Applied Structured Corrective Diagnosis of a Legacy Autonomous Mobile Robot: A Comparison of Three Prioritisation Strategies
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3645-1247
Abstract
Corrective diagnosis of legacy robotic assets is routinely performed in operating contexts where manufacturer documentation is incomplete, telemetry is unavailable, and the failure mode is non-progressive. These operations fall outside the typical scope of both data-driven and knowledge-based PHM techniques. This paper presents a structured framework for diagnosing legacy AMR startup failures under limited information conditions, together with a comparison of three diagnostic prioritisation strategies applied to the same practical case: (i) a qualitative power-tracing logic that combines Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), and a decision flowchart, which was the method applied to the asset; (ii) an analytical FMEA with Risk Priority Number (RPN) scoring; and (iii) an analytical decision cost ordering that ranks investigation steps by expected total cost. Methods (ii) and (iii) are then applied retrospectively to the same case using the operator’s experience gained during the practical investigation to assign scores and parameters. The case is a no-start fault on a legacy MiR100 autonomous mobile robot in a university laboratory. The practical investigation, following method (i), traced the fault to a blown fuse in the robot-side input path; replacement and a brief charging recovery restored normal operation, confirmed via the built-in hardware-health diagnostic. Applied retrospectively, method (ii) would have ordered the investigation by descending RPN, reaching the fuse on the seventh step, method (iii) would have ordered by the lowest per-step decision cost, reaching the fuse within minutes. We compare the three methods on time-to-confirmation and total cost, and found that methods (i) and (ii) reach the fault with comparable total time and cost despite different orderings, while method (iii) reaches it approximately an order of magnitude faster and cheaper in this case.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Autonomous Mobile Robot, Corrective Diagnosis, Prognostics and Health Mangement, Fault Tree Analysis, Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Han, P., et al. (2024). Dynamic Bayesian network for risk assessment of autonomous ships. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 194, 107342.
Krot, P., Iskierka, G., Poskart, B., & Gola, A. (2022). Predictive maintenance of mobile robots based on IIoT and AI technologies. Materials, 15(19), 6561. doi: 10.3390/ma15196561
Li, Y., Li, Y., Feng, K., Gryllias, K., Gu, F., & Pecht, M. (2024). Small-data prognostics and health management: A survey. Artificial Intelligence Review, 57(8), 214. doi: 10.1007/s10462-024-10820-4
Luo, H., Li, Y., Bai,W., Tang, H., & Jin, H. (2024). A review of reliability engineering approaches for autonomous robotic systems. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability. doi: 10.1177/1748006X231171449
Mikołajczyk, T. (2023). Reliability analysis and failure mode identification in mobile robotic systems. Sensors, 23(15), 6890.
Pan, H., et al. (2025). Deep convolutional neural networkbased fault diagnosis for industrial manipulators. Journal of Field Robotics, 42(7), 3308–3322.
Peeters, J. F. W., Basten, R. J. I., & Tinga, T. (2018). Improving failure analysis efficiency by combining FTA and FMEA in a recursive manner. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 172, 36–44. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2017.11.024
Sabry, A. H., & Amirulddin, U. A. U. (2024). A review on fault detection and diagnosis of industrial robots and multi-axis machines. Results in Engineering, 21, 101888.
Shafiee, M., Enjema, E., & Kolios, A. (2019). An integrated FTA-FMEA model for risk analysis of engineering systems: A case study of subsea blowout preventers. Applied Sciences, 9(6), 1192. doi: 10.3390/app9061192
Soleimani, M., Shahbeigi, V., & Esfahani, M. N. (2024). A methodology for reliability assessment using Bayesian networks. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 216, 111459. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2024.111459
Yazdi, M. (2023). A bibliometric review of fault tree analysis methods and applications. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 39, 1234–1255. doi: 10.1002/qre.3271
Zhao, W., et al. (2024). Battery management system diagnostics for mobile robotic platforms. Journal of Energy Storage, 84, 110826.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The Prognostic and Health Management Society advocates open-access to scientific data and uses a Creative Commons license for publishing and distributing any papers. A Creative Commons license does not relinquish the author’s copyright; rather it allows them to share some of their rights with any member of the public under certain conditions whilst enjoying full legal protection. By submitting an article to the International Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society, the authors agree to be bound by the associated terms and conditions including the following:
As the author, you retain the copyright to your Work. By submitting your Work, you are granting anybody the right to copy, distribute and transmit your Work and to adapt your Work with proper attribution under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States license. You assign rights to the Prognostics and Health Management Society to publish and disseminate your Work through electronic and print media if it is accepted for publication. A license note citing the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License as shown below needs to be placed in the footnote on the first page of the article.
First Author et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.