]°

6.04 × 10[email protected]°

9.86 × 10[email protected]°
3.44 × 10[email protected]°
5.03 × 10[email protected]°
6.67 × 10[email protected]°
8.37 × 10[email protected]°

noise covariance and fading factor, are not presented here

8.2 × 10[email protected]°

4.2 × 10[email protected]°

7.9 × 10[email protected]°

because these effects are already shown in Shrivastava and

Mohanty (2018) by the authors. Here, some important facts
4

are provided to make this article self-contained. It is as-

sumed that the initial state and error covariance values are
5

known, but if this is not the case, then a large value, for
example 107 or 105, can be selected. The large initial
3.96 × 10 @58.9°
6.04 × 10[email protected]°
7.77 × 10[email protected]°
9.47 × 10[email protected]°

5.72 × 10[email protected]°
7.49 × 10[email protected]°
9.34 × 10[email protected]°
3.25 × 10[email protected]°
4.77 × 10[email protected]°
6.31 × 10[email protected]°
7.93 × 10[email protected]°

error covariance may provide inaccurate initial estimates,

4 × 10[email protected]°

which can be ignored. For a stable filter, the error covariance

4

converges to a fixed value as time advances. The other

Table 3. Actual and estimated unbalance parameters with perturbation to stiffness.

parameters can be tuned by performing unbalance esti-

Percentage change in stiffness

mation with a known unbalance.

10

Table 3 contains actual and estimated unbalance pa-

3.74 × 10 @58.57°

rameters obtained for the configurations presented in

5.70 × 10[email protected]°
7.34 × 10[email protected]°
8.95 × 10[email protected]°
3.78 × 10[email protected]°

7.07 × 10[email protected]°
8.82 × 10[email protected]°
3.07 × 10[email protected]°

5.96 × 10[email protected]°
5.4 × 10[email protected]°

4.5 × 10[email protected]°

7.5 × 10[email protected]°

Table 1. Results are also presented for different percentage

changes in stiffness values. It is observed that the estimated
4

amount of unbalance (or unbalance amplitude) is more

sensitive to stiffness than the phase angle. The quality of
15

balancing can be evaluated from the balance quality grade.

The average of the product of residual specific unbalance
(e0) and operating speed (ω) is calculated for all the cases
10 @59.6°
10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°

10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°
10[email protected]°

10[email protected]°
104@53°

104@78°

presented in Table 3. It is found that the balance quality

complies with G6.3 as per ISO 1940 standard.
4
unbalance
Estimated

In some cases, large errors in estimated phase angles are

×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
(kg m)

observed, which may be caused by the variation in me-

4.40
6.70
8.63
1.05
4.45
6.36
8.32
1.03
3.62
5.29
7.02
8.81

chanical speed. It is assumed in the present research work

that the shaft is rotating at a constant speed. Estimation of
10 @54°
104@54°
104@54°
103@54°
104@54°
104@54°
104@54°
103@54°
104@54°
104@54°
104@54°
103@54°

unbalance parameters under fluctuating speed conditions is

beyond the scope of the present work. However, the phase
4
speed unbalance

angles are calculated from the estimated unbalance forces;

×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
×
(r/min) (kg m)

this technique can be used when a tachometer/keyphasor is

Actual

4.29
6.33
8.33
1.00
4.29
6.33
8.33
1.00
4.29
6.33
8.33
1.00

not installed. The estimated amount of unbalance is quite

accurate.
The conventional balancing methods (e.g. three-point
1367

1845
Shaft

649

balancing) are based on the vibration measurements only,

Shrivastava and Mohanty 1089

which make the balancing process time-consuming because Funding

multiple runs are required. The present technique can be The author(s) received no financial support for the research, au-
used online, and the unbalance condition can be identified thorship, and/or publication of this article.
without stopping the machine. This technique helps in
continuous monitoring of the unbalance conditions in rotor
ORCID iD
systems used for critical applications.
Akash Shrivastava  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2098-1099

5. Conclusions
References
In this article, we have presented experimental validation De Queiroz MS (2009) An active identification method of rotor
of a recently developed Kalman filter–based unbalance unbalance parameters. Journal of Vibration and Control 15(9):
identification technique. A laboratory-scale experimental 1365–1374.
test rig was used in the experiments. A rigid rotor model was Fatima S, Guduri B, Mohanty AR, et al. (2014) Transducer in-
used in the present work. Stiffness of the bearings was variant multi-class fault classification in a rotor-bearing system
estimated using a frequency domain parameter estimation using support vector machines. Measurement 58: 363–374.
technique. Jalan AK and Mohanty AR (2009) Model based fault diagnosis of
Based on the results obtained from the present research a rotor–bearing system for misalignment and unbalance under
work, the following conclusions can be made: steady-state condition. Journal of Sound and Vibration 327(3–
5): 604–622.
Lee MH and Chen TC (2011) Intelligent fuzzy weighted input
1. The proposed scheme can be applied for online
estimation method for the forces generated by an operating
identification of rotating disk unbalance. The present rotating machine. Measurement 44(5): 917–926.
technique does not need multiple runs for unbalance Lees AW (2015) Recent advances and prospects in condition
parameter estimation, unlike traditional techniques. monitoring. In: Vibration Engineering and Technology of
2. The present Kalman filter–based technique requires Machinery. Cham: Springer, 51–63.
a mathematical model of the rotor system and re- Mohanty AR (2014) Machinery Condition Monitoring: Principles
sponse measurements. and Practices. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
3. The present technique assumes that the shaft speed Sekhar AS (2005) Identification of unbalance and crack acting
does not vary, and the results are presented for the case simultaneously in a rotor system: modal expansion versus
when only an unbalance fault is present. The un- reduced basis dynamic expansion. Journal of Vibration and
Control 11(9): 1125–1146.
balance parameters are identified accurately for dif-
Shrivastava A and Mohanty AR (2018) Estimation of single plane
ferent unbalance configurations and shaft speeds.
unbalance parameters of a rotor-bearing system using Kalman
4. It is observed that for some cases when variation in filtering based force estimation technique. Journal of Sound
shaft speed is observed or when the effect of mis- and Vibration 418: 184–199.
alignment is severe, the estimated phase angle is not Sudhakar GNDS and Sekhar AS (2011) Identification of unbalance
accurate. However, the amplitude of unbalance is in a rotor bearing system. Journal of Sound and Vibration
estimated with good accuracy. 330(10): 2299–2313.
Tiwari R and Chakravarthy V (2009) Simultaneous estimation of
For the case of varying shaft speeds, some parameter the residual unbalance and bearing dynamic parameters from
estimation techniques can be combined with the present the experimental data in a rotor-bearing system. Mechanism
technique for unbalance parameter estimation. Identification and Machine Theory 44(4): 792–812.
of multiple faults using the present approach will be dealt with Tuan PC, Ji CC, Fong LW, et al (1996) An input estimation ap-
in a future research work. proach to on-line two-dimensional inverse heat conduction
problems. Numerical Heat Transfer 29(3): 345–363.
Verhoeven J (1988) Excitation force identification of rotating
Declaration of conflicting interests machines using operational rotor/stator amplitude data and
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with re- analytical synthesized transfer functions. Journal of vibration,
spect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Acoustics, Stress, and Reliability in Design 110(3): 307–314.
1090 Journal of Vibration and Control 26(11–12)

Appendix 1

2 2  3
mðb=lÞ þ Id l 2 0 mab=l 2  Id =l 2 0
6 mðb=lÞ2 þ Id =l 2 mab=l 2  Id =l 2 7
6 0 0 7
M¼6   7;
4 mab l 2  Id l 2 0
2
mða=lÞ þ Id =l 2 0 5
2
0 mab=l 2  Id =l 2 0 mða=lÞ þ Id =l 2
2 3
kxx;1 0 0 0
6 0 0 7
6 k yy;1 0 7
K¼6 7;
4 0 0 kxx;2 0 5
0 0 0 kyy;2
2 3
cxx;1 0 0 0
6 0 0 7
6 cyy;1 0 7
C¼6 7
4 0 0 cxx;2 0 5
0 0 0 cyy;2
8 2 9 8 9
>
>uω ðb þ cÞ=l cosðωt þ fÞ>> >
>x1>
< 2 = < >=
uω ðb þ cÞ=l sinðωt þ fÞ y1
Funb ¼ ; q¼
>
>uω2 ða  cÞ=l cosðωt þ fÞ>
> >x2>
> >
: 2 ; : ;
uω ða  cÞ=l sinðωt þ fÞ y2

where u is the amount of unbalance (i.e. me), f is the phase angle, and ω is the rotating speed in rad/s. Here, m and Id are
the rotor mass and transverse mass moment of inertia, respectively. kii;j and cii;j represent the stiffness and damping
coefficients for the jth bearing in the i direction. Funb is a vector of equivalent unbalance force at bearing locations in x and y
directions.
The following are the values of different matrices
2 3 2 3
0:2301 0 0:1609 0 150;000 0 0 0
6 0 0:1609 7 6 7
6 0:2301 0 7 6 0 278;000 0 0 7
M¼6 7; K ¼ 6 7
4 0:1609 0 0:2301 0 5 4 0 0 704;000 0 5
0 0:1609 0 0:2301 0 0 0 605;000
2 3
250 0 0 0
6 0 0 7
6 250 0 7
C¼6 7
4 0 0 250 0 5
0 0 0 250

With a sampling frequency of 4096 Hz, i.e. a sampling time of 2.44 × 10–4 s, the following are the values of different
matrices presented in equations (4) and (5)
2 3
0:9706 0 0:0866 0 0:0002 0 0 0
6 0 7
6 0 0:9456 0 0:0743 0 0:0002 0 7
6 7
6 0:0185 0 0:8635 0 0 0 0:0002 0 7
6 7
6 0:0002 7
6 0 0:0342 0 0:8825 0 0 0 7
A¼6 7;
6211:0032 0 574:3276 0 0:6189 0 0:2906 0 7
6 7
6 388:1985 0:2777 7
6 0 0 492:1922 0 0:5965 0 7
6 7
4 122:3709 0 963:5818 0 0:2224 0 0:5214 0 5
0 226:1644 0 831:2731 0 0:2375 0 0:5390
Shrivastava and Mohanty 1091

2 3
0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 7
6
B¼6 7
0:0008 7
6 0:0014 0 0 7
6 0 0:0014 0 0:0008 7
6 7
40:0008 0 0:0014 0 5
0 0:0008 0 0:0014

Appendix 2
The discrete time linear dynamic system with modeling and measurement errors can be represented as
xðk þ 1Þ ¼ AxðkÞ þ BFðkÞ þ wðkÞ (17)

yðkÞ ¼ GxðkÞ þ JFðkÞ þ vðkÞ (18)

Simple Kalman filter algorithm without input

State prediction ðwithout inputÞ; x½k=k  1 ¼ A x½k  1=k  1 (19)

State prediction covariance; P½k=k  1 ¼ A P½k  1=k  1 AT þ Q (20)

Innovation covariance; S½k ¼ GP½k=k  1GT þ R (21)

Kalman gain; Ka ½k ¼ P½k=k  1GT S1 ½k (22)

Updated state covariance; P½k=k ¼ ½I  Ka ½kGP½k=k1 (23)

Innovation; Z½k ¼ y½k  Gx½k=k  1 (24)

Updated state estimation; x½k=k ¼ x½k=k  1 þ Ka Z½k (25)

Recursive least-square algorithm

Bs ½k ¼ G½AMs ½k  1 þ IB (26)

Ms ½k ¼ ½I  Ka ½kC½AMs ½k  1 þ I (27)

 1
Kb ½k ¼ λ1 Pb ½k  1BTs ½k Bs ½kλ1 Pb ½k  1BTs ½k þ S½k (28)

Pb ½k ¼ ½I  Kb ½kBs ½kλ1 Pb ½k  1 (29)

 
^ ¼ F½k
F½k ^  1 þ Kb ½k Z½k  Bs ½kF½k
^  1 (30)