Broken Rotor Bar Fault Monitoring based on
Fluxgate Sensor Measurement of Leakage Flux
Taner Goktas1, Muslum Arkan1, M. Salih Mamis1, Bilal Akin2
1
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Inonu University, Malatya, TURKEY
2
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, TX USA
Abstract— Broken rotor bar fault in induction motors
significantly affects the motor dynamic performance and
increases the mechanical oscillations in torque and speed. Motor
current signature analysis has widely been used to detect such
fault, yet it has some shortcomings due to motor topology, stator
winding and load type dependencies. In this paper, radial leakage
flux which contains most critical fault related information is
analyzed using a fluxgate sensor to detect broken bar fault in
induction motors (IMs). The 2D-Time Stepping Finite Element
Method (2D-TSFEM) is used to analyze fault patterns in leakage
flux. A 2-Dimensional (2D) finite element analysis and
experimental results show that using leakage flux can provide
superior and more reliable results than classical motor stator
current analysis in IMs.
Keywords— Broken rotor bar; fault diagnosis; fluxgate
sensors; leakage flux component
I. INTRODUCTION
In order to avoid costly shutdowns/repairs in industrial
facilities and minimize safety concerns, electric machines
should be monitored carefully. The existing commercial
monitoring solutions for electrical machines are not meant for
real time monitoring, and they can be bulky, costly and may
not be practical to use in various applications. Motor current
signature analysis is the most widely used method for condition
monitoring which employs frequency spectrum of phase
currents. Among all fault types, broken rotor bar faults account
for 5%-10% of failures reported for induction motors [1].
Intensive research has been conducted to detect broken
rotor bar faults under constant load conditions. In [2], broken
rotor bar fault at different relative bar positions is observed
through Finite Element Model (FEM). In [3], the components
around the space harmonics in the current spectrum are
analyzed to detect broken rotor bar fault. It is pointed out that
some broken bar signatures around the third, fifth and seventh
current harmonics are observed. The generated torque
fluctuates due to these current harmonics, especially the sixth
harmonic in torque spectrum can be observed when there are
fifth and seventh harmonics in the current spectrum. A novel
frequency pattern during the start-up period [4], and Shannon
wavelets [5] are used to detect fault in induction motors. It is
shown in [6] that space harmonics in current spectrum such as
(5-4s)fs and (5-6s)fs are more reliable indicators to detect
broken bar in induction motors. In [7], the zero sequence
978-1-5090-4281-4/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
current which shows greater diagnostic performance than
classical MCSA is used to detect broken bar fault.
Although the phase current information is mostly preferred
motor variable to detect the faults in electric machines; fault
signatures in the current spectrum depend on the stator winding
connection and motor topology [8]. In order to overcome these
issues, flux spectrums can be used to detect the fault since it
provides more reliable, compact and portable diagnostic
solutions. There are two basic methods to track the flux data
from motor air-gap or frame. -i) The air-gap flux can be
measured with one or more hall-effect sensors placed in stator
slots [9], [10]. But it has practical challenges and higher cost
due to installation and number of hall-effect sensors. –ii) The
induced voltage in search coils installed on motor frame can
relatively provide some information about air-gap flux data
[11], [12] as well, but it does not provide absolute value and
depends on number of turns and flux derivation due to
Faraday’s law.
Some studies have been conducted in the literature
addressing the leakage flux usage for condition monitoring in
IMs [13-16]. In order to detect stator winding fault [13], and
rotor faults [14] in IMs the leakage flux sensors-coils are used.
In [15], the stray flux around the motor frame is used to detect
the inter-turn short circuit faults in low voltage induction
motors. It is claimed that stray flux is more efficient than stator
current to detect faults particularly at a no-load condition. In
[16], the stray flux spectrum of a three-phase induction
machine captured using an external coil is analyzed to
investigate gearbox behavior in an induction machine. It is
shown that mesh and its related frequencies cannot be easily
identified in stator current but show up in the EMF stray flux
spectrum. As discussed in the literature, the leakage flux can be
obtained from hall-effect sensors or a bulky search coils which
leads costly maintain and cause the false signature in IMs.
Our preliminary results have shown that there are some
key advantages using an integrated fluxgate sensor and leakage
flux density as follows:
• It has small form factor allowing easier installation. Remote
sensing is also possible within a certain distance.
• Provides accurate flux density value rather than a turn
number dependent relative value
• Provides resolution in the order of nT .
 • Fault detection in time domain is also possible due high
relative ratio of fault signatures to high energy spectrum
components
In this paper, it is aimed to detect the broken rotor bar faults
through radial leakage flux analysis using a QFN package
(4mm x 4mm) fluxgate sensor which provides resolution in
order of nT. In addition, a comparison between stator current
and leakage flux analysis is achieved to show the advantages
and disadvantages of these for broken bar fault diagnosis.
II. ANALYSIS OF BROKEN ROTOR BAR FAULT AND
MODELING INDUCTION MOTOR
A. Analysis of Broken Rotor Bar Fault
Broken rotor bar fault mainly occurs due to overheating in
rotor bars and large-thermo mechanical stress on the rotor shaft.
It degrades motor dynamic performance and increase the
mechanical oscillation in torque and speed. As well known,
when there is a broken bar, the blocked bar currents flow
through adjacent bars. This introduces electrical and magnetic
asymmetry in motor which causes to appear some
characteristics harmonics in stator current. The characteristics
broken rotor bar signatures including space harmonics are
defined as in current spectrum (1):
§§ k · · k
f b = ¨ ¨ ¸ (1 − s ) ± s ¸ f s = 1, 5, 7,... (1)
p p
©© ¹ ¹
where k is the harmonic index, s is the motor slip and p is the
number of pole pairs. The sideband harmonics at (1±2s)fs are
most commonly used signatures to detect broken rotor bar fault
in IMs. The amplitude of these sideband harmonics is
depended on rotor inertia, load level, the severity of fault. The
sideband harmonics distance to the fundamental harmonic is
proportional to the motor slip. Moreover, these harmonics
appear even in healthy induction motor due to manufacturing
processing stage. But they have always smaller amplitude than
broken rotor bar fault harmonics.
Under normal conditions, the frequency at fs and sfs do exist
on stator and rotor currents, respectively. If the rotor bar is
broken, the magnetic symmetry is lost and a reverse magnetic
field is produced at –sfs frequency in the rotor current as
depicted in Fig. 1. This component induces other fault
characteristics frequencies such as (1±2ks)fs in the stator
currents. The harmonics at (1-2s)fs and (1+2s)fs in stator
appears at –sfs and 3sfs on the rotor, respectively [17].
Furthermore, speed and torque oscillate at 2sfs due to these
components. Usually, the diagnostics methods have focused
Fig. 1. The frequency chain of broken rotor bar fault
on sidebands of fundamental harmonics at (1±2ks)fs in stator
current (see Fig. 1).
Although the diagnostics methods have focused on
sidebands of fundamental harmonics at (1±2ks)fs in stator
current, there are some drawbacks and limited diagnostics
ability using current waveform analysis since its frequency
spectrum can be different depending on winding configuration,
winding connection type, and motor topology and causes
monitoring false positive signatures due to load oscillation. In
this paper, it is shown that the rotor current frequencies in
broken bar fault such as sfs, 3sfs as well as the sidebands of
rotor rotational frequency, (fs±fr)±2sfs, can be clearly seen in
leakage flux spectrum whereas they don’t exist in current based
spectrum.
B. Modeling Induction Motor
The Finite Element Method (FEM) can be used to obtain
approximate solutions in a pre-defined boundary. Thus, in
order to model electric motor, ANSYS Maxwell-2D interactive
software package is used. Through the transient solver, this
software can analyze magnetic fields, power, torque, speed,
and flux of a model at various time steps of a solution over a
specified period of time. The variables are updated based on a
time dependent motion equation component in the z-direction:
dA
∇ × υ∇ × A = J s − σ − σ∇ V + ∇ × H c (2)
dt
where Hc is the coercivity of the permanent magnet, A is the
magnetic vector potential, V is the electric potential, υ is the
reluctivity, Js is the source of current density. The equation, (2)
is executed in each time step at every node of FEM model.
The filaments in each stranded winding are connected in
series or parallel with different several locations. The current in
each filament are the same and defined as:
∇×υ∇× A = J s (3)
Fig. 2. The 2D-FEM model of motor including sensor positions
Fig. 3. Radial leakage flux based analysis and fluxgate sensor position
 In order to minimize eddy current effects, stranded the axial field paralleled to machine axis is more sensitive to
conductors are used in each winding. The motor is 2.2 kW, 50 eccentricity fault whereas radial field has some key
Hz and has 36 slots/28 bars. The cross section of 2D-FEM information about broken bar and short circuit fault since it is
motor model including leakage flux and sensors positions an image of the air-gap flux density. Fig. 4 shows that the
shown in Fig. 2 is designed based on the actual size and leakage flux spectrum has the same characteristics fault
geometry of all parts such as stator core, rotor core, shaft, rotor signatures that of air-gap in IMs. Thus, leakage flux can be a
bar structure. Furthermore, stator winding configuration, air good option to analyze the behavior of main air-gap flux for
gap, physical conditions of the stator conductors, stator and broken rotor bar fault.
rotor magnetic material are also taken into account. The motor
electrical and geometrical parameters are given in Appendix. In A. Comparative Results Between Current and Leakage Flux
order to model broken bar fault, the bulk conductivity at The motor model for both healthy and broken rotor bar
corresponding bar is reduced by a hundred times, so the condition is simulated at full-load in order to compare stator
resistance of broken rotor bar increases which represents the current and leakage flux analysis where slip(s) = 0.053 and
broken bar fault model at incipient stage. In order to clearly nm=1420 rpm. As seen from the Fig. 5a, the sidebands of
show leakage flux based analysis using fluxgate sensor, the fundamental are clearly observed at 55.3 Hz and 44.7 Hz in
3D-cross section of induction motor model including fluxgate current spectrum for broken bar fault.
sensor position is shown in Fig. 3. As shown in Fig. 3.,
fluxgate sensor located at motor frame tracks radial leakage Fig. 6a shows the leakage flux spectrums at corresponding
flux in order to detect broken rotor bar fault in IM. sensor position both healthy and broken rotor bar fault at full-
load. As seen from the Fig. 6a, the characteristics sideband
III. ANALYSIS AND COMPRASION OF LEAKAGE FLUX AND components (1±2ks)fs in leakage flux rise up when there is a
CURRENT BASED DIAGNOSIS OF BROKEN BAR FAULT broken bar fault in IMs.
The magnetic field distribution plays a fundamental role in 0
Same Leakage flux
motor performance. In particular, the air-gap magnetic field Characteristics Air-gap flux
-30
determines the back-emf, torque, stator flux and leakage flux.
FFT(Br )(dB)

The interaction between the stator and rotor magnetic fields

-60
creates the demanded torque on the shaft, whereas other
components such as leakage flux do not contribute to the
-90 Under Threshold
torque generation. When the dynamic motor performance is
changed such as broken rotor bar fault case, the affected -120
variables in IMs are in order of main air-gap flux, stator back- 0 50 25 75 100
emfs and current. Thus, the air-gap flux and leakage flux as a Frequency (Hz)
function of air-gap flux can be good candidates to detect Fig. 4. The air-gap and leakage flux spectrums in one broken rotor bar fault
electrical and mechanical faults in IMs. One should note that
Stator Current Results Radial Leakage Flux Results
0 0
Healthy fs-fr (fs-fr)+2sfs Healthy
No additional (1-2s)fs (1+2s)fs (fs-fr)-2sfs
Broken bar (1± 2s)fs Broken bar
-25 signatures -25 sfs
FFT(Br )(dB)
FFT(ia )(dB)

Residual 3sfs
-50 harmonics -50

-75 Under Threshold -75 Under Threshold

-100 -100
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
(a) (a)
x 10-4
10 Healthy Broken bar 2.5
No significant decreasing (broken bar) Healthy
difference 1.5 Broken bar
Stator current, ia (A)

6
Leakage flux, Br (T)

flux

2 0.5

-2 -0.5

-6 -1.5 increasing
(Adjacent bars) flux
-10 -2.5
2.1 2.2 2.15 2.25 2.3 2.1 2.15 2.2 2.25 2.3
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(b) (b)
Fig. 5. Stator current sim. results for both two broken bars and healthy case Fig. 6. Radial Leakage flux sim. results for both two broken bars and healthy case
a) Frequency domain b) Time domain results a) Frequency domain b) Time domain result
 If the low frequency components [0-to-50Hz] are analyzed
in leakage flux, it is clearly seen from Fig. 6a that the rotor
current frequencies at sfs and 3sfs do exist based on frequency
chain as shown in Fig. 1. Moreover the signatures at (fs-fr)±2sfs
in leakage flux spectrum is show up clearly in leakage flux
spectrum where fr = 23.66 Hz is rotational frequency. As shown
in Fig. 6a that when there is a broken rotor bar fault, the fs-fr
component raises up in leakage flux as well. It may be used to
detect broken bar fault but eccentricity fault and inherent
asymmetries in the air-gap can also affect this signature which
causes misleading diagnosis. Based on the simulation results,
the leakage flux spectrum is more reliable and sensitive than
classical current analysis due to observing additional
characteristic broken bar signatures such as sfs, 3sfs and
(fs-fr)±2sfs which do not appear in current spectrums.
Both current and leakage flux are examined at time domain
in broken bar fault. As it can be seen from the Fig. 6b that the
broken bar fault can be detected even in time domain using
leakage flux. At each cycle of broken bar which depends on
mechanical frequency, stator and rotor slots; the corresponding Fig. 7. Experimental setup
leakage magnetic field decreases whereas adjacent magnetic
fields increases due to higher flux density in neighbors bars the 2D-FEM findings experimentally as shown in Fig. 7. In
(see Fig. 6b). However, Fig. 5b shows that there is no order to measure radial leakage flux, the fluxgate sensor is
significant difference between healthy and faulty case in stator located at the vicinity of motor frame. It should be noted that
current at time domain. It is clear that leakage flux based the sensor location is very sensitive to track other leakage
analysis is effective to detect broken rotor bar fault even in fluxes such as axial and tangential in IM.
time domain. The induction motor is 2.2kW and coupled with a
controlled eddy current brake to adjust the load level via a
IV. TEST BENCH SETUP AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS flexible coupling. The hall-effect sensors are used to get the
In order to analyze leakage flux spectrums, a high-end phase currents data. The measured fluxes as well as stator
motor test bed including fluxgate sensor from Texas currents are transferred to user interface via a DAQ card with
Instruments is designed and a handheld wand fluxgate sampling rate 6.6 kHz/16 seconds. In order to create broken
prototype is prepared including data streaming units to verify rotor bar fault, two out of 28 bars on the rotor are drilled using
a fine tool.
Stator Current Results Radial Leakage Flux Results
0 0
Healthy (fs-fr)-2sfs fs-fr (fs-fr)+2sfs Healthy
No additional (1± 2s)fs Broken bar
(1-2s)fs (1+2s)fs Broken bar sf
-25 signatures -25 s 3sf s
FFT(Br )(dB)
FFT(ia )(dB)

Residual
-50 harmonics -50

-75 Under Threshold -75 Under Threshold

-100 -100
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
(a) (a)
x 10-4
10 Healthy Broken bar 2.5 Broken bar
No significant broken decreasing Healthy
difference bar
Stator current, ia (A)

6 1.5 flux
Leakage flux, Br (T)

2 0.5

-2 -0.5

-6 -1.5

-10 -2.5
2.1 2.2 2.15 2.25 2.3 2.1 2.15 2.2 2.25 2.3
Time (sec) Time (sec)
(b) (b)
Fig. 8. Stator current exp. results for both two broken bars and healthy case Fig. 9. Radial Leakage flux exp. results for both two broken bars and healthy case
a) Frequency domain b) Time domain results a) Frequency domain b) Time domain results
 The induction motor is tested at full-load where speed (nm) Radial Leakage Flux
is 1420 rpm and slip (s) is 0.053 for both healthy and broken 0
More reliable Healthy
bar rotor. One should note that the measured values are Low slip
3sfs signatures (fs-fr)± 2sfs operation
Broken bar
normalized to per-unit (p.u). -25

Fig. 8a shows that the characteristics current sidebands are
clearly seen at fs±2sfs where 2sfs= 5.3 Hz in broken rotor bar
fault. Besides, there are some residual signatures at the same
frequencies even in healthy case due to inherent asymmetries
at manufacturing stage. They are smaller than that of broken
bar fault but they can provide reliable threshold values in
diagnostic stage for broken bar fault. If the radial leakage flux
is analyzed at the same operation conditions, the
characteristics sidebands of fundamental are clearly seen at
fs±2sfs harmonics (see Fig. 9a). The low level residual
harmonics which overlap with characteristics broken bar
signatures are observed due to motor manufacturing stage. As
can be seen from Fig. 9a, the leakage flux spectrum has some
additional broken bar signatures such as sfs, 3sfs and (fs-fr)±2sfs
where fr =23.66 Hz which do not appear in stator current
spectrum.
In order to show the efficacy of leakage flux based
diagnostic ability in time domain, both stator current and
leakage fluxes are tracked as shown in Fig. 8b and Fig. 9b. As
seen from the Fig. 8b, there is no remarkable difference
between healthy and broken bar case in stator current.
However, Fig. 9b shows that the broken bar faults can be
FFT(Br )(dB)
-50
-75 Under Threshold
-100
75 100
0 25 50
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 10. Radial leakage flux spectrum, two broken rotor bars fault at low slip
detected even in time domain due to decreasing flux density
compare to healthy case by using leakage flux data.
Low slip operation test:
As well known, when motor operates at low slip, the
characteristics sidebands harmonics fs±2sfs can not be seen
clearly in current spectrum due to side lobe effects of
fundamental frequency. In order to overcome this issue,
leakage flux based diagnostic can be used to detect broken bar
fault in very low slip operation. Therefore, the induction motor
has run for both broken rotor bar and healthy motor where slip
is 0.01and speed is 1485 rpm. It is clear from the Fig. 10. that
the signatures at 3sfs and (fs-fr) ± 2sfs rises up significantly
compare to healthy case which provides effective diagnostics
results in IMs.

Simulation Results Experimental Results

-20 -20
-30 -25
Amplitude (dB)
Amplitude (dB)

-40 -30
-50 -35
-60 -40
-70 -45

(a) (a)

-35 -20
-25
Amplitude (dB)
Amplitude (dB)

-40
-30
-35
-45
-40
-50 -45

(b) (b)
Fig. 11. Simulation results, the behavior of broken bar harmonics Fig. 12. Experimental results, the behavior of broken bar harmonics
a) Low frequency region b) Sidebands of fundamental a) Low frequency region b) Sidebands of fundamental
 Different torque profiles tests:
The induction motor has run at different torques [20%-to-
100%] to show the behavior of characteristics broken bar
harmonics in radial leakage flux for both simulations and
experiments. It is clearly seen in Fig. 11 (simulation results)
and Fig. 12 (experimental results) that the amplitudes of
characteristics broken bar harmonics at sfs, fs±2sfs in leakage
flux are changing with increasing torque levels whereas the
harmonics at 3sfs and (fs-fr)±2sfs are slightly torque dependent
as shown in Fig. 11a and Fig. 12a. Based on simulation and
experimental results, it can be concluded that the signatures at
3sfs and (fs-fr)±2sfs are more reliable indicators for broken bar
fault since they are more resistant to torque changes.
V. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, the broken rotor bar fault monitoring in IMs
is studied through the leakage flux using a very small footprint
fluxgate sensor installed on the motor frame. The traditional
current analysis and leakage flux analysis are compared to
each other to show the advantages of leakage flux analysis. It
is shown that leakage flux analysis using fluxgate sensor is
more reliable, accurate and fault sensitive over existing
methods. It also provides time domain diagnostics opportunity
for broken bar fault detection. Moreover, the harmonics at 3sfs
and (fs-fr)±2sfs in the leakage flux can be used as key broken
bar fault signatures in IMs since they are resistant to load
levels. The proposed approach enables low-cost and very
practical implementation due to its easy installation.
APPENDIX
TABLE I. PARAMETERS OF THE TEST MOTOR
Number of poles 4 Broken Bars Fault Detection Using Stray Flux after Supply
Outer diameter of stator, mm 145
Inner diameter of stator, mm 89
Outer diameter of rotor, mm 88
Inner diameter of rotor, mm 34.7
Number of stator slots, mm 36
Number of rotor bars 28
Rated voltage, V 400
Rated frequency, Hz 50
Rated power, kW 2.2
Rated current, A 4.7
Rotor inertia, kgm2 0.047
VI. REFERENCES
[1] S. Nandi, H. A. Toliyat, and L. Xiaodong, “Condition monitoring and
fault diagnosis of electrical motors—A review,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 719–729, Dec. 2005.
[2] Ying, X.: ‘Performance evaluation and thermal fields analysis of
induction motor with broken rotor bars located at different relative
positions’, Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on , 2010, 46, (5), pp. 1243-
1250
[3] Martinez, J., Belahcen, A., Arkkio, A.: ‘Broken bar indicators for cage
induction motors and their relationship with the number of consecutive
broken bars’, IET Electr. Power Appl., 2013, 7, (8), pp. 633-642
[4] Faiz, J., Ebrahimi, B. M.: ‘A new pattern for detecting broken rotor bars
in induction motors during start-up’, Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on,
2008, 44, (12), pp. 4673-4683
[5] Kang, M., Kim, J-M.: ‘Reliable fault diagnosis of multiple induction
motor defects using a 2-D representation of shannon wavelets’,
Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on, 2014, 50, (10), pp. 1-13
[6] C. Yang et al., "Screening of False Induction Motor Fault Alarms
Produced by Axial Air Ducts Based on the Space-Harmonic-Induced
Current Components," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 1803-1813, March 2015.
[7] K. N. Gyftakis, J. A. Antonino-Daviu, R. Garcia-Hernandez, M. D.
McCulloch, D. A. Howey and A. J. Marques Cardoso, "Comparative
Experimental Investigation of Broken Bar Fault Detectability in
Induction Motors," in IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol.
52, no. 2, pp. 1452-1459, March-April 2016.
[8] T. Goktas; M. Zafarani; K. W. Lee; B. Akin; T. Sculley, "A
Comprehensive Analysis of Magnet Defect Fault Monitoring Through
Leakage Flux," in IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , vol.PP, no.99,
pp.1-1,doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2016.2617318.
[9] C. G. Dias, I. E. Chabu and M. A. Bussab, "Hall Effect Sensor and
Artificial Neural Networks Applied on Diagnosis of Broken Rotor Bars
in Large Induction Motors," 2006 IEEE International Conference on
Computational Intelligence for Measurement Systems and Applications,
2006, pp. 34-39.
[10] G. Mirzaeva; K. Saad; M. G. Jahromi, "Comprehensive Diagnostics of
Induction Motor Faults Based on Internal Flux Measurement," in IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications , vol.PP, no.99, pp.1-1doi:
10.1109/TIA.2016.2628718.
[11] M. Wehner and B. Ponick, "Search coil systems for early fault detection
in wind turbine generators," 2014 International Symposium on Power
Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and Motion, Ischia, 2014, pp.
273-278
[12] S. H. Kia, H. Henao, G. A. Capolino and C. Martis, "Induction Machine
Disconnection," IECON 2006 - 32nd Annual Conference on IEEE
Industrial Electronics, Paris, 2006, pp. 1498-1503.
[13] Henao, H.; Demian, C.; Capolino, G.-A., "A frequency-domain detection
of stator winding faults in induction machines using an external flux
sensor," Industry Applications, IEEE Transactions on, vol.39, no.5,
pp.1272,1279, Sept.-Oct. 2003.
[14] Yazidi, A.; Henao, H.; Capolino, G.-A., "Broken rotor bars fault
detection in squirrel cage induction machines," Electric Machines and
Drives, 2005 IEEE International Conference on , vol., no., pp.741,747,
15-15 May 2005
[15] Frosini, L.; Borin, A.; Girometta, L.; Venchi, G., "A novel approach to
detect short circuits in low voltage induction motor by stray flux
measurement," Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2012 XXth International
Conference on , vol., no., pp.1538,1544, 2-5 Sept. 2012
[16] Rastegar Fatemi, S.M.J.; Henao, H.; Capolino, G.A., "Gearbox
monitoring by using the stray flux in an induction machine based
electromechanical system," Electrotechnical Conference, 2008.
MELECON 2008. The 14th IEEE Mediterranean , vol., no., pp.484,489,
5-7 May 2008
[17] A. Bellini, F. Filippetti, C. Tassoni and G. A. Capolino, "Advances in
Diagnostic Techniques for Induction Machines," in IEEE Transactions
on Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 4109-4126, Dec. 2008.