Author Affiliations
1 Tianjin Key Laboratory for Advanced Signal Processing, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China2 Institute of Operation Programming and Safety Technology of Air Traffic Management, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China3 Engineering Technical Training Center, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Fiber-optic perimeter system based on Mach-Zehnder interferometry
Fig. 2. Processing of LMD-ICA
Fig. 3. Structural diagram of PNN network
Fig. 4. Four typical waveforms of vibration signal. (a) Vibration signal of climbing; (b) vibration signal of knocking; (c) vibration signal of car; (d) vibration signal of natural wind
Fig. 5. Comparison of the results of additive reconstruction and ICA reconstruction. (a) Original signal; (b) ICA reconstructed signal; (c) additive reconstructed signal
Fig. 6. Feature distributions of different vibration signals. (a) Distribution of K; (b) distribution of Z; (c) distribution of H; (d) distribution of Eapen
Fig. 7. Waveforms of different vibration signals in interference environment. (a) Vibration signal in rain; (b) climbing signal in rain; (c) knocking signal in rain
Reconstruction method | Error energy /mV2 | Signal-to-noise ratio /dB | Mean-square error /mV |
---|
ICA reconstruction | 1.17×105 | 11.67 | 1.71 | Additive reconstruction | 8.06×105 | 3.30 | 4.49 |
|
Table 1. Effect comparison of the two reconstruction methods
Classification | K | Z | H | Eapen |
---|
Climbing | 1.69 | 94 | 1.98 | 0.0106 | Knocking | 1.80 | 258 | 2.59 | 0.1243 | Car | 1.21 | 115 | 2.33 | 0.0645 | Wind | 1.33 | 29 | 1.72 | 0.0078 |
|
Table 2. Feature list of four kinds of signals
Features | Climbing recognition rate /% | Knocking recognition rate /% | Car recognition rate /% | Wind recognition rate/% | Average recognition rate /% | Average recognition time /s |
---|
K,Z | 64 | 80 | 58 | 44 | 61.5 | 0.76 | K,Z,H | 92 | 96 | 84 | 74 | 86.5 | 0.76 | K,Z,H,Eapen | 100 | 100 | 94 | 90 | 96 | 0.87 |
|
Table 3. Recognition results based on different features
Method | Climbing recognition rate /% | Knocking recognition rate /% | Car recognition rate /% | Wind recognition rate /% | Average recognition rate /% | Average recognition time /s |
---|
LMD-ICA | 100 | 100 | 94 | 90 | 96.0 | 0.87 | Direct method | 90 | 92 | 84 | 80 | 86.5 | 0.58 |
|
Table 4. Recognition results of two methods
Classification | K | Z | H | Eapen |
---|
Signal in Rain | 1.34 | 6 | 0.69 | 0.0025 | Climbing signal in rain | 1.51 | 164 | 1.77 | 0.0088 | Knocking signal in rain | 1.69 | 207 | 1.85 | 0.0144 |
|
Table 5. Feature list of vibration signals in rain
Method | Rain recognition rate /% | Climbing in rain recognition rate /% | Knocking in rain recognition rate /% | Average recognition rate /% | Average recognition time /s |
---|
LMD-ICA | 100 | 94 | 96 | 96.7 | 0.91 | Direct method | 100 | 84 | 80 | 88.0 | 0.56 |
|
Table 6. Recognition results of two methods in rain