Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

XGBoost based residual life prediction in the presence of human error in maintenance

  • S.I.: Applications of Machine Learning in Maintenance Engineering and Management (IFAC AMEST 2020)
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Accurate maintenance decision making is essential for organizations like military and aviation. Immensely demanding situations like limited time availability for maintenance in strenuous conditions escalate the possibility of human errors in maintaining such equipment. Human errors in maintenance negatively impact the life of the systems. Human Reliability Analysis methodologies have evolved to systematically quantify the human error in terms of Human Error Probability. However, the exact effect of human error on every component’s life is unknown yet. In the presence of the diverse operating profiles for equipment, estimating such effects becomes a complex and mathematically challenging problem to be handled by conventional statistical techniques. This paper presents a machine learning approach to estimate the residual life of a component by incorporating the effect of human error in maintenance. Based on the nature of the maintenance data, a gradient boosting ensemble model (XGBoost) is developed, which predicts the residual life of the component while considering error induced by maintenance personnel during its maintenance. The model recommends the maintenance decision considering the predicted residual life and the user-defined future mission profile. Additionally, provision is made to capture the stochastic future operating profile. The developed model effectively handles the uncertainties and variabilities in expected future mission profiles and the correlation of multiple influencing parameters without increasing mathematical complexity. The developed model is illustrated in the decision making of replacement of a component in a mission-critical military system in pre-mission maintenance break. From the perspective of managerial implications, some of the key findings from numerical experiments on the developed model are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Pandey M, Zuo MJ, Moghaddass R, Tiwari MK (2013) Selective maintenance for binary systems under imperfect repair. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 113:42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.12.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sharma P, Kulkarni MS, Yadav V (2017) A simulation based optimization approach for spare parts forecasting and selective maintenance. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 168:274–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2017.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Calixto E (2012) Human reliability analysis. In: Gas and oil reliability engineering. Elsevier

  4. Dhillon BS (2009) Human reliability, error, and human factors in engineering maintenance: with reference to aviation and power generation. CRC Press

  5. Kumar U (1990) Reliability analysis of load—haul—dump machines

  6. Koval DO, Floyd HL (1998) Human element factors affecting reliability and safety. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 34:406–414. https://doi.org/10.1109/28.663487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Calixto E, Lima GBA, Firmino PRA (2013) Comparing SLIM, SPAR-H and bayesian network methodologies. Open J Safety Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojsst.2013.32004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Silva VA (2003) O Planejamento de Emergências em Refinarias de Petróleo Brasileiras: Um Estudo dos Planos de Refinarias Brasileiras e uma Análise de Acidentes em Refinarias no Mundo e a Apresentação de uma Proposta de Relação de Canários Acidentais para Planejamento. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sistemas de Gestão), Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói

  9. Aju kumar VN, Gandhi MS, Gandhi OP (2015) Identification and assessment of factors influencing human reliability in maintenance using fuzzy cognitive maps. Quality Reliab Eng Int.https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1569

  10. Danielsson J (2011) Maximum likelihood. In: Financial risk forecasting: the theory and practice of forecasting market risk with implementation in R and Matlab. Wiley

  11. NIST/SEMATECH e-handbook of statistical methods. NIST

  12. Wang Y, Zhao Y, Addepalli S (2020) Remaining useful life prediction using deep learning approaches: a review. In: Procedia manufacturing. Elsevier BV, pp 81–88

  13. Khazaee M, Banakar A, Ghobadian B et al (2020) Remaining useful life (RUL) prediction of internal combustion engine timing belt based on vibration signals and artificial neural network. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05520-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kundu P, Darpe AK, Kulkarni MS (2020) An ensemble decision tree methodology for remaining useful life prediction of spur gears under natural pitting progression. Struct Health Monit 19:854–872. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475921719865718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhang L, Mu Z, Sun C (2018) Remaining useful life prediction for lithium-ion batteries based on exponential model and particle filter. IEEE Access 6:17729–17740. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2816684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mohril RS, Solanki BS, Kulkarni MS, Lad BK (2020) Residual life prediction in the presence of human error using machine learning. In: IFAC-PapersOnLine. Elsevier B.V., pp 119–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2020.11.019

  17. Swain AD, Guttmann HE (1983) Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications. California

  18. Gertman D, Blackman H, Marble J, et al (2005) The SPAR-H human reliability analysis method. Washington, DC

  19. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2013) Tree-based methods. In: An introduction to statistical learning. Springer, New York

  20. Chakraborty D, Elzarka H (2019) Early detection of faults in HVAC systems using an XGBoost model with a dynamic threshold. Energy Build 185:326–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.12.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tyralis H, Papacharalampous G (2021) Boosting algorithms in energy research: a systematic review. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-05995-8

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Dietterich TG Ensemble methods in machine learning

  23. Chen T, Guestrin C XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system

  24. Li S, Zhang X (2020) Research on orthopedic auxiliary classification and prediction model based on XGBoost algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 32:1971–1979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04378-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Que Z, Xu Z (2019) A data-driven health prognostics approach for steam turbines based on Xgboost and DTW. IEEE Access 7:93131–93138. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2927488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Feng Y, Liu L, Shu J (2019) A link quality prediction method for wireless sensor networks based on xgboost. IEEE Access 7:155229–155241. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2949612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shen X, Wei S (2020) Application of XGBoost for hazardous material road transport accident severity analysis. IEEE Access 8:206806–206819. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3037922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mo H, Sun H, Liu J, Wei S (2019) Developing window behavior models for residential buildings using XGBoost algorithm. Energy Build. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jain AK, Lad BK (2020) Prognosticating RULs while exploiting the future characteristics of operating profiles. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Denson W, Chandler G, Crowell W, Wanner R (1990) Nonelectronic parts reliability data 1991

  31. Ghodrati B, Kumar U (2005) Reliability and operating environment-based spare parts estimation approach: a case study in Kiruna Mine, Sweden. J Qual Maint Eng 11:169–184. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552510510601366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Alsmeyer G (2011) Chebyshev’s Inequality. In: Lovric M (ed) International encyclopedia of statistical science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 239–240

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Lad BK, Kulkarni MS (2010) A parameter estimation method for machine tool reliability analysis using expert judgement. Int J Data Anal Tech Strat 2:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ebeling CE (2004) An introduction to reliability and maintainability engineering. McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the organizing committee of 4th IFAC workshop on Advanced Maintenance Engineering, Services and Technologies (AMEST) 2020, for inviting this article to the topical collection on ‘Applications of Machine Learning in Maintenance Engineering and Management’. Authors also acknowledge the support by the project—IAPP18-19/31 funded by Royal Academy of Engineering, London.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India

    Ram S. Mohril & Bhupesh K. Lad

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

    Bhupendra S. Solanki & Makarand S. Kulkarni

Authors
  1. Ram S. Mohril
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bhupendra S. Solanki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Makarand S. Kulkarni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bhupesh K. Lad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ram S. Mohril.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohril, R.S., Solanki, B.S., Kulkarni, M.S. et al. XGBoost based residual life prediction in the presence of human error in maintenance. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 3025–3039 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07216-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07216-2

Keywords