|
曝光台 注意防骗 网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
1.81 for the multiple fault case. The other CIs computed also share the same trend with the M8A CI being more pro-nounced due to its larger exponent. Plots comparing Vibration Separation Vectors , where the damage is clearly visible, are also obtained using differ-ent test cases for different accelerometer / planet combina-tions. Figure 32 shows the results using A3/P1 again along with the other 2 test cases. Results for the A5/P2 combina-tion are shown in Figure 33 and results for the A3/P2 com-bination are shown in Figure 34. The combination A3/P2 and A5/P2 are chosen because the two accelerometers oppose one another. The results for the single tooth spall case shows no clear distinction from the baseline. In the A3/P1 results, there is a single abbera-tion for the single spall case but does not appear in all plots, so one could not be con.dent its due to the single spall. The results for the multiple faults test were positive. In all three plots, the damage was distinctive and repeated for different accelerometer/planet pairings. In addition, the damage appears in a mesh group pattern, making it a strong indicator of sun gear damage for the multiple fault case. The damage was most apparent in the low power tests, which also had the highest FM4 values. Results -GSMM The following plots are results for the GSMM. As shown in the previous section, the damage is best detected at the low power cases so the results shown are for the 80 HP case. For these plots, the CI value was assigned to the mesh bins that contained the closest sun gear mesh angle. The plots show a schematic of the transmission on the left. The four positions along the sun gear intersecting the line of centers make up the mesh groups. The top right .gure is the TSA data. It represents one of three carrier cycles of data being processed. The accelerometer is A4. |
