1

Modeling Condition And Performance

Of Mining Equipment
Tad S. Golosinski and Hui Hu

Mining Engineering
University of
Missouri-Rolla
2
Condition and Performance Monitoring
Systems
Machine health monitoring
Allows for quick diagnostics of problems
Payload and productivity
Provides management with machine and fleet
performance data
Warning system
Alerts operator of problems, reducing the risk
of catastrophic failure
3
CATs VIMS
(Vital Information Management System)
Collects / processes
information on major
machine components
Engine control
Transmission/chassis
control
Braking control
Payload measurement
system
Installed on
Off-highway trucks
785, 789, 793, 797
Hydraulic shovels
5130, 5230
Wheel loaders
994, 992G (optional)
4
Other, Similar Systems
Cummins
CENSE (Engine Module)
Euclid-Hitachi
Contronics & Haultronics
Komatsu
VHMS (Vehicle Health Monitoring System)
LeTourneau
LINCS (LeTourneau Integrated Network Control
System)
5
Round Mountain Gold Mine
Truck Fleet
17 CAT 785 (150t)
11 CAT 789B (190t)
PSA
(Product Support
Agreement) CAT
dealer guarantees
88% availability
6
VIMS in RMG Mine
Average availability is 93%
over 70,000 operating hours
VIMS used to help with
preventive maintenance
Diagnostics after engine failure
Haul road condition assessment
Other

Holmes Safety Association Bulletin 1998
7
CAT MineStar
CAT MineStar - Integrates
Machine Tracking System
(GPS)
Computer Aided Earthmoving System
(CAES)
Fleet scheduling System
(FleetCommander)
VIMS

8
Cummins Mining Gateway
Cummins
Engine
Base
Station
RF Receiver Modem
Modem
CENSE Database MiningGateway.com
9
VIMS Data & Information Flow
VIMS Data
Warehouse
Data Extract
Data Cleanup
Data Load
Data Mining
Tools
Information
Extraction
Information
Apply
Mine
Site 1
Mine
Site 2
Mine
Site 3
VIMS
Legacy
Database
10
Earlier Research:
Data Mining of VIMS
Kaan Ataman tried modeling using:
Major Factor Analysis
Linear Regression Analysis
All this on datalogger data
Edwin Madiba tried modeling using:
Data formatting and transferring
VIMS events association
All this on datalogger and event data

11
Research Objectives
Build the VIMS data warehouse to
facilitate the data mining
Develop the data mining application for
knowledge discovery
Build the predictive models for prediction
of equipment condition and performance

12
Data Mining
Interactions
Result
Interpretation
Data
Preparation
Data
Acquisition
13
VIMS Features
Sensors & Controls
Monitor & Store

Event list

Event recorder

Data logger

Trends

Cumulative data

Histograms

Payloads
Wireless Link
Maintenance
Management
Download
Operator
VIMS wireless
14
Data Source
15
VIMS Statistical Data Warehouse
Minimum
Maximum
Average
Data Range
Variance

Regression Intercept
Regression Slope
Regression SYY
Standard Deviation
EVENT ID TC_OUT_TEMP_AVG TC_OUT_TEMP_MAX TC_OUT_TEMP_MIN TC_OUT_TEMP_RANGE
0_6 70.35 73 65 8
0_7 64.95 66 64 2
0_8 65.67 66 65 1
0_9 66.30 67 66 1
767_1 80.00 80 80 0
767_2 80.37 81 80 1
767_3 80.95 81 80 1
767_4 81.32 82 81 1
767_5 81.83 82 81 1
767_6 83.43 87 82 5

1-3 minute interval statistical data
16
VIMS Data Description
Six CAT 789B trucks
300 MB of VIMS data
79 High Engine Speed events

One-minute data statistics
Dataset Count of Record
Training Set 1870 86.4%
Test set 1 (#1) 98
Test set 2 (#2) 196
13.6%
Total 2164

17
SPRINT -A Decision Tree Algorithm
IBM Almaden Research Center
GINI index for the split point



Strictly binary tree
Built-in v-fold cross validation

2
1 ) (
j
p s gini
) ( ) ( ) (
2
2
1
1
s gini
n
n
s gini
n
n
s gini
split

18

19
0 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
High Engine Speed
Snapshot
Normal Engine Speed
Normal Engine Speed
High Eng
767_1 767_2
Eng_1 Eng_2 Other Other Other Other
VIMS
Data
Predicted
Label
Event_ID
VIMS EVENT PREDICTION
20
One-Minute
decision tree
21
Total Errors = 120 (6.734%)

Predicted Class --> | Other | Eng1 | Eng3 | Eng2 | Eng4 | Eng6 | Eng5 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 1331 | 18 | 9 | 5 | 16 | 6 | 1 | total = 1386
Eng1 | 0 | 62 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 66
Eng3 | 0 | 11 | 51 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | total = 67
Eng2 | 0 | 12 | 8 | 38 | 7 | 0 | 0 | total = 65
Eng4 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 55 | 0 | 1 | total = 68
Eng6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 61 | 4 | total = 66
Eng5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 64 | total = 64
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1331 | 106 | 76 | 51 | 80 | 68 | 70 | total = 1782

Decision Tree: Training on One-Minute Data
22
Total Errors = 24 (24%)

Predicted Class --> | Other | Eng1 | Eng3 | Eng2 | Eng4 | Eng6 | Eng5 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 59 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | total = 68
Eng1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
Eng3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | total = 5
Eng2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 4
Eng4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | total = 4
Eng6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | total = 7
Eng5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | total = 6
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
65 | 9 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 7 | total = 100

Decision Tree: Test#1 on One-Minute Data
23
Decision Tree: Test#2 on One-Minute Data
Total Errors = 35 (17.86%)

Predicted Class --> | Other | Eng1 | Eng3 | Eng2 | Eng4 | Eng6 | Eng5 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other | 141 | 9 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | total = 160
Eng1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
Eng3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
Eng2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
Eng4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
Eng6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | total = 6
Eng5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | total = 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
148 | 13 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 6 | 6 | total = 196

24
Two-Minute
decision tree
25
Total Errors = 51 (5.743%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 | ENG3 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 657 | 6 | 19 | 3 | total = 685
ENG1 | 0 | 62 | 10 | 0 | total = 72
ENG2 | 0 | 13 | 54 | 0 | total = 67
ENG3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 64 | total = 64
---------------------------------------------------------------------
657 | 81 | 83 | 67 | total = 888

Decision Tree
Training on Two-Minute Data Sets
26
Total Errors = 14 (29.79%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 | ENG3 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 28 | 5 | 4 | 1 | total = 38
ENG1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | total = 1
ENG2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | total = 4
ENG3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | total = 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------
31 | 6 | 5 | 5 | total = 47

Decision Tree
Test #1 on Two-Minute Data
27
Total Errors = 15 (15.31%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 | ENG3 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 71 | 8 | 1 | 0 | total = 80
ENG1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | total = 6
ENG2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | total = 6
ENG3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | total = 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------
74 | 14 | 4 | 6 | total = 98

Decision Tree
Test #2 on Two-Minute Data
28
Three-Minute
decision tree
29
Total Errors = 28 (4.878%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 |
----------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 411 | 23 | 4 | total = 438
ENG1 | 1 | 65 | 0 | total = 66
ENG2 | 0 | 0 | 70 | total = 70
----------------------------------------------------
412 | 88 | 74 | total = 574

Decision Tree
Training on Three-Minute Data
30
Total Errors = 12 (19.05%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 |
----------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 42 | 9 | 0 | total = 51
ENG1 | 3 | 5 | 0 | total = 8
ENG2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | total = 4
----------------------------------------------------
45 | 14 | 4 | total = 63

Decision Tree
Test #1 on Three-Minute Data
31
Decision Tree
Test #2 on Three-Minute Data
Total Errors = 9 (14.06%)

Predicted Class --> | OTHER | ENG1 | ENG2 |
----------------------------------------------------
OTHER | 47 | 5 | 0 | total = 52
ENG1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | total = 6
ENG2 | 0 | 0 | 6 | total = 6
----------------------------------------------------
51 | 7 | 6 | total = 64

32
Decision Tree Summary
One-Minute model needs more complex tree
structure
One-Minute model gives low accuracy of
predictions
Three-Minute decision tree model gives
reasonable accuracy of predictions
Based on test #1 &#2
Other - 13% error rate
Eng1 - 50% error rate
Eng2 0 error rate
Other approach?

33
Backpropagation
A Neural Network Classification Algorithm
Input

Hidden
Layer

Out

Some choices for F(z):
f(z) = 1 / [1+e
-z
] (sigmoid)
f(z) = (1-e
-2z
) / (1+e
-2z
) (tanh)
Characteristic: Each output
corresponds to a possible classification.
f(z)
x
1
x
2
x
3
w
3
w
2
w
1
Node Detail
z = S
i
w
i
x
i
Node
34

m
k
k k
y t E
1
2
) (
2
1
min

m
k
k k
y t E
1
2
) (
2
1
y
k (output)
is a function of
the weights w
j,k
.
t
k
is the true value.
SSQ Error Function
Freeman & Skapura, Neural Networks,
Addison Wesley, 1992
Minimize the Sum of Squares

k j ,
,
,
,
for W 0 solve and

k j
W
k j
k j
W
E
W
E
E
In the graph:

E
p
is the sum of
squares error

E
p
is the gradient,
(direction of maximum
function increase)
More
35
Neural Network Modeling Results
Three-Minute training set
36
Neural Network Modeling Result
Three-Minute set: test #1 and #2
Test #1
Test #2
37
NN Summary
Insufficient data for one-minute and two-
minute prediction models
Three-minute network shows better
performance than the decision tree
model:
Other - 17% error rate
Eng1 - 28% error rate
Eng2 - 20% error rate
38
Conclusions
Predictive model can be built
Neural Network model is more accurate
than the Decision Tree one
Based on all data
Overall accuracy is not sufficient for
practical applications
More data is needed to train and test the
models

39
References
Failure Pattern Recognition of a Mining
Truck with a Decision Tree Algorithm
Tad Golosinski & Hui Hu, Mineral Resources
Engineering, 2002 (?)

Intelligent Miner-Data Mining Application
for Modeling VIMS Condition Monitoring
Data
Tad Golosinski and Hui Hu, ANNIE, 2001, St. Louis

Data Mining VIMS Data for Information on
Truck Condition
Tad Golosinski and Hui Hu, APCOM 2001, Beijing,
P.R. China
40