skip to main content
10.1145/3573900.3591111acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespadsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Equipment-centric Data-driven Reliability Assessment of Complex Manufacturing Systems

Published:21 June 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Complex manufacturing systems produce highly engineered products with long product cycle times and are characterized by complex production process behaviors. Ensuring the reliability of these systems is critical to meet customer demands, improve product quality and minimize production losses. The collection and storage of data by sensors and information systems respectively enable the automatic generation and analysis of reliability models of complex manufacturing systems, reducing the need for expert knowledge of the processes. In this article, we propose a novel approach to generate data-driven reliability models of complex manufacturing systems using stochastic Petri nets as the modeling formalism. Our method extracts models from event logs that capture relevant events related to material flow in a system, and state logs, that capture operational state changes in a system’s production resources using process mining. We, furthermore, simulate the derived data-driven reliability models using discrete-event simulation and validate the models to ensure their robustness. We demonstrate the successful application of our method using a case study from the wafer fabrication domain. The results of our case study indicate that data-driven reliability assessment of complex manufacturing systems is feasible and can provide rapid insights into such systems. In addition, the extracted models can be used to support decisions related to maintenance planning, parts procurement and system configuration.

References

  1. Angela Adamyan and David He. 2002. Analysis of sequential failures for assessment of reliability and safety of manufacturing systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 76, 3 (June 2002), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00013-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Elvio Gilberto Amparore, Gianfranco Balbo, Marco Beccuti, Susanna Donatelli, and Giuliana Franceschinis. 2016. 30 years of GreatSPN. In Principles of Performance and Reliability Modeling and Evaluation. Springer, 227–254.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Jerry Banks, John Carson, Barry Nelson, and David Nicol. 2010. Discrete-event System Simulation. Prentice Hall.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Bertolini, M. Bevilacqua, and G. Mason. 2006. Reliability design of industrial plants using Petri nets. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 12, 4 (Jan. 2006), 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552510610705955Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Wallace R. Blischke and D. N. Prabhakar Murthy. 2011. Reliability: Modeling, Prediction, and Optimization. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Jonas Friederich, Deena P. Francis, Sanja Lazarova-Molnar, and Nader Mohamed. 2022. A Framework for Data-Driven Digital Twins of Smart Manufacturing Systems. Computers in Industry 136 (April 2022), 103586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2021.103586Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jonas Friederich and Sanja Lazarova-Molnar. 2021. Process Mining for Reliability Modeling of Manufacturing Systems with Limited Data Availability. In 2021 8th International Conference on Internet of Things: Systems, Management and Security. IEEE, Gandia, Spain, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/IOTSMS53705.2021.9704921Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Jonas Friederich and Sanja Lazarova-Molnar. 2021. Towards Data-Driven Reliability Modeling for Cyber-Physical Production Systems. Procedia Computer Science 184C (2021), 589–596.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jonas Friederich and Sanja Lazarova-Molnar. 2022. Data-Driven Reliability Modeling of Smart Manufacturing Systems Using Process Mining. In 2022 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). IEEE, 2534–2545. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC57314.2022.10015301Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Jonas Friederich, Giovanni Lugaresi, Sanja Lazarova-Molnar, and Andrea Matta. 2022. Process Mining for Dynamic Modeling of Smart Manufacturing Systems: Data Requirements. In International Conference on Manufacturing Systems 2022. Elsevier B.V., Lugano, Switzerland, 546–551.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P.J. Haas. 2004. Stochastic Petri nets for modelling and simulation. In Proceedings of the 2004 Winter Simulation Conference, 2004., Vol. 1. IEEE, 112. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.2004.1371307Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Edward Y Hua and Sanja Lazarova-Molnar. 2022. Validation of Digital Twins: Challenges and Opportunities. In Proceedings of the 2022 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Singapore, 12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Sohag Kabir and Yiannis Papadopoulos. 2019. Applications of Bayesian networks and Petri nets in safety, reliability, and risk assessments: A review. Safety Science 115 (June 2019), 154–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.009Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Amit Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Vikas Modgil, Ajay Kumar, and Anita Sharma. 2021. Performance Analysis of Complex Manufacturing System using Petri Nets Modeling Method. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1950, 1 (Aug. 2021), 012061. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1950/1/012061Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Sanja Lazarova-Molnar and Nader Mohamed. 2019. Reliability Assessment in the Context of Industry 4.0: Data as a Game Changer. Procedia Computer Science 151 (2019), 691–698. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S187705091930554XGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. G. Lugaresi and A. Matta. 2020. Generation and Tuning of Discrete Event Simulation Models for Manufacturing Applications. In 2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). IEEE, 2707–2718. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC48552.2020.9383870Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Giovanni Lugaresi and Andrea Matta. 2021. Automated Manufacturing System Discovery and Digital Twin Generation. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 59 (April 2021), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.01.005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Michael Milde and Gunther Reinhart. 2019. Automated Model Development and Parametrization of Material Flow Simulations. In 2019 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC). IEEE, 2166–2177. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC40007.2019.9004702Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. In Jae Myung. 2003. Tutorial on Maximum Likelihood Estimation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 47, 1 (Feb. 2003), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-2496(02)00028-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lars Mönch, John W. Fowler, and Scott J. Mason. 2012. Production Planning and Control for Semiconductor Wafer Fabrication Facilities: Modeling, Analysis, and Systems. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Y. J. Qu, X. G. Ming, Z. W. Liu, X. Y. Zhang, and Z. T. Hou. 2019. Smart Manufacturing Systems: State of the Art and Future Trends. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 103, 9 (Aug. 2019), 3751–3768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-03754-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. S.P. Sharma, N. Sukavanam, Naveen Kumar, and Ajay Kumar. 2010. Reliability analysis of complex robotic system using Petri nets and fuzzy lambda‐tau methodology. Engineering Computations 27, 3 (Jan. 2010), 354–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/02644401011029925Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Wil van der Aalst. 2016. Data Science in Action. In Process Mining: Data Science in Action, Wil van der Aalst (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49851-4_1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. V. Volovoi. 2004. Modeling of system reliability Petri nets with aging tokens. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 84, 2 (May 2004), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2003.10.013Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Pai Zheng, Honghui wang, Zhiqian Sang, Ray Y. Zhong, Yongkui Liu, Chao Liu, Khamdi Mubarok, Shiqiang Yu, and Xun Xu. 2018. Smart Manufacturing Systems for Industry 4.0: Conceptual Framework, Scenarios, and Future Perspectives. Frontiers of Mechanical Engineering 13, 2 (June 2018), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-018-0499-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Equipment-centric Data-driven Reliability Assessment of Complex Manufacturing Systems

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            SIGSIM-PADS '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSIM Conference on Principles of Advanced Discrete Simulation
            June 2023
            173 pages
            ISBN:9798400700309
            DOI:10.1145/3573900

            Copyright © 2023 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 21 June 2023

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate398of779submissions,51%
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)83
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format