| Literature DB >> 30181525 |
Muhammad Syafrudin1, Ganjar Alfian2, Norma Latif Fitriyani3, Jongtae Rhee4.
Abstract
With the increase in the amount of data captured during the manufacturing process, monitoring systems are becoming important factors in decision making for management. Current technologies such as Internet of Things (IoT)-based sensors can be considered a solution to provide efficient monitoring of the manufacturing process. In this study, a real-time monitoring system that utilizes IoT-based sensors, big data processing, and a hybrid prediction model is proposed. Firstly, an IoT-based sensor that collects temperature, humidity, accelerometer, and gyroscope data was developed. The characteristics of IoT-generated sensor data from the manufacturing process are: real-time, large amounts, and unstructured type. The proposed big data processing platform utilizes Apache Kafka as a message queue, Apache Storm as a real-time processing engine and MongoDB to store the sensor data from the manufacturing process. Secondly, for the proposed hybrid prediction model, Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise (DBSCAN)-based outlier detection and Random Forest classification were used to remove outlier sensor data and provide fault detection during the manufacturing process, respectively. The proposed model was evaluated and tested at an automotive manufacturing assembly line in Korea. The results showed that IoT-based sensors and the proposed big data processing system are sufficiently efficient to monitor the manufacturing process. Furthermore, the proposed hybrid prediction model has better fault prediction accuracy than other models given the sensor data as input. The proposed system is expected to support management by improving decision-making and will help prevent unexpected losses caused by faults during the manufacturing process.Entities:
Keywords: DBSCAN; IoT-based sensor; Random Forest; big data processing; fault detection; monitoring system
Year: 2018 PMID: 30181525 PMCID: PMC6164307 DOI: 10.3390/s18092946
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Architecture of the real-time monitoring system in an assembly line process (a) and system design for big data processing (b).
Figure 2An example of sensor data generated by the IoT-based sensor presented in JSON format (a); and when stored in NoSQL MongoDB (b).
Figure 3The real-case implementation of the proposed IoT-based sensor in an assembly line.
Detailed specifications of Raspberry Pi 3 model B.
| Specification | Information |
|---|---|
| RAM | 1 GB |
| CPU | Quad Cortex A53 @ 1.2 GHz |
| GPU | 400 MHz VideoCore IV |
| GPIO | 40 pins |
| Storage | Micro-SD |
| Ethernet | 10/100 Mbps |
| Wireless | Wireless LAN 802.11n/Bluetooth 4.0 Low Energy |
| USB | 4 ports |
| Power consumption | 5 V |
| Dimensions | 85.60 × 56.5 mm |
Detailed specifications of Sense-HAT.
| Specification | Information |
|---|---|
| Gyroscope | Gyroscope sensor (accurate to ±245/500/2000 degrees per second) |
| Accelerometer | Accelerometer sensor (accurate to ±2/4/8/16 G-forces) |
| Magnetometer | Magnetic Sensor (accurate to ±4/8/12/16 gauss) |
| Barometric pressure | Pressure sensor (accurate to ±0.1 hectopascal) |
| Temperature | Temperature sensor (accurate to ±2 °C) |
| Humidity | Relative humidity sensor (accurate to ±4.5%) |
| Display | 8 × 8 LED display matrix |
| Input | Small 5 joystick button |
Figure 4Hybrid Prediction Model using Density-Based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise (DBSCAN)-based outlier detection and Random Forest (RF)-based classifier.
Distribution of dataset.
| Feature | Description | Normal Class | Abnormal Class | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | STD | Mean | STD | ||
| temp | Temperature | 22.09583333 | 0.294977719 | 24.04901961 | 1.26159926 |
| hum | Humidity | 19.90416667 | 0.294977719 | 19.99019608 | 11.70638744 |
| ax | The x value of accelerometer | 1.557855833 | 3.568198363 | −1.991126471 | 4.533231608 |
| ay | The y value of accelerometer | 2.1834275 | 1.362406134 | 4.090368627 | 8.006935948 |
| az | The x value of accelerometer | 15.72753 | 171.4913135 | 48.21502549 | 153.998157 |
| gx | The x value of the gyroscope | −0.013850417 | 0.000748499 | −0.012051961 | 0.052695636 |
| gy | The y value of the gyroscope | −0.105782917 | 0.000897929 | −0.01652549 | 0.02378498 |
| gz | The z value of the gyroscope | 0.999329167 | 0.003934067 | 0.996021569 | 0.053289554 |
The significance of features presented by Information Gain (IG) Score.
| Feature | IG Score |
|---|---|
| temp | 1.0504 |
| ay | 0.97 |
| gy | 0.9249 |
| hum | 0.8719 |
| gz | 0.8471 |
| gx | 0.6324 |
| az | 0.4899 |
| ax | 0.4663 |
Figure 5The result of DBSCAN-based outlier detection.
The result of DBSCAN-based outlier detection.
| # Instance (Original) |
|
| # Outlier Data | # Normal Data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 342 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 338 |
Confusion matrix of a classifier.
| Classified as “Yes” | Classified as “No” | |
|---|---|---|
| Actual “Yes” | TP | FN |
| Actual “No” | FP | TN |
Performance metrics for the classification model.
| Performance Metric | Formula |
|---|---|
| Precision |
|
| Recall/Sensitivity |
|
| Accuracy |
|
Figure 6The web-based real-time monitoring system.
Figure 7The IoT-based sensor system’s (a) network delay, and (b) CPU and memory usage.
The detailed specifications of server and client computer.
| Server | Client | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Processor | Core i7-4790 | Core i7-4790 |
| CPU | 3.60 GHz × 8 cores | 3.60 GHz × 8 cores | |
| RAM | 16 GB | 16 GB | |
| HDD | SSD 128 GB | SSD 128 GB | |
|
| OS | Ubuntu Server 14.04 | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit |
| Node.js | 8.4.0 | - | |
| Express | 4.15.4 | - | |
| Socket.IO | 1.7.4 | - | |
| Apache Kafka | 0.8.2 | - | |
| Apache Storm | 0.9.3 | - | |
| MongoDB | 3.6.2 | - | |
| JDK | - | 1.8.0_121 | |
| Eclipse | - | 4.6.3 | |
| HttpClient | - | 4.5.3 | |
Figure 8Performance evaluation in terms of latency with different numbers of clients (a) and servers (b); throughput with different numbers of clients (c) and servers (d); comparison between MongoDB and CouchDB databases in terms of latency (e); and database size (f).
Performance comparison of several classification models for fault prediction.
| Model | Precision (%) | Recall (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naïve Bayes (NB) | 94.1 | 93.6 | 93.567 |
| Logistics Regression (LR) | 98 | 98 | 97.953 |
| Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) | 96.8 | 96.8 | 96.784 |
| Random Forest (RF) | 98.5 | 98.5 | 98.538 |
| DBSCAN + NB | 96.8 | 96.7 | 96.74 |
| DBSCAN + LR | 98.6 | 98.5 | 98.52 |
| DBSCAN + MLP | 98.8 | 98.8 | 98.81 |
| Hybrid Prediction Model (DBSCAN + RF) | 100 | 100 | 100 |