Observations on developing reliability information utilization in a manufacturing environment with case study: robotic arm manipulators

  • Michael SharpEmail author


Manufacturing environments face many unique challenges with regard to balancing high standards of both product quality and production efficiency. Proper diagnostic health assessment is essential for maximizing uptime and maintaining product and process quality. Information for diagnostic assessments, and reliability information in general, can come from a myriad of sources that can be processed and managed through numerous algorithms that range from simplistic to hypercomplex. One area that typifies the assortment of information sources in a modern manufacturing setting is found with the use of industrial robotics and automated manipulators. Although several monitoring methods and technologies have been previously proposed for this and other assets, adoption has been sporadic with returns on investment not always meeting expectations. Practical concerns regarding data limitations, variability of setup, and scarcity of ground truth points of validation from active industrial sites have contributed to this. This paper seeks to provide an overview of barriers and offer a feasible action plan for developing a practical condition monitoring information utilization program, matching available capabilities and assets to maximize knowledge gain. Observations are made on a real-world case study involving industrial 6 degrees of freedom (DOF) robots actively deployed in a manufacturing facility with a variety of operational tasks.


Diagnostics Machine learning Maintenance Manufacturing Monitoring Operations management Robotics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



  1. 1.
    Li R, Verhagen W, Curran R (2018) A functional architecture of prognostics and health management using a systems engineering approach. In: European conference of the prognostics and health management societyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saxena A, Roychoudhury I, Celaya J, Goebel K (2012) Requirements flowdown for prognostics and health management. In: AIAA Infotech at aerospace conference and exhibit 2012, p 13.
  3. 3.
    Vogl GW, Weiss BA, Moneer Helu O (2016) A review of diagnostic and prognostic capabilities and best practices for manufacturing. J Intell Manuf 0:1–17Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee G-Y, Kim M, Quan Y-J, Kim M-S, Kim TJY, Yoon H-S, Min S, Kim D-H, Mun J-W, Oh JW, ang Chung-Soo Kim IGC, Chu W-S, Yang J, Bhandari B, Lee C-M, IHn J-B, Ahn S-H (2018) Machine health management in smart factory: a review. J Mech Sci Technol 32(3):987–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moa K, Chen Z, Tao X, Xue Q, Wu H, Hou J (2017) A visual model based evaluation framework of cloud-based prognostics and health management. In: IEEE international conference. Smart Cloud, pp 33–40Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu D, Jennings C, Terpenny J, Kumara S, Gao RX (2018) Cloud-based parallel machine learning for tool wear prediction. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tountopoulos V, Kavakli E, Sakellariou R (2018) Towards a cloud-based controller for data-driven service orchestration in smart manufacturing. In: Sixth international conference on enterprise systemsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Specht R, Isermann R (1988) On-line identification of inertia, friction and gravitational forces applied to an industrial robot. IFAC Proceedings Volumes 21(16):219–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mitsuishi M (1989) Diagnostic system for robot using a force-torque sensor. Robotersysteme 5:40–46Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Isermann R (1990) Estimation of physical parameters for dynamic processes with application to an industrial robot. 1990 American control conferenceGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wünnenberg J, Frank P (1990) Dynamic model based incipient fault detection concept for robots. IFAC Proceedings Volumes 23(8):61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freyermuth B (1991) An approach to model based fault diagnosis of industrial robots. Proceedings. 1991 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation 2:1350–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhou C, Chinnam RB, Korostelev A (2012) Hazard rate models for early detection of reliability problems using information from warranty databases and upstream supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 139(1):180–195. Supply Chain Risk Management. [Online]. Available: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vemuri A, Polycarpou M, Diakourtis S (1998) Neural network based fault detection in robotic manipulators. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 14(2):342–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Datta A, Mavroidis C, Krishnasamy J, Hosek M (2007) Neural netowrk based fault diagnostics of industrial robots using wavelt multi-resolution analysis. 2007 American control conferenceGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bittencourt AC, Saarinen K, Sander-Tavallaey S, Gunnarsson S, Norrlöf M (2014) A data-driven approach to diagnostics of repetitive processes in the distribution domain – applications to gearbox diagnostics in industrial robots and rotating machines. Mechatronics 24(8):1032–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jaber AA, Bicker R (2018) Development of a condition monitoring algorithm for industrial robots based on artificial intelligence and signal processing techniques. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) 8(2):996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kothamasu R, Huang S, VerDuin W (2006) System health monitoring and prognostics — a review of current paradigms and practices. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 24(28):1012–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Huang N, Shen Z, Long SR, Wu MC, Shih HH, Zheng Q, Yen N-C, Tung CC, Liu HH (1998) The empirical mode decomposition and the hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non-stationary time series analysis. Proc R Soc Lond A 454:903–995MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Prohorov Y, Rozanov Y (1969) Probability theory, basic concepts. Limit theorems, random processes. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xia M, Li T, Liu L, Xu L, Silva CWD (2017) Intelligent fault diagnosis approach with unsupervised feature learning by stacked denoising autoencoder. IET Sci Meas Technol 11(6):687–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nadaraya EA (1964) On estimating regression. Theory of Probability and its Applications 9(1):141–142. [Online]. Available: CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sculley D (2010) Web-scale k-means clustering. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on world wide web - WWW, p 10Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hotelling H (1933) Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. J Educ Psychol 24:417–441 and 498–520CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Golub GH, Reinsch C (1970) Singular value decomposition and least squares solutions. Numer Math 14(5):403–420MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Standards and TechnologyGaithersburgUSA

Personalised recommendations