A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods

Industrial vibration monitoring often requires sensors with adjustable sensitivity and suitable frequency range. In practice, most industrial studies utilize either geophones (velocimeters) or accelerometers. In some cases, where low frequency content is of interest, larger sensor will be required....

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aleksandar Mihaylov, Hesham El Naggar
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/9208cd4a56f149879c7bbf2e1b480db6
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:9208cd4a56f149879c7bbf2e1b480db6
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:9208cd4a56f149879c7bbf2e1b480db62021-11-28T04:39:30ZA comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods2666-828910.1016/j.ringps.2021.100033https://doaj.org/article/9208cd4a56f149879c7bbf2e1b480db62021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666828921000249https://doaj.org/toc/2666-8289Industrial vibration monitoring often requires sensors with adjustable sensitivity and suitable frequency range. In practice, most industrial studies utilize either geophones (velocimeters) or accelerometers. In some cases, where low frequency content is of interest, larger sensor will be required. In difficult installation conditions, it can be advantageous to utilize smaller, higher frequency sensor elements (geophones or accelerometers) to simplify installation and maintenance. A frequency correction of sensors or the recorded waveforms will be needed to accommodate the frequency range of interest. Most accelerometers have relatively smaller sensitivity at low frequency which can affect the calculation of vibration velocity and displacement at low frequencies. Geophones are limited by their frequency response, which drops-off significantly their sensitivity below the resonant frequency of the sensor. Structural and ground vibrations that occur under the resonant frequency could be observed at test sites, but the recorded waveforms cannot be used directly for real-time assessment, and therefore it can be beneficial to artificially expand the frequency range below the sensor's frequency cutoff. Methods for such expansion, were developed and are well established in seismological studies and exploratory geophysics. Usually, these procedures are applied in data post-processing. These methods are not applicable when an operator requires real-time feedback of the measured vibrational amplitude, for example, monitoring of machinery foundations, where excitation control is necessary to avoid infrastructure damage.This paper presents an approach for instrument frequency extension in the necessary low-frequency range of common geophone elements in real-time applications and compares the results of the proposed technique in post-processing and in real time data collection systems.Aleksandar MihaylovHesham El NaggarElsevierarticleGeophone characteristicImpulse response correctionReal-time DSPIndustrial vibrationsGeophysics. Cosmic physicsQC801-809GeologyQE1-996.5ENResults in Geophysical Sciences, Vol 8, Iss , Pp 100033- (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Geophone characteristic
Impulse response correction
Real-time DSP
Industrial vibrations
Geophysics. Cosmic physics
QC801-809
Geology
QE1-996.5
spellingShingle Geophone characteristic
Impulse response correction
Real-time DSP
Industrial vibrations
Geophysics. Cosmic physics
QC801-809
Geology
QE1-996.5
Aleksandar Mihaylov
Hesham El Naggar
A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
description Industrial vibration monitoring often requires sensors with adjustable sensitivity and suitable frequency range. In practice, most industrial studies utilize either geophones (velocimeters) or accelerometers. In some cases, where low frequency content is of interest, larger sensor will be required. In difficult installation conditions, it can be advantageous to utilize smaller, higher frequency sensor elements (geophones or accelerometers) to simplify installation and maintenance. A frequency correction of sensors or the recorded waveforms will be needed to accommodate the frequency range of interest. Most accelerometers have relatively smaller sensitivity at low frequency which can affect the calculation of vibration velocity and displacement at low frequencies. Geophones are limited by their frequency response, which drops-off significantly their sensitivity below the resonant frequency of the sensor. Structural and ground vibrations that occur under the resonant frequency could be observed at test sites, but the recorded waveforms cannot be used directly for real-time assessment, and therefore it can be beneficial to artificially expand the frequency range below the sensor's frequency cutoff. Methods for such expansion, were developed and are well established in seismological studies and exploratory geophysics. Usually, these procedures are applied in data post-processing. These methods are not applicable when an operator requires real-time feedback of the measured vibrational amplitude, for example, monitoring of machinery foundations, where excitation control is necessary to avoid infrastructure damage.This paper presents an approach for instrument frequency extension in the necessary low-frequency range of common geophone elements in real-time applications and compares the results of the proposed technique in post-processing and in real time data collection systems.
format article
author Aleksandar Mihaylov
Hesham El Naggar
author_facet Aleksandar Mihaylov
Hesham El Naggar
author_sort Aleksandar Mihaylov
title A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
title_short A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
title_full A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
title_fullStr A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of instrument response correction methods: Post-processing and real-time methods
title_sort comparison of instrument response correction methods: post-processing and real-time methods
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/9208cd4a56f149879c7bbf2e1b480db6
work_keys_str_mv AT aleksandarmihaylov acomparisonofinstrumentresponsecorrectionmethodspostprocessingandrealtimemethods
AT heshamelnaggar acomparisonofinstrumentresponsecorrectionmethodspostprocessingandrealtimemethods
AT aleksandarmihaylov comparisonofinstrumentresponsecorrectionmethodspostprocessingandrealtimemethods
AT heshamelnaggar comparisonofinstrumentresponsecorrectionmethodspostprocessingandrealtimemethods
_version_ 1718408273320738816