Abstract
This research offers an extensive study of different machine learning issues for predictive maintenance applications for motor condition ranging from AC motors. The research establishes a scenario that represents the real world to identify which algorithms can be trusted to predict both the time of failure and the actual type of failure in the AC motors. The employed machine learning algorithms include the Random Forest (RFC), Support Vector Classifier (SVC), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Logistic Regression (LR), and XGBoost (XGB) in our work. The assessment includes the comparison of algorithms in terms of the predictive accuracy educated with different size training data. Before the model is developed, thorough data preprocessing methods will be applied that will allow the breaking down of the model assumptions and the optimization of the performance. For preprocessing step the following two steps are made including the removal of unclear samples, label encoding used for categorical columns, and column scaling. Intriguingly, the identification of seemingly outlier data points is revisited, revealing their integral role in capturing the natural variance of the dataset and enhancing classification tasks. These identified features are observed to be pivotal contributors to predictive models. The study shows that in both algorithm failure cases and failure type identification, their performances are comparable. Regarding training time, K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) algorithm yields the top-performing model for both datasets ( 4 sec and 3 sec) respectively, whereas Random Forest (RFC) performs the worst training time (151 sec) which belong to the binary failure prediction task and XGBoost (XGB) in multi-class failure prediction task (276 sec), which is contributed. Finally, this paper emphasizes that deciding on which machine learning model is appropriate for predictive maintenance can be quite a challenge due to the necessity to balance between accuracy and training time. The findings constitute important tipping point for those companies that aim to implement a solution for predictive maintenance with the KNN model being faster and efficient at the same time.
References
Pech, M.; Vrchota, J.; Bednář, J. Predictive Maintenance and Intelligent Sensors in Smart Factory: Review. Sensors 2021, 21, 1470. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21041470
Andreas, T.; Judith, P.; Marcel, K.; Gordon, E. Predictive maintenance enabled by machine learning: Use cases and challenges in the automotive industry. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 2021, 215, 107864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107864
Onur, S.; Stephen, A.; John, Y. Condition Monitoring using Machine Learning: A Review of Theory, Applications, and Recent Advances. Expert Systems with Applications 2023, 221, 119738.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.119738
[4] Rojek, I.; Jasiulewicz Kaczmarek, M.; Piechowski, M.; Mikołajewski, D. An Artificial Intelligence Approach for Improving Maintenance to Supervise Machine Failures and Support Their Repair. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 4971.
https:// doi.org/10.3390/app13084971
Silvestrin, L.P.; Hoogendoorn, M.; Koole, G. A Comparative Study of State-of-the-Art Machine Learning Algorithms for Predictive Maintenance. In Proceedings of the SSCI, Xiamen, China, 6–9 December 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 760–767. https:// doi: 10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9003044
Ashok, K. P.; Pratik, M.; Pradeep, P. Machine Learning Based Predictive Maintenance Model. Proceedings of the 2nd Indian International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Warangal, Telangana, India, August 2022.
Pan, S.-J.; Tsai, M.-L.; Chen, C.-L.; Lin, P.T.; Lee, H.-Y. Investigation of Machine Learning Methods for Predictive Maintenance of the Ultra-High-Pressure Reactor in a Polyethylene-Vinyl Acetate Production Process. Electronics 2023, 12, 580. https://doi.org/10.3390/ electronics12030580
Chaitali, R. P.; Sanika, K. J.; Asmeeta, L. B.; Ankita P. D.; Mahee P. R. Machine Learning-Based Predictive Maintenance of Industrial Machines. International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology 2023, 71, 3, 50-56. https://doi.org/10.14445/22312803/IJCTT-V71I3P108
Uppal, M.; Gupta, D.; Goyal, N.; Imoize, A.L.; Kumar, A.; Ojo, S.; Pani, S.K.; Kim, Y.; Choi, J. A Real-Time Data Monitoring Framework for Predictive Maintenance Based on the Internet of Things. Complexity 2023, 9991029. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/9991029
Achouch, M.; Dimitrova, M.; Dhouib, R.; Ibrahim, H.; Adda, M.; Sattarpanah Karganroudi, S.; Ziane, K.; Aminzadeh, A. Predictive Maintenance and Fault Monitoring Enabled by Machine Learning: Experimental Analysis of a TA-48 Multistage Centrifugal Plant Compressor. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031790
Qadir Mohammed, salim; A. Hussein, M. Performance Analysis of Different Machine Learning Models for Intrusion Detection Systems. jcoeng 2022, 28, 61-91. https://doi.org/10.31026/j.eng.2022.05.05
Fayez, T. K.; Wijdan, A.; Zahra, G. Random Forest Machine Learning Technique for Automatic Vegetation Detection and Modelling in LiDAR Data. Int J Environ Sci Nat Res. 2021, 28, 2.
https://doi.org/10.19080/IJESNR.2021.28.556234
Susmita R. A Quick Review of Machine Learning Algorithms. International Conference on Machine Learning, Big Data, Cloud and Parallel Computing (COMITCon), Faridabad, India, 2019, 35-39.
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMITCon.2019.8862451
Mohsin, M.A.; Hamad, A.H. Performance evaluation of SDN DDoS attack detection and mitigation based random forest and K-nearest neighbors machine learning algorithms. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle 2022, 36, 2, 233-240. https://doi.org/10.18280/ria.360207
Jian, F.; Hongbin, W.; Fan Y.; Kuang, Y.; Xiang, L.; Min, Z. A failure prediction method of power distribution network based on PSO and XGBoost. Australian Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering 2022, 19, 4, 371-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/1448837X.2022.2072447
Mohammed, N.A.; Abdulateef, O.F.; Hamad, A.H. An IoT and machine learning-based predictive maintenance system for electrical motors. Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés 2023, 56, 4, 651-656.
https://doi.org/10.18280/jesa.560414
Jérôme, D.; Gaël, V.; Jean-Baptiste, P.; Preventing dataset shift from breaking machine-learning biomarkers. GigaScience 2021, 10, 9. https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giab055
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2023 Al-Khwarizmi Engineering Journal
(Received 4 October 2023; Accepted 27 November 2023; Published 1 June 2024)