Decision Making under Uncertainty in Tool Condition Monitoring

Tool Condition Monitoring is a field which sees a significant divergence between the published research and current industrial practice. It has been proposed that the principal reason for this divergence is the inability of laboratory-developed systems to display sufficient robustness in coping with the diverse range of stochastic influences that are found in industrial deployment – ranging from operator influence to variations in the properties of tools and workpieces used. Furthermore, several studies have shown that a majority of tool condition monitoring systems purchased by industrial concerns are switched off. Principal among the reasons given is the number of ‘false alarms’ resulting in costly system downtime. This work considers the current trends in tool condition monitoring research, in parallel with the requirements of industry, and argues that probabilistic rather than binary decision making systems are required in the next generation of tool condition monitoring systems, if the poor industrial acceptance of the previous generation systems is to be countered. Examples are considered from industry and used to illustrate a suggested approach to both generating and assessing such predictions. These examples explore the range of decision making criteria under which such systems are required to operate – from minimization of downtime to the protection of costly capital equipment or customer resources.

[1]  Steven Y. Liang,et al.  Machining Process Monitoring and Control: The State–of–the–Art , 2002 .

[2]  D. E. Dimla,et al.  Neural network solutions to the tool condition monitoring problem in metal cutting—A critical review of methods , 1997 .

[3]  Krzysztof Jemielniak,et al.  Commercial Tool Condition Monitoring Systems , 1999 .

[4]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Outline of a New Approach to the Analysis of Complex Systems and Decision Processes , 1973, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[5]  Kenneth R. Mylne Decision‐making from probability forecasts based on forecast value , 2002 .

[6]  Ichiro Inasaki,et al.  Tool Condition Monitoring (TCM) — The Status of Research and Industrial Application , 1995 .

[7]  Ekkard Brinksmeier,et al.  Prediction of Tool Fracture in Drilling , 1990 .

[8]  W. S. Lau,et al.  In-process drill wear and breakage monitoring for a machining centre based on cutting force parameters , 1992 .

[9]  D. E. Dimla,et al.  Sensor signals for tool-wear monitoring in metal cutting operations—a review of methods , 2000 .

[10]  Stephen Jewson The problem with the Brier score , 2004 .

[11]  Ibrahim N. Tansel,et al.  Monitoring drill conditions with wavelet based encoding and neural networks , 1993 .

[12]  Erkki Jantunen,et al.  A summary of methods applied to tool condition monitoring in drilling , 2002 .

[13]  D. Richardson Skill and relative economic value of the ECMWF ensemble prediction system , 2000 .

[14]  D. Wilks A skill score based on economic value for probability forecasts , 2001 .

[15]  K. Mori,et al.  Prediction of small drill bit breakage by wavelet transforms and linear discriminant functions , 1999 .

[16]  Kevin Kelly,et al.  Ai-based condition monitoring of the drilling process , 2002 .

[17]  Hideki Aoyama,et al.  Sensor to Detect Cutting Force Components, Cutting Torque, and Cutting Tool Deflections , 2004 .

[18]  Gerry Byrne,et al.  Towards the improvement of tool condition monitoring systems in the manufacturing environment , 2001 .