 Original Article
 Open Access
Grinding Chatter Detection and Identification Based on BEMD and LSSVM
 HuanGuo Chen^{1},
 JianYang Shen^{2},
 WenHua Chen^{1}Email author,
 ChunShao Huang^{3},
 YongYu Yi^{1} and
 JiaCheng Qian^{1}
https://doi.org/10.1186/s1003301803137
© The Author(s) 2019
 Received: 16 January 2017
 Accepted: 18 December 2018
 Published: 9 January 2019
Abstract
Grinding chatter is a selfinduced vibration which is unfavorable to precision machining processes. This paper proposes a forecasting method for grinding state identification based on bivarition empirical mode decomposition (BEMD) and least squares support vector machine (LSSVM), which allows the monitoring of grinding chatter over time. BEMD is a promising technique in signal processing research which involves the decomposition of twodimensional signals into a series of bivarition intrinsic mode functions (BIMFs). BEMD and the extraction criterion of its true BIMFs are investigated by processing a complexvalue simulation chatter signal. Then the feature vectors which are employed as an amplification for the chatter premonition are discussed. Furthermore, the methodology is tested and validated by experimental data collected from a CNC guideway grinder KD4020X16 in Hangzhou Hangji Machine Tool Co., Ltd. The results illustrate that the BEMD is a superior method in terms of processing nonstationary and nonlinear signals. Meanwhile, the peak to peak, realtime standard deviation and instantaneous energy are proven to be effective feature vectors which reflect the different grinding states. Finally, a LSSVM model is established for grinding status classification based on feature vectors, giving a prediction accuracy rate of 96%.
Keywords
 Grinding chatter
 BEMD and LSSVM
 Complexvalue chatter signal
 Feature vector
 Grinding status classification
1 Introduction
Grinding is an abrasive machining process which is widely used in modern manufacturing practice to produce high surface quality and close tolerance [1–4]. Particularly with the increasing mature of ultrahigh speed grinding, its advantages are further improved, that providing convenient conditions for development of aerospace technology, transportation, military and other industries [5, 6]. However, grinding chatter is one of the most unfavorable dynamic phenomena in grinding operations including regenerative chatter, frictional chatter and mode coupling chatter. In practice, grinding chatter has negative impacts on the ultimate geometrical workpiece accuracy, surface quality and productivity of machinery. Moreover, it leads to increased wheel wear and adds time and costs to manufacturing [7, 8]. Many theories have been proposed and experiments carried out to discover exactly what mechanism underlies grinding chatter, with the aim of developing reliable suppression methods subsequently [9].
At present, only a few methods for chatter detection have been successfully and practically applied in industry. It is common for trained machine operators to identify the appearance of chatter through experience or observation, meaning that corresponding measurements are not taken at the time that resulting in irreparable loss for the industry. Signal processing techniques and appropriate feature vectors are very important for chatter detection. In the past few decades, either nonlinear time series modeling [10] or spectral analysis [11, 12] has been applied for chatter detection. Additionally, Tansel et al. [13], adopted stransformation to extract the damping index, making a very descriptive feature of chatter available for inspection in turning operations. Yao et al. [14], presented a twodimensional feature vector for chatter detection based on the standard deviation of wavelet transforms in drilling machining which had an advantageous identification time. In another study, Gradisek et al. [15] used the coarsegrained entropy rate as a chatter index in grinding and turning, as its value exhibits a drastic drop at the onset of chatter.
It is important to note that the signal processing methods proposed above were mostly based on the theory of Fourier transformation and that these traditional methods are not applicable to processing grinding signals (which are almost nonstationary and nonlinear). They can only detect chatter if it is already in an almost fully developed stage and easily to extract spurious frequency and error information from chatter signals. In order to highly meet the demand of realworld production, it is necessary to detect the onset of chatter before chatter marks have been made on the workpiece. Given this requirement, Rilling et al. [16] proposed a novel method called the bivarition empirical mode decomposition (BEMD). In the third session of the HHT (Hilbert–Huang Transform) International conference, BEMD was successfully applied to the monitoring of wind turbine conditions and displayed its feasibility as a method to determine weak features and integrate information from nonstationary and nonlinear signals [17].
The author of this paper also has made a comparison between EMD and BEMD in extracting features for grinding chatter signals to show the advanced performance of BEMD, that the paper is accepted by the 2016 11th International Conference on Reliability, Maintainability and Safety (ICRMS’ 2016). Thus will not be repeated in details here and just give out some brief conclusions about the distinctions between EMD and BEMD: (1) EMD is initially applied to a onedimensional signal and extracts zeromean oscillating components, whereas BEMD is applied to a bivariate signal and extracts zeromean rotating components; (2) BEMD has calculation efficiency due to process complexvalue signals simultaneously and only compute the upper envelope using the maximum points, while EMD can only decompose signals onebyone and has to obtain both upper and lower envelopes by connecting the extreme points; (3) The number of IMFs derived from signals by EMD are different, and can’t reveal any synchronous characteristics and phase shifting, nor can EMD extract an information fusion function. While the number of IMFs by BEMD is the same, it can extract an information fusion function well and preserve phase differences; (4) BEMD has facilitates the establishment of purified shaft vibration orbits and fully guarantees the correctness of results, which EMD cannot.
Additionally, there are several smart classifiers essential for grinding state identification, such as artificial neural network (ANN) [18, 19], fuzzy logic and support vector machines (SVM). Li et al. [20] used multilayer perceptron ANN to distinguish the tool breakage and cutting chatter. According to the trend of signal in time domain. Bediaga, et al. [21] established the fuzzy logical rule to analyze stability of cutting system. Moreover, Jiang et al. [22] adopted multiclass SVM to identify and classify cutting states that accuracy rate reached 95%. The ANN usually suffers from the problem of intrinsic defeats such as slow study speed, multiple local minima and overfitting. Also, the prediction ability of fuzzy logic is inaccurate and its theory is still imperfect. SVM overcomes these deficiencies by using the structural risk minimization principle to enhance extensive ability and it also stresses the study of statistical learning rules with a small sample. In order to further improve the learning speed [23]. Suykens proposed a modified version of SVM, i.e. the least squares SVM (LSSVM). In the LSSVM, the nonsensitive loss function is replaced by a quadratic loss function and the inequality constraints are replaced by equality constraints. Through constructing a loss function, the quadratic programming problem is translated into solving linear equation group problems, which simplifies the complexity of calculation [24, 25].
The advantages of BEMD and LSSVM are combined in this paper for detecting and identifying grinding chatter. Section two gives a brief review of BEMD and LSSVM, as well as the extraction criterion of true BIMFs. Moreover, the peak to peak, realtime standard deviation and instantaneous energy are presented as feature vectors for the grinding chatter. In section three, a simulation chatter signal is constructed and then processed by BEMD. Afterwards, peak to peak, realtime standard deviation and instantaneous energy are extracted from BIMFs. In section four, the benefits of the proposed method are further validated experimentally by processing grinding signals which are derived from the grinder KD4020X16, and then a LSSVM model is established to predict the grinding state. Finally, conclusions are presented in section five, which also gives new directions for future work.
2 BEMD and LSSVM
2.1 A Brief Review of BEMD
2.1.1 Algorithm of BEMD
 (1)
The number of extrema and zeros must be equal or different at most by one.
 (2)
The mean value of the envelope at any point defined by the local maximum points and the envelope as defined by the local minima must be zero.
 S_{1}:

Select a bivariate signal \(s(t) = x(t) + iy(t)\) and a set of projection directions: \(\varphi_{k} = 2k\pi /N ,\; 1 \le k \le N\)
 S_{2}:

For \(1 \le k \le N.\)
 S_{21}:

Project the signal \(s(t)\) on directions \(\varphi_{k}:\)$$p_{{\varphi_{k} }} = \text{Re} \left[ {s(t)\exp (  i\varphi_{k} )} \right].$$(1)
 S_{22}:

Extract all partial maximum points of \(p_{{\varphi_{k} }} (t):\) \(\{ (t_{i}^{k} ,p_{i}^{k} )\}\), where i indicates number of individual maxima.
 S_{23}:

Interpolate the set of points \(\left\{ {\left( {t_{i}^{k} ,p_{i}^{k} \exp (i\varphi_{k} )} \right)} \right\}\) by cubic spline interpolation to obtain the partial envelope curve in direction \(\varphi_{k}\), namely, \(e_{{\varphi_{k} }} (t).\)
 S_{3}:

Calculate the mean of all envelop curves:$$\bar{m}(t) = \frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{k = 1}^{N} {e_{{\varphi_{k} }} } (t),$$(2)
 S_{4}:

Subtract the mean \(\bar{m}(t)\) from \(s(t)\) to obtain \(g(t):\)$$g(t) = s(t)  \bar{m}(t).$$(3)
 S_{5}:

Examine if \(g(t)\) is a BIMF:
 S_{51}:

If not, replace \(s(t)\) by \(g(t)\) and repeat the procedure from step S_{2} until \(g(t)\) is a BIMF.
 S_{52}:

If it is, record the obtained BIMF and repeat the procedure from step S_{2} on the residual signal \(g(t).\)
2.1.2 Extraction Criteria of True BIMFs
It is worth noting that the abovegenerated BIMFs basically incorporate two components: true BIMFs and spurious BIMFs. These spurious BIMFs cannot exactly reflect the vibration peculiarities of grinding systems in a physical sense and this seriously interferes with the researchers’ efforts to extract the feature vectors from signals and eliminate the mechanism faults of grinders. In general, the generation of spurious BIMFs are summarized by the following factors: (1) the definition of BIMFs is only based on numerical analysis, without referring to its physical significance; (2) the stopping criterion of the sifting process results in an excessive decomposition phenomenon; (3) end effect which can lead to serious deviation from the actual features of the signal is not fully eliminated; (4) either white noise or pulse interference which is superimposed on the vibration signal may produce high frequency spurious components. Considering that the majority of people rely heavily on their experience to estimate the authenticity of BIMFs, this is not conducive to facilitating the expansion of the BEMD method. It is therefore necessary to use an efficient and reliable method to identify and eliminate the spurious BIMFs, a procedure which is of great importance to the extraction of the actual vibration mode and corresponding features of the timefrequency domain.
Extraction criterion of true BIMFs based on correlation coefficient
If \(\zeta_{m} \ge \eta\), 
Reserve the \(m^{th}\) BIMF \(g_{m}\); 
Else 
Estimate \(m^{th}\) BIMF, and \(r_{n} = r_{n} + g_{m}.\) 
2.2 Brief Review of LSSVM
 (1)
Using a training set of the data points \(D = \{ (x_{i} ,y_{i} )i = 1,2, \ldots ,n\}\), where \(x_{i} \in R^{n}\) is the ith input data, and \(y_{i} \in \{  1, + 1\}\) is the output class.
 (2)The regression function in highdimensional space is constructed:where \({\varvec{\upomega}}\) is the weight vector, \(\varphi (x)\) is a nonlinear function that maps the input data x into a lowdimension space and b is the bias parameter.$$y(x) = {\varvec{\upomega}} \cdot \varphi (x) + b,$$(6)
 (3)According to the structural risk minimization principle, the optimal \({\varvec{\upomega}}\) and b can be obtained by minimizing the following function:where C is the penalty coefficient to balance the structural risk and experience risk and \(\varepsilon_{i}\) is the slack variable.$$\begin{aligned} \mathop {\hbox{min} }\limits_{\omega ,b,\varepsilon } J({\varvec{\upomega}},\varepsilon ) = \frac{1}{2}\left\ {\varvec{\upomega}} \right\^{2} + \frac{C}{2}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n} {\varepsilon_{i}^{2} } , \hfill \\ {\text{s}} . {\text{t}} .\;y_{i} = {\varvec{\upomega}} \cdot \varphi (x_{i} ) + b + \varepsilon_{i} , \hfill \\ \end{aligned}$$(7)
 (4)The Lagrange function can be constructed to solve the optimization problem:where \(\alpha_{i}\) represent Lagrange multipliers that can be either positive or negative values. Eq. (8) can be changed to the following equivalent equations:$$L({\varvec{\upomega}},b,\varepsilon ,\alpha ) = J({\varvec{\upomega}},\varepsilon )  \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n} {\alpha_{i} ({\varvec{\upomega}} \cdot \varphi (x_{i} ) + b + \varepsilon_{i}  y_{i} )} ,$$(8)$$\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}l} {\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \omega }} = 0 \Rightarrow \omega  \sum\limits_{{i = 1}}^{n} {\alpha _{i} \varphi (x_{i} ) = 0,} } \\ {\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial b}} = 0 \Rightarrow \sum\limits_{{i = 1}}^{n} {\alpha _{i} = 0,} } \\ {\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \varepsilon _{i} }} = 0 \Rightarrow C\varepsilon _{i}  \alpha _{i} = 0,} \\ {\frac{{\partial L}}{{\partial \alpha _{i} }} = 0 \Rightarrow \omega \cdot \varphi (x_{i} ) + b + \varepsilon _{i}  y_{i} = 0.} \\ \end{array} } \right.$$(9)
 (5)Eliminating \({\varvec{\upomega}}\) and \(\varepsilon_{i}\) and expressing in matrix form gives:where$$\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} 0 & {{\varvec{e}}^{\text{T}} } \\ {\varvec{e}} & {{\varvec{\Omega}}_{i,j} + \varvec{C}^{  1} {\varvec{ I}}} \\ \end{array} } \right]\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} b \\ {\varvec{\upalpha}} \\ \end{array} } \right] = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} 0 \\ {\varvec{y}} \\ \end{array} } \right],$$(10)$${\varvec{e}} = [1,1, \ldots ,1]_{n}^{\text{T}} ,$$$${\varvec{y}} = [y_{1} ,y_{2} , \ldots ,y_{n} ],$$\({\varvec{\Omega}}_{i,j} = (x_{i} ) \times (x_{j} ) = K(x_{i} ,x_{j} )\) is the kernel function.$${\varvec{\upalpha}} = [\alpha_{1} ,\alpha_{2} , \ldots ,\alpha_{n} ]^{\text{T}} ,$$
The commonly used kernel functions are listed as follows [31, 32].
Polynomial kernel function:$$K(x_{i} ,x_{j} ) = ((x_{i} ,x_{j} ) + \theta )^{d} ,\quad d = 1,2, \ldots$$(11)RBF kernel function:$$K(x_{i} ,x_{j} ) = \exp \left( {\frac{{  \left\ {x_{i}  x_{j} } \right\^{2} }}{{\sigma^{2} }}} \right).$$(12)Sigmoid kernel function:$$K(x_{i} ,x_{j} ) = \tanh (\upsilon (x_{i} ,x_{j} ) + c).$$(13)  (6)Lastly, the linear model for function estimation is achieved after the optimization problem is solved:$$y(x) = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n} {\alpha_{i} K(x_{i} ,x_{j} )} + b.$$(14)
2.3 Chatter Feature Vectors Extraction
Numerous experiments have shown that the amplitude of the vibration signal fluctuates within a certain range when the grinder is in a stable grinding state, while the amplitude substantially increases when in a transition state. It later becomes steady again when the grinder is in a chatter state; Therefore, early grinding chatter can be preliminary detected by comparing changes in the timedomain statistical parameters of the signal. In this paper, the peak to peak (pp), realtime standard deviation (Rsd) and instantaneous energy (IE) are conceived as ideal feature vectors that can detect and identify the chatter.
Using these definitions, the pp, Rsd and IE of each BIMF can be monitored every second, achieving initially detecting grinding chatter in real time.
3 Application of BEMD to Simulate Chatter Signal
3.1 Construction of a Simulation Chatter Signal
It is clearly seen that the real and imaginary parts of signal s(t) are composed of two sine signals and white noise, respectively, and that the frequency components of both are 50 rad/s and 100 rad/s. Additionally, the phase of the imaginary parts of signal is shifted by 0.08 rad and 0.024 rad. The output is a harmonic vibration signal which simulates the stable grinding process when t ≤ 2.5 s. The output is the harmonic vibration signal multiplied with a slant sign also as to simulate the grinding chatter when 2.5 < t ≤ 3 s. Moreover, the output is the original harmonic vibration signal multiplied by gain coefficients in order to simulate the stable chatter status when 3 < t ≤ 5 s.
3.2 Application of BEMD
Correlation coefficient of BIMFs of simulation chatter signal
No.  BIMFs  Correlation coefficient 

1  BIMF_{1}  0.8025 
2  BIMF_{2}  0.6281 
3  BIMF_{3}  0.0526 
4  BIMF_{4}  0.0176 
5  BIMF_{5}  0.0043 
6  BIMF_{6}  0.0147 
According to Figure 4, it is clearly seen that the phase shifting and synchronization information about the real and imaginary parts of the true BIMFs are well preserved and easily detected. The phase shifting of BIMF_{1} and BIMF_{2} is 0.025 rad and 0.08 rad, respectively, which is similar to the phase as described in the simulation signal. From Figure 5, the frequency components of the real and imaginary parts of the signal (8 Hz and 16 Hz) are accurately revealed as corresponding with the same frequency components, i.e., 50 rad/s and 100 rad/s, as set in the previous signal.
3.3 Extraction of the Chatter Feature Vectors Based on BEMD
In Figure 6, it is clearly seen that all feature vectors in various grinding states exhibit different behaviors and that the amplitude of the feature vectors is almost constant in a stable grinding state, while the amplitude drastically increases once the grinder turns into chatter. Moreover, the peak to peak and instantaneous energy fluctuation within a certain range when the grinder is in stable chatter state. The realtime standard deviation continuously increases with time and tends towards stability at the end, making it hard to exactly distinguish the transition state and chatter state. But all in all, it is feasible to clearly find out the onset of grinding chatter of great important to take reliable method to suppress the chatter. In summary, the peak to peak, realtime standard deviation and instantaneous energy are significantly distinct and could be used as a predictor for early grinding chatter detection.
4 Grinding Experiments and Application of BEMD and LSSVM
4.1 Grinding Experiments
In practice, the grinder is more sensitive to the rotational speed, feeding speed and grinding depth of the grinding wheel, which contributes to the unbalance of the grinding vibration. The experiment was therefore carried out in following steps:
Firstly, keep the feeding speed of the workpiece and grinding depth of the wheel constant, and then gradually increase the rotational speed.
Secondly, keep the feeding speed and rotational speed constant, and then gradually increase the depth of grinding.
Lastly, keep the rotational speed and depth of grinding constant, and then gradually increase the feeding speed.
Grinding parameters
Parameter  Value 

Grinding wheel material  Green silicon carbide 
Size of wheel (mm × mm)  \(\phi 600 \times 150\) 
Workpiece material  Gray cast iron 250 
Size of workpiece (mm × mm × mm)  3050 × 500 × 500 
Rotational speed (r/min)  700 ~ 1100 
Feeding speed (m/s)  0.381, 0.254, 0.210 
Grinding depth (μm)  5, 10, 15 
Position of sensors and corresponding sensitivity
Label of sensors  Sensitivity (mV/g)  Position 

1  9.9  Column Z 
2  10.6  Column X 
3  10.4  Spindle Z 
4  10.1  Spindle Y 
5  10.4  Motor Z 
6  10.5  Motor X 
7  10.2  Motor Y 
8  10.1  Column Y 
From Figure 9, it is seen that the grinding chatter emerges at about 6‒14 s and the transitional phase remains at almost 8 s. It is clearly seen that the amplitude of the vibration signal rapidly expands when the grinder turns into chatter, then the amplitude becomes steady when the grinder gets into stable chatter. However, the signal vibrates more markedly compared with the stable grinding state.
4.2 Application of BEMD to Experimental Chatter Signals
Correlation coefficients of the experimental BIMFs
No.  BIMFs  Correlation coefficient 

1  BIMF_{1}  0.9656 
2  BIMF_{2}  0.0700 
3  BIMF_{3}  0.0336 
4  BIMF_{4}  0.0156 
5  BIMF_{5}  0.0032 
6  BIMF_{6}  0.0016 
7  BIMF_{7}  0.0021 
8  BIMF_{8}  0.0014 
Phase and maximum of CCF from each of the experimental BIMFs
Parameter  BIMF_{1}  BIMF_{2}  BIMF_{3}  BIMF_{4} 

Estimated phase (rad)  0.0562  0.0141  0.0350  0.0562 
Maximum of CCF  6517.1  148.55  74.647  7.1760 
In Figure 11, the marginal spectrum of both the Zdirection and Xdirection shows the same frequency components, which represent about 300 Hz, 580 Hz, 1200 Hz and 1400 Hz. Yet the Zdirection BIMFs have a larger amplitude relative to the Xdirection, and signal vibrates more significantly in the Zdirection according to the practical data.
4.3 Chatter Feature Vectors Extraction for the Experimental Signal
From Figure 13, it is seen that the pp, Rsd and IE of chatter grinding are increased to a different degree compared with stable grinding, that it is considered as the significant characteristic to distinguish the grinding state. Therefore, they are all employed as input data for the LSSVM.
4.4 LSSVM Model Prediction
Prediction results of the LSSVM model
Test No.  Input  Target  Output  Result  Rotational speed (r/min)  Feeding speed (m/s)  Grinding depth (μm)  

pp  Rsd  IE  
1  01710  0.4626  1.9618  1  1  Correct  992  0.381  5 
2  0.0382  0.0111  0.0353  − 1  − 1  Correct  763  0.381  5 
3  0.0830  0.2870  0.2765  − 1  1  Wrong  1034  0.381  5 
4  0.0336  0.0113  0.0361  − 1  − 1  Correct  808  0.381  10 
5  0.0288  0.0115  0.0383  − 1  − 1  Correct  943  0.381  5 
6  0.4903  0.0631  0.3030  1  1  Correct  808  0.381  15 
7  0.0920  0.0163  0.0636  − 1  − 1  Correct  853  0.381  15 
8  0.0522  0.0176  0.0925  − 1  − 1  Correct  992  0.381  15 
9  0.1109  0.1937  0.5600  1  1  Correct  1074  0.254  15 
10  0.0327  0.0131  0.0363  − 1  − 1  Correct  804  0.254  10 
11  0.0851  0.1218  0.3987  1  1  Correct  803  0.254  15 
12  0.0394  0.0147  0.0513  − 1  − 1  Correct  844  0.254  15 
13  0.1162  0.2798  0.3863  1  1  Correct  936  0.254  10 
14  0.0421  0.0124  0.0570  − 1  − 1  Correct  989  0.254  5 
15  0.0470  0.0149  0.0996  − 1  − 1  Correct  1035  0.254  5 
16  0.1037  0.1263  0.3676  1  1  Correct  1040  0.254  15 
17  0.1602  0.5510  2.0361  1  1  Correct  760  0.210  5 
18  0.0325  0.0115  0.0245  − 1  − 1  Correct  760  0.210  10 
19  0.0431  0.0122  0.0427  − 1  − 1  Correct  853  0.210  5 
20  0.1031  0.1823  0.6225  1  1  Correct  893  0.210  10 
21  0.0471  0.0133  0.0702  − 1  − 1  Correct  935  0.210  5 
22  0.1787  0.3055  1.5177  1  1  Correct  936  0.210  10 
23  0.0507  00218  0.0884  − 1  − 1  Correct  1075  0.210  5 
24  0.1480  0.3681  0.9967  1  1  Correct  904  0.210  15 
25  0.0396  0.0139  0.0417  − 1  − 1  Correct  860  0.210  15 
It is seen that Figure 14 is the visual expression of the LSSVM prediction model. It is clearly divided into two parts: a stable state area and a chatter state area. Moreover, the feature vector distribution of chatter is more extensive than the stable state. Thus, in view of this grinding machine, the feature vectors could be extracted out from the realtime acquired signals by BEMD method, and then tested by this LSSVM model which has high accuracy and efficiency. If the feature vectors are in stable area, it means that the grinder is operating well. Otherwise, the grinding machine is suffering from the chatter, that effective measures should be taken immediately to reduce the damage of chatter. It is also necessary to collect more sample data as training set to improve identification accuracy of the LSSVM model. Using the diagram makes it more intuitive and convenient to judge which area the feature vector is in and then find out whether the grinder is in a stable grinding or chatter state. Consequently, the chatter detection and identification method based on BEMD and LSSVM in this paper has an excellent use for chatter prediction, which is robust under different grinding conditions.
5 Conclusions
 (1)
The BEMD decomposes the simulation chatter signal derived from a grinding vibration signal generator and is validated by the experimental data which was collected from the CNC guideway grinder KD4020X16 in Hangzhou Hangji Machine Tool Co., Ltd. The results illustrate the suitability of BEMD in terms of processing nonstationary and nonlinear signals and indicating the phase shifting and synchronization information of signals. Meanwhile, the marginal spectrum accurately revealed the actual peculiarities of the signal.
 (2)
The extraction criterion of the true BIMFs based on the correlation coefficient is a reliable technique which successfully identifies and estimates the spurious components. It reserves the main frequency bands which are of great import to the extraction of the actual vibration mode and corresponding features of the timefrequency domain.
 (3)
The peak to peak, standard deviation, and kurtosis values are demonstrated as appropriate feature vectors for early grinding chatter detection.
 (4)
The prediction model based on BEMD and LSSVM shows its feasibility for chatter detection and identification, where the accuracy of this LSSVM model is 96%.
For future work it should be notes that, although the feature vectors based on BEMD showed good performance, these vectors might not be the optimal choice. How to choose and estimate the feature vector is still a challenge for pattern recognition. Furthermore, the selection of the kernel function and the penalty coefficient is also a problem that needs further investigation. In addition, researching smart algorithms for optimization of the vector would be another interesting work.
Declarations
Authors’ Contributions
HGC and CSH was in charge of the whole trial; HGC, JYS and WHC wrote the manuscript; YYY and JCQ assisted with sampling and laboratory analyses. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Authors’ Information
HuanGuo Chen, born in 1977, is currently a doctor, Professor, Master’s tutor at Zhejiang Province’s Key Laboratory of Reliability Technology for Mechanical and Electrical Product, Zhejiang SciTech University, China. She received her doctor degree from Northwestern Polytechnical University, China, in 2007. Her research interests include on line damage detection and fault diagnosis of intelligent structures.
JianYang Shen, born in 1992, is currently an engineer at Zhejiang Jiali Technology Co., Ltd., China. He received his master degree on mechanical engineering from Zhejiang SciTech University, China, in 2017.
WenHua Chen, born in 1963, is currently a professor, Vice President and doctoral supervisor at Zhejiang Province’s Key Laboratory of Reliability Technology for Mechanical and Electrical Product, Zhejiang SciTech University, China. He received his doctor degree from Zhejiang University, China, in 1997. His research interests include on reliability and mechanism.
ChunShao Huang, born in 1976, is currently an engineer at Hangzhou Hangji Machine Tool Co., Ltd., China.
YongYu Yi, born in 1991, is currently an engineer at Zhejiang Jiali Technology Co., Ltd., China. He received his master degree on mechanical engineering from Zhejiang SciTech University, China, in 2017.
JiaCheng Qian, born in 1993, is currently a master candidate at Zhejiang SciTech University, China.
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Funding
Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51475432), Zhejiang Provincial National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. LZ13E050003), and State Key Program of National Natural Science of China (Grant Nos. U1234207, U1709210).
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Authors’ Affiliations
References
 M Ahrens, R Fischer, M Dagen, et al. Abrasion monitoring and automatic chatter detection in cylindrical plunge grinding. Procedia CIRP, 2013(8): 374–378.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 L G Wang, X J Liu, Q F Jia. Studies and developments about grinding chatter of machine tools. Tianjin: Machine Tool & Hydraulics, 2004.Google Scholar
 Wenfeng Ding, Barbara Linke, Yejun Zhu, et al. Review on monolayer CBN superabrasive wheels for grinding metallic materials. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2017, 30(1): 109–134.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Wenzhong Li, Yujing Hu. Simulation analysis of ultrasonic vibration grinding of hard alloy. Journal of Qingdao University (Natural Science Edition), 2015, 28 (4): 66–71. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 N H M Rozalli, N L Chin, Y A Yusof. Grinding characteristics of Asian originated peanuts (Arachishypogaea L.) and specific energy consumption during ultrahigh speed grinding for natural peanut butter production. Journal of Food Engineering, 2015, 152(2): 1–7.Google Scholar
 X C Liu, F Chen, M S Fen, et al. Research of GCr15 bearing steel’s surface roughness and grinding burn in ultrahigh speed grinding. Modular Machine Tool & Automatic Manufacturing Technique, 2016(9): 32–34. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 H G Chen, J Y Shen, W H Chen, et al. The bivariate empirical mode decomposition and its contribution to grinding chatter detection. Applied Sciences, 2017, 7(2): 145–163.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Yao Liu, Xiufeng Wang, Jing Lin, et al. Early chatter detection in gear grinding process using servo feed motor current. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016, 83(12): 1801–1810.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Z L Yao, M Wang, T Zan, et al. Prediction method of grinding chatter based on ARIMA. Advanced Materials Research, 2014, 971973 (9): 1288–1291.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 A Messaoud, C Weihs. Monitoring a deep hole drilling process by nonlinear time series modeling. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2009, 321(3–5): 620–630.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 E Kondo, H Ota, T Kawai. A new method to detect regenerative chatter using spectral analysis. Part 1. Basic study on criteria for detection of chatter. Journal of Manufacturing Science & Engineering, 1997, 119(4A): 461–466.Google Scholar
 M C Yoon, D H Chin. Time series modeling and spectrum analysis for chatter mode in endmilling dynamics. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2006, 29(11): 1125–1133.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 I N Tansel, X Wang, P Chen, et al. Transformation in machining, Part 2. Evaluation of machining quality and Trans detection of chatter in turning by using stransformation. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 2014, 46(a): 43–50.Google Scholar
 Zhehe Yao, Deqing Mei, Zichen Chen. Online chatter detection and detection based on wavelet and support vector machine. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2010, 210(5): 713–719.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 J Gradisek, E Govekar, I Grabec. Using coarsegrained entropy rate to detect chatter in turning. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1998, 214(5): 941–952.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Gabriel Rilling, Partick Flandrin. Bivariate empirical mode decomposition. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2007, 14(12): 936–939.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Wenxian Yang, Richard Court, Peter J Tavner. Bivariate empirical mode decomposition and its contribution to wind turbine condition monitoring. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2011, 330(15): 3766–3782.Google Scholar
 Long Li, Jing Wei, Canbing Li. Prediction of load model based on artificial neural network. Transactions of China Electrotechnical Society, 2015, 30(8): 225–230. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 Yuan Ren, Guangchen Bai. New neural network response surface methods for reliability analysis. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2011, 24(1): 25–31.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 X Q Li, Y S Wong, A Y C Nee. A comprehensive identification of tool failure and chatter using a parallel multiART2 neural network. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 1998, 120(2): 433–442.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 I Bediaga, J Muñoa, J Hernández, et al. An automatic spindle speed selection strategy to obtain stability in highspeed milling. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2009, 49(5): 384–394.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Y T Jiang, C L Zhang. Hybrid HMM/SVM method for predicting of cutting chatter. Proceedings of the SPIEThe International Society for Optical Engineering, 2006, 6280: 404–411.Google Scholar
 Qing Wang, Weiqi Qian, Kaifeng He. Unsteady aerodynamic modeling at high angles of attack using support vector machines. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2015, 28(3): 659–668.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Jianyang Shen. An online BEMD and LSSVMbased grinding chatter detection method for large grinding machine. Zhejiang: Zhejiang SciTech University, 2017. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 C W Hsu, C J Lin. A comparison of methods formulticlass support vector support vector machines. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 2002, 13(2): 415–425.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 N E Huang, Z Shen, S R Long, et al. The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and nonstationary time series analysis. Proceedings Mathematical Physical & Engineering Sciences, 1998, 454(1971): 903–995.MATHGoogle Scholar
 Changfu Liu, Lida Zhu, Chenbing Ni. The chatter identification in end milling based on combining EMD and WPD. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2017, 91(912): 3339–3348.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 H G Chen, Y J Yan, W H Chen, et al. Early damage detection in composite wingbox structures using HilbertHuang Transform and Genetic Algorithm. International Journal of Structural Health Monitoring, 2007, 6(4): 281–297.MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Z H Zhu, Y L Sun, J I Yu. Shortterm load forecasting research based on EMD and SVM. High Voltage Engineering, 2007, 33(5): 118–122.Google Scholar
 S J Rong, L Pan, X X Huang, et al. The influence of training step on price forecasting based on least squares support vector machine. Applied Mechanics & Materials, 2014, 530–531: 621–624.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Xin Ma. Power transformer fault diagnosis based on least squares support vector machine and particle swarm optimization. Applied Mechanics & Materials, 2011, 50–51: 624–628.Google Scholar
 Q Wu. Monthly run off forecasting research based on wavelet transform and LSSVM. Xinjiang: Xinjiang University, 2015. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 Zhang Fei, Xinfeng Ge, Luoping Pan, et al. Shaft runouts’ peak to peak value calculation method for a hydraulic power unit under stable conditions. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2015, 34(21): 170–174.Google Scholar
 Bai Yu, Huang Zhigang, Li Rui. Analyze of algorithm based on estimating navigation satellite measurement noise. Annual Conference on Ship Communication and Navigation, 2008, 12(4): 11–16. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
 Yafu Yao, Zhang Xing. Fault diagnosis approach for roller bearing based on EMD momentary energy entropy and SVM. Journal of Electronic Measurement and Instrumentation, 2013, 27(10): 957–962.Google Scholar
 Xuelong Li, Zhonghui Li, Enyuan Wang, et al. Analysis of natural mineral earthquake and blast based on Hilbert–Huang transform (HHT). Journal of Applied Geophysics, 2016, 128: 79–86.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
 Wang Ming, Fen Meng, Yao Ziliang, et al. Prediction of grinding chatter based on the ARIMA. Journal of Beijing University of Technology, 2016, 42: 609–613.Google Scholar
 Yingxia Luo, Ma Jun, Qingsong Zhu. A method for phase difference measurement with correlation function based on Matlab. Sci/Tech Information Development & Economy, 2003, 13(7): 1–2.Google Scholar
 Hanguang Han, Congzhong Cai. Comparison study of normalization of feature vector. Engineer and Application, 2009, 45(22): 117–119.Google Scholar
 Rui LIN. An improved fast algorithm for the fractional Fourier transform based on the method of the dimensional normalization. Journal of Jiangxi Normal University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2016, 40 (01): 71–76. (in Chinese)MATHGoogle Scholar
 Wang Nan, Jinsong Du. Application of wavelet denoising in unsteady vibration signal processing. Chinese Journal of Scientific Instrument, 2001.Google Scholar
 J H CAI, J Li. Suppression of power line interference on MT signals based on the frequency domain wavelet method. Geology and Exploration, 2015, 51(02): 353–359.Google Scholar