Search

Search Results

• FAILURE PREDICTION USING FACTOR ANALYSIS METHODS

  Е.S. Podoplelova

  213-223

  2025-07-24

  Abstract ▼

  This article discusses the application of a risk assessment method based on the combination of the FMEA (failure mode and effect analysis) methodology and the MCDM (Multiple Criteria Decision Making) methods. This approach allows taking into account both expert knowledge and historical data on the operation of the equipment. MCDM methods process the assessment more flexibly in comparison with the standard method of calculating the priority number of risks (PRN), which helps to better assess the risks by three criteria: the probability of occurrence, the complexity of detection and the severity of the consequences. One of the criteria can be obtained not only through an expert assessment, but also on the basis of data recording the operation of the equipment. This approach was tested using the example of synthetic open-source data on the operating modes of production equipment. The task was to predict both the failure itself and its type, as well as to identify the factors that have the greatest impact on the failure. For this purpose, data preprocessing was carried out, during which it was necessary to eliminate the imbalance of classes. There are several approaches to solving this problem, aimed at reducing the dominant class or generating instances of poorly represented classes. In this example, random reduction of the number of records without errors was used. Then, AdaBoost, Random Forest and LinearSVC were compared as classification algorithms. Since multi-class classification was required, it was decided to use the one-vs-the-rest strategy. As a result, it was possible to achieve 86% forecasting accuracy by F-measure using the AdaBoost and Random Forest algorithms. LinearSVC turned out to be ineffective. Thus, the resulting forecasting model recognizes different types of errors, but there is room for improvement, which requires a larger sample, including more examples with different types of failure. Based on this, this approach as an alternative to expert assessment is promising, improving objectivity, and also making it possible to foresee risks and prevent a real failure or risk-related incident.