A Comparison of Residual-based Methods on Fault Detection



Published Oct 26, 2023
Chi-Ching Hsu Gaetan Frusque Olga Fink


An important initial step in fault detection for complex industrial systems is gaining an understanding of their health condition. Subsequently, continuous monitoring of this health condition becomes crucial to observe its evolution, track changes over time, and isolate faults. As faults are typically rare occurrences, it is essential to perform this monitoring in an unsupervised manner. Various approaches have been proposed not only to detect faults in an unsupervised manner but also to distinguish between different potential fault types. In this study, we perform a comprehensive comparison between two residual-based approaches: autoencoders, and theinput-output models that establish a mapping between operating conditions and sensor readings. We explore the sensorwise residuals and aggregated residuals for the entire system in both methods. The performance evaluation focuses on three tasks: health indicator construction, fault detection, and health indicator interpretation. To perform the comparison, we utilize the Commercial Modular Aero-Propulsion System Simulation (C-MAPSS) dynamical model, specifically a subset of the turbofan engine dataset containing three different fault types. All models are trained exclusively on healthy data. Fault detection is achieved by applying a threshold that is determined based on the healthy condition. The detection results reveal that both models are capable of detecting faults with an average delay of around 20 cycles and maintain a low false positive rate. While the fault detection performance is similar for both models, the input-output model provides better interpretability regarding potential fault types and the possible faulty components.

How to Cite

Hsu, C.-C., Frusque, G., & Fink, O. (2023). A Comparison of Residual-based Methods on Fault Detection. Annual Conference of the PHM Society, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.36001/phmconf.2023.v15i1.3444
Abstract 97 | PDF Downloads 106



condition monitoring, run-to-failure, anomaly detection, n-cmapss, fault detection

Arias Chao, M., Kulkarni, C., Goebel, K., & Fink, O. (2019). Hybrid deep fault detection and isolation: Combining deep neural networks and system performance models. International Journal of Prognostics and Health Management.
Arias Chao, M., Kulkarni, C., Goebel, K., & Fink, O. (2021). Aircraft engine run-to-failure dataset under real flight conditions for prognostics and diagnostics. Data, 6(1),5.
Darrah, T., Lovberg, A., Frank, J., Biswas, G., & Quinones- Gruiero, M. (2022). Developing deep learning models for system remaining useful life predictions: Application to aircraft engines. In Annual conference of the phm society (Vol. 14).
Fink, O., Wang, Q., Svensen, M., Dersin, P., Lee, W.-J., & Ducoffe, M. (2020). Potential, challenges and future directions for deep learning in prognostics and health management applications. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 92, 103678.
Frederick, D. K., DeCastro, J. A., & Litt, J. S. (2007). User’s guide for the commercial modular aero-propulsion system
simulation (c-mapss) (Tech. Rep.).
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980.
Lei, Y., Li, N., Guo, L., Li, N., Yan, T., & Lin, J. (2018). Machinery health prognostics: A systematic review from
data acquisition to rul prediction. Mechanical systems and signal processing, 104, 799–834.
Lovberg, A. (2021). Remaining useful life prediction of aircraft engines with variable length input sequences. In
Proceedings of the annual conference of the phm society.
Ma, Q., Zhang, M., Xu, Y., Song, J., & Zhang, T. (2021). Remaining useful life estimation for turbofan engine with transformer based deep architecture. In 2021 26th international conference on automation and computing (icac) (pp. 1–6).
Michau, G., Hu, Y., Palm´e, T., & Fink, O. (2020). Feature learning for fault detection in high-dimensional condition monitoring signals. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability, 234(1), 104–115.
Michau, G., Palm, T., & Fink, O. (2017). Deep feature learning network for fault detection and isolation. In Annual conference of the phm society (Vol. 9).
Pan, Z., Meng, Z., Chen, Z., Gao, W., & Shi, Y. (2020). A two-stage method based on extreme learning machine for predicting the remaining useful life of rollingelement bearings. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 144, 106899.
Rausch, R. T., Goebel, K. F., Eklund, N. H., & Brunell, B. J. (2007, 01). Integrated in-Flight Fault Detection and Accommodation: A Model- Based Study. Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, 129(4), 962-969. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2720517 doi: 10.1115/1.2720517
Reddy, K. K., Sarkar, S., Venugopalan, V., & Giering, M. (2016). Anomaly detection and fault disambiguation in large flight data: A multi-modal deep auto-encoder approach. In Annual conference of the phm society (Vol. 8).
Saufi, S. R., Ahmad, Z. A. B., Leong, M. S., & Lim, M. H.
(2019). Challenges and opportunities of deep learning models for machinery fault detection and diagnosis: A
review. Ieee Access, 7, 122644–122662. 10
Technical Research Papers