International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

A Bayesian network approach to root cause diagnosis of process

variations
S. Dey, J.A. Stori

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 140 Mechanical Engineering Building, 1206 West Green Street, MC-244,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA

Received 28 October 2003; accepted 29 June 2004

Abstract

This paper addresses the challenges inherent in root cause diagnosis of process variations in a production machining environ-
ment. We develop and present a process monitoring and diagnosis approach based on a Bayesian belief network for incorporat-
ing multiple process metrics from multiple sensor sources in sequential machining operations to identify the root cause of process
variations and provide a probabilistic condence level of the diagnosis. The vast majority of previous work in machining process
monitoring has focused on single-operation tool wear monitoring. The focus of the present work is to develop a methodology for
diagnosing the root cause of process variations that are often confounded in process monitoring systems, namely workpiece hard-
ness, stock size, and tool wear variations. To achieve this goal, multiple sensor metrics have been identied with statistical corre-
lations to the process faults of interest. Data from multiple sensors on sequential machining operations are then combined
through a causal belief network framework to provide a probabilistic diagnosis of the root cause of the process variation.
# 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Process monitoring; Process diagnosis; Fault diagnosis; Bayesian belief network

1. Introduction for example. Due to the stochastic nature of manufac-

Machining process monitoring has received a great
deal of attention in the academic research literature. A
wide variety of sensors, modeling, and data analysis
techniques have been developed, often focusing on tool
condition monitoring. However, the majority of these
techniques have yet to experience widespread industrial
deployment. Industrial process monitoring systems in
use today tend to rely on relatively simple signal
thresholds for triggering alarms, and are not generally
capable of diagnosing the cause of the alarm. One
important challenge in industrial process monitoring is
isolating the root cause of a process variation. In auto-
motive transfer line applications, for example, false
alarms may be generated in monitoring systems as a
result of variations in casting geometry and hardness.
Such variations may be dicult to distinguish from
increases in the sensor signals resulting from tool wear,


Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-217-244-7762; fax: +1-217-333-
1942.
E-mail address: jastori@uiuc.edu (J.A. Stori).
0890-6955/$ - see front matter # 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.06.018
turing process variations, a probabilistic analysis tech-
nique based on Bayesian inferencing has been
developed and will be described in this paper. Before
providing an overview of the developed approach, we
briey review some of the relevant prior work in pro-
cess monitoring and diagnosis.
1.1. Sensors in process monitoring
1.1.1. Tool condition monitoring
Tool condition monitoring has received a tremendous
amount of attention in the academic literature. Li and
Mathew [1] and Dimla [2] provide excellent reviews of the
various direct and indirect methods used to predict tool
wear and failure in turning. Direct methods include
optical techniques as well as radioactivity analysis, work-
piece size measurement, and tool/workpiece distance
measurement techniques. Indirect methods include cut-
ting force, acoustic emission, sound, vibration, spindle
power, cutting temperature and surface roughness
measurement. Jantunen [3] recently reviewed prior work
in tool condition monitoring for drilling. Below, we
76 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
briey discuss some of the sensors that have been com-
monly used in tool condition monitoring applications.
Cutting force sensors have proven popular for tool
condition monitoring applications. The success of these
approaches may be attributed, at least in part, to the
prevalence of analytic and mechanistic process models
capable of predicting cutting forces as a function of
various process parameters. One important practical
hindrance to the industrial deployment of cutting force
sensors for process monitoring sensors is the high cost
and intrusive nature of multi-axis dynamometers in a
production environment. A variety of model-based tool
condition monitoring techniques using cutting force
sensors have been proposed [46]. Statistical techniques
such as time series and autoregressive models based on
cutting force sensors have been developed [79] as well
as neural network approaches [1012].
Acoustic emission refers to the transient elastic
waves generated from a localized source or sources
within a material. These waves are generated at high
frequencies, usually above 500 kHz, and are picked up
by AE transducers mounted in close proximity to the
source of emission. Acoustic emission is sensitive to the
microscopic activities related to plastic deformation
and friction in the cutting zone.
Dornfeld pioneered some of the important early
eorts to develop acoustic emission techniques for tool
condition monitoring of machining processes [13,14]. A
variety of applications of AE techniques to tool con-
dition monitoring by other research groups have been
reported in the literature some of which may be found
in the following review papers.
Jemielniak [15] discusses the dierent acoustic emis-
sion and ultrasonic sensors used for tool condition
monitoring. Li [16] presents a compact review of vari-
ous issues in acoustic emission monitoring for turning,
including AE generation, classication and signal cor-
rection, signal processing methodologies, and tool wear
estimation methods.
The majority of AE monitoring applications have
relied on the root mean square (rms) value of the acoustic
emission signal. Other metrics such as the energy content
in various frequency ranges, and time domain statistical
parameters such as skew and kurtosis have been explored.
Applications of accelerometers or piezoelectric
vibration sensors to tool condition monitoring have also
been reported. El-Wardany et al. [17] investigated the
use of vibration signals for online drill wear monitoring
and breakage. Features sensitive to tool wear were
identied in both the time domain (ratio of absolute
mean and kurtosis metrics) and the frequency domain
(power spectra and cepstra ratio). Yao et al. [18] resear-
ched the detection and estimation of groove wear at the
minor cutting edge of the tool using vibration sig-
natures. Rotberg et al. [19] also described the appli-
cation of a vibration sensor to tool wear monitoring.
Spindle current sensors have also been applied to tool
condition monitoring of drilling and milling processes.
The time response of such sensors is inherently limited.
For this reason, high frequency components of cutting
force are dicult to observe. Feed drive motor sensors
have also been used for tool condition monitoring and
cutting force estimation. Previous applications of a spin-
dle power sensor to monitor tool wear include [2023]. Li
et al. [24] apply neural network and fuzzy logic analysis
techniques to estimate cutting forces and detect the onset
of accelerated wear using the feed motor current.
1.1.2. Dimensional and geometric variations
Dimensional variations in the incoming raw material
will result in unanticipated depth of cut variations, and
corresponding increased loads on the cutting tool and
spindle. Spindle and cutter run-out will result in varying
and unbalanced cutting forces. Seethaler and Yellowly
[25] investigated the individual tooth run-out in milling
using linear force models. They showed experimentally
how the methods could be used to distinguish run-out
from edge breakage. Sastry et al. [26] developed a meth-
odology that used variations in spindle speed to compen-
sate for radial run-out. Several researchers have
developed techniques for the identication of the depths
of cut in milling using cutting force data. Altintas and
Yellowly [27,28] used the ratio of two orthogonal cutting
force components to identify the axial and radial depth of
cut. They assumed a zero helix angle, and required the t-
ting of polynomial functions for each feedrate value. Choi
and Yang [29] proposed a technique for calculating the
depths of cut based only on the shape of the cutting force
prole. Yang et al. [30,31] has developed a detailed diag-
nosis methodology for axial and radial depth of cut varia-
tions also based on an analysis of the cutting forces and
comparison with model predictions. Their approach relies
only on the resultant cutting force prole.
1.1.3. Workpiece hardness
Workpiece hardness variation does not appear to
have received a signicant amount of prior attention in
the process monitoring and diagnosis literature, yet it
remains an important issue challenge for the successful
industrial application of process monitoring systems.
Production castings may contain signicant hardness
variations that are dicult to distinguish from other
process variations such as tool wear or workpiece
geometry variations. We were unable to nd any pub-
lished references addressing sensor-based identication
of workpiece hardness variations.
1.2. Inference and diagnostic methods
A variety of diagnostic or inferencing techniques
have been used in process monitoring, including arti-
cial neural networks, expert systems, fuzzy logic and
statistical methods.
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
1.2.1. Neural networks
Articial neural networks, also known as connec-
tionist architectures, parallel distributed processing,
and neuromorphic systems, are systems where inputs
are mapped to known outputs via weights during a
training process. The learned weights are used to pre-
dict corresponding outputs for given inputs. Their
structure is modeled loosely on the neural conduction
system existing in the human body. Neural networks
have proven successful as pattern recognition engines
and robust classiers, with the ability to generalize in
making decisions about imprecise input data. The
advantage of articial neural networks lies in their
resilience against distortions in the input data and their
capability of learning. Many types of articial neural
networks have been developed with varying structures
and connectivity.
Dimla et al. [32] have compiled an excellent review
of applications of neural networks to tool condition
monitoring applications. A number of individual eorts
have been referenced previously. Neural networks have
also been used successfully to combine inputs from
multiple sensors for tool condition monitoring.
1.2.2. Fuzzy logic and hidden Markov models
Fuzzy set theory, originally introduced by Lot
Zadeh in the 1960s, emulates human reasoning in its
use of approximate information and uncertainty to
generate decisions. Fuzzy set theory implements classes
or groupings of data with boundaries that are not shar-
ply dened. Any methodology or theory implementing
crisp denitions such as classical set theory, arithme-
tic, and programming, may be fuzzied by general-
izing the concept of a crisp set to a fuzzy set with
blurred boundaries. The benet of extending crisp
theory and analysis methods to fuzzy techniques is the
strength in solving real-world problems, which inevi-
tably entail some degree of imprecision and noise in the
variables and parameters measured and processed for
the application. Accordingly, linguistic variables are a
critical aspect of some fuzzy logic applications, where
general terms such a large, medium, and small
are each used to capture a range of numerical values.
Du et al. [33] demonstrated the eectiveness of using
fuzzy set theory in tool condition monitoring. A total
of 11 monitoring indices were identied to describe sig-
nature characteristics of force, vibration, and spindle
power sensor signals. Li et al. [34,35] used both fuzzy
set and wavelet transformation techniques to extract
features from the spindle and feed servo motor current
signals in drilling and establish relationships between
these features and the cutting conditions for dierent
tool states.
Hidden Markov models are an extension of Markov
chains and used to model processes whose character-
istics vary with time. A Markov chain is a random pro-
77
cess involving a number of states linked by a number
of discrete transitions. Each transition has an associa-
ted probability and each state has an associated obser-
vation output. In hidden Markov models, the
transitions and output are stochastic. They have been
used extensively and with great eectiveness in speech
recognition applications. Ertunc et al. [36] uses hidden
Markov models to classify the wear state of the tool in
drilling using cutting force signals. Atlas et al. [37]
applied hidden Markov models to tool wear monitor-
ing in milling using a vibration sensor.
1.2.3. Statistical techniques
Statistical approaches to modeling and monitoring
of machining processes most often involve regression-
based and time domain techniques such as time series
or moving averages. Liang and Dornfeld [13] used an
autoregressive time series model to detect tool wear
using acoustic emission signals. Yao and Fang [7]
developed a stochastic method based on multivariate
autoregressive moving average vector models to quan-
tify the process dynamics embedded in multi-dimen-
sional force and vibration signals to monitor tool wear
in nish turning. Kumar et al. [38] used a time series
approach to extract features from force and vibration
signals and pattern recognition techniques to identify
the state of tool wear. Tarn and Tomizuka [23] used an
autoregressive model to detect tool breakage using
spindle current and cutting force signals.
Govekar et al. [39] used spectral and time series
analysis methods to develop characteristics for tool
condition monitoring using data obtained from mul-
tiple sensors including acoustic emission. Yan et al. [40]
used an autoregressive model to extract features from
acoustic emission and cutting force sensors to detect
tool failure in milling.
1.2.4. Bayesian techniques
Perhaps the most widely applied technique in prob-
abilistic inferencing is the Bayesian network. Bayesian
networks provide a exible structure for modeling and
evaluating uncertainty. The network consists of nodes
representing random variables connected by arcs that
quantify a causal relationship between the nodes.
McCabe [41] provides an overview of Bayesian belief
networks and their application. Bayesian networks
have proven useful for a variety of monitoring and pre-
dictive purposes. Applications have been documented
in the medical domain [4244], image-processing, target
recognition [45,46], and pattern matching [47].
Bayesian networks have also been used for monitor-
ing and diagnostic applications in manufacturing. Lewis
and Ransing [48] present an interesting study of a
semantically constrained Bayesian network for diag-
nosis in manufacturing. The algorithm they use is based
on Bayesian theory but is modied to enable belief
78 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
revision. The presence of uncertainty is also quantied
by a relationship. Rigorous constraints have been
developed and are used to check the consistency of net-
work values. The network is initialized and then used to
diagnose a pressure die casting process. Wolbrecht et al.
[49] describe a real time monitoring and diagnosis sys-
tem that identies component failures quickly in a
multi-stage process. Prateepasen et al. [50] demonstrates
the ability to combine signals from acoustic emission
and vibration sensors for tool wear monitoring. The AE
rms signal and the coherence function between the axial
and feed directions for the accelerometer signals were
found to be sensitive to tool wear.
1.3. Motivation
Despite the tremendous amount of prior work in
sensor-based tool condition monitoring, very little
attention has been placed on the important task of
diagnosing the root cause of process variations when
multiple potential sources of variation exist. For
example, increases in workpiece hardness, stock size,
and tool wear, may be confounded in a production
process monitoring application. The intent of the
present eort is to explore the possibility of using mul-
tiple sensors and data obtained from sequential
machining operations to diagnose the root cause of
process variations. We have adopted a Bayesian prob-
abilistic framework to explicitly address the uncertainty
inherent in the root cause diagnosis.
In Section 2 of this paper, we motivate the appli-
cation of the Bayesian belief network and describe its
structure. The procedure for learning from a training
database, and rules for the updation and propagation
of evidence are described. In Section 3, we describe the
experimental procedure and methodology that were
used to identify the correlative sensor metrics for pro-
cess fault diagnosis, as well as the resulting structure of
the Bayesian belief network. In Section 4, results are
presented demonstrating the eectiveness of the tech-
nique for root cause diagnosis of process faults using
an acoustic emission and spindle power sensor and
data from two subsequent machining operations.
2. Bayesian belief networks
Process monitoring and fault diagnosis requires the
assimilation of numerous noisy and incomplete sources
of evidence in order to infer when a change in process
state has occurred and identify the root cause of that
change. Such inferences will necessarily be imperfect,
and it would be valuable if the conclusions could be
augmented with some quantiable measure of its cer-
tainty or uncertainty.
Bayesian inferencing techniques are well suited to
such problems. In particular, a data structure known as
a Bayesian belief network provides a convenient for-
malism for representing conditional probabilistic rela-
tionships between attributes of interest.
2.1. Bayesian inferencing
Given a hypothesis H and an evidence e, Bayes the-
orem may be stated as follows:
PejH  PH
PHje 1
Pe
where P(H|e) is the conditional probability of hypoth-
esis H being true given the evidence e, also know as the
posterior probability or posterior, P(H) is the prob-
ability of hypothesis H being true or the prior prob-
ability, and P(e|H) is the probability of evidence e
occurring given hypothesis H is true. This is also
known as the likelihood that evidence e will materialize
if hypothesis H is true. As Pearl states: The impor-
tance of [Bayes Theorem] is that it expresses a quan-
tity, P(H|e)which is often dicult to assessin terms
of quantities that often can be drawn directly from our
experiential knowledge [51]. The aim in monitoring
and diagnosis is to be able to incorporate previous
knowledge of the process with present observed evi-
dence to come up with the most plausible explanation
of how the process is behaving. Bayes theorem incor-
porates this type or predictive and diagnostic support.
2.2. The structure of a Bayesian belief network
Bayesian networks are directed acyclic graphs in
which each node represents a random variable that can
take on two or more discrete values. The arcs in the
network signify the existence of direct causal inuences
between the linked variables, and the strengths of these
inuences are quantied by conditional probabilities.
The directionality of the arrows is essential for display-
ing causality and non-transitive dependencies. The cau-
sal relationships expressed through the network
structure are based on prior knowledge, experience, or
statistically observed correlations.
Each node has distinct states or levels that signify the
values that the particular node can take. A Bayesian
network must be an acyclic graph, although it may be
multiply connected. Each node is associated with a
conditional probability table that denes probabilities
for the dierent states of the node given the states of
the parents.
Fig. 1 illustrates the variables and notation to be
used in describing a Bayesian network. The notation
has been adopted from Ramoni and Sebastiani [52]. In
this subset of a Bayesian network, there are three
nodes, representing the random variables X1, X2, and
X3. The links between nodes X1 and X2 as well as X2
and X3 indicate an explicit conditional dependence. In
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
Fig. 1. Notation to be used in describing a Bayesian network.
other words, node X3 is conditionally dependent only
on the state of nodes X1 and X2. The matrix h3 quanti-
es this conditional dependence. h3 contains the con-
ditional probabilities of all possible states of node X3
given all possible states of the parents. The individual
elements of matrix h3 are denoted h3jk PX3
kjP3 p3j where p3j indicates the state of the parents
of X3. In this particular example, nodes X1 and X2 can
each take on two possible states, so P3 can take on
four possible values, p3j, j 1 . . . 4. The vector p3j
holds the individual states of the parents.
The general notation is as follows: each random
variable Xi is discrete and has a nite set of ci states.
The state of the node Xi is given by xik. The state of
the parents of Xi is stored in the variable Pi. The num-
ber of states of Pi is denoted by qi, and a particular
state is indicated by pij. Thus, the subscript i indicates
the node in question, j stands for the parent state
among a total of qi states and k stands for the state of
the variable Xi among a total of ci states. Each element
of the conditional probability matrix is dened as:
hijk PXi xik jPi pij . The vector pij holds the
individual states of the parents of Xi and has cardin-
ality equal to the number of parents.
2.3. Learning conditional probabilities in a Bayesian
belief network
Before a Bayesian network may be used for process
fault diagnosis, the structure of the network must be
79
identied, and initial values for the conditional prob-
abilities must be obtained. We will discuss the develop-
ment of an appropriate structure for our application in
Section 3 of this paper. We rst discuss techniques for
estimating the unknown conditional probabilities, hijk,
given a prior set of data, or a database, D. The follow-
ing development follows [52].
A database consists of a series of instances of prior
node states. The objective of a learning procedure is to
assign values to the conditional probability matrix that
are consistent with the database. One common way in
which this is formulated is through maximization of
the likelihood function, P(D|h). In other words, it is
desired to identify conditional probability values that
maximize the likelihood of the database having
occurred.
Let n(xik|pij) be the P
frequency of (xik|pij) in the data-
base, and let npij k nxik jpij be the frequency of
pij. It is well known that the ML estimate of hijk is the
relevant frequency of the cases in the database [53]:
hijk nxik jpij =npij 2
A major drawback of this method is that hijk 0 when-
ever nxik jpij 0, so that the estimate can be too
extreme when the database is sparse or incomplete. Thus,
the type of database available for learning is what prim-
arily governs the choice of a suitable learning technique.
A complete database contains data for all possible com-
binations of the variables and their states. A database is
sparse when data for all the possible combinations of the
80 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
variables and their states are not available. A database is
said to be incomplete when in a particular data set,
values of some of the variables are missing.
Learning for incomplete databases poses the most
signicant statistical challenges. A summary of a num-
ber of common techniques for learning with incomplete
databases can be found in [54]. In our process monitor-
ing application, it will typically be possible to observe
all sensor metrics for all data instances. Thus, we will
not address learning with an incomplete database.
Nevertheless, obtaining training data will be expensive,
requiring extensive experimentation. For this reason, it
is likely that a training database for a process monitor-
ing application will be sparse.
The Bayesian approach is to regard hijk as a random
variable whose prior distribution represents the obser-
vers belief about the conditional probability before
data are seen. Application of Bayesian learning
involves the use of a database of training examples to
update the prior belief on the parameters using Bayes
theorem. We rst require an assumption on the prior
distribution of the parameters, h.
For convenience, a Dirichlet prior distribution is typi-
cally chosen for the multinomial parameters, hij. This
choice of prior satises the desired assumption of mutual
independence of the parameters introduced by Spie-
gelhalter and Lauritzen [53] and results in a conjugate
sampling situation, namely that after data are seen, the
distribution of parameters remains in the Dirichlet fam-
ily [55]. Interestingly, Geiger and Heckerman [55] dem-
onstrate that the under these assumptions, a Dirichlet
prior distribution is, in fact, the only possible choice. The
assumption of complete data, parameter independence,
and Dirichlet priors makes it possible to update each
vector of parameters, hij, independently [54].
For our application, we also assume the prior distri-
bution of hij to be a Dirichlet distribution with para-
meters faij1 ; . . . aijci g. The prior density of hij is then
given by [52]:
P  notation used previously in this paper.
XC
k aijk a The probabilities of interest will be the belief, or likeli-
phij hijkijk 3
k
Ca ijk
The parameters aijk encode an observers prior belief.
In the absence of prior information, we will assume
that aijk a=ci qi for all i, j and k, so that the prior
probability of (xik|pij) is simply 1=ci [55].
As previously discussed, the posterior density of h
will remain within the family of Dirichlet distributions,
and the posterior expectation of hijk can be readily
obtained [52]:
 aijk nxik jpij
Ehijk D 4 received from its parents and children, and correspond-
aij npij
Eq. (4) will be used to initialize the conditional prob-
abilities for our process monitoring application given a
sparse training database, and the assumption of a uni-
form prior expectation.
2.4. Bayesian belief updatingpropagation of evidence
Once a Bayesian network has been constructed and
initial conditional probability tables have been gener-
ated by training on prior data, the network is ready for
the introduction of external evidence based on sensor
observations.
Upon the introduction of external evidence, those
nodes representing sensor observations are forced to
take on a specic value while the remaining nodes must
adjust their own belief (probability of being in each
of the potential states) in order to remain consistent
with the new evidence. It is these updated beliefs that
will be observed and relied upon as the output of the
process monitoring and diagnosis system.
A variety of techniques for inferencing in a Bayesian
network have been developed. We have adopted a
message passing methodology for belief updating
developed by Pearl [51]. This method oers a number
of appealing characteristics relevant for applications in
process monitoring and diagnosis. Specically, the
message passing methodology oers a local triggering
mechanism and a computationally simple local updat-
ing procedure. Finally, the triggering mechanism and
updating action is conceptually meaningful. Alternative
approaches typically rely on a global supervisor, or
monitor that must select the sequence of propagation
and computation throughout the network.
In this section, we provide our formal implemen-
tation of Pearls message passing methodology for
belief updating in a multiply connected tree (polytree).
For a detailed development of the message passing
mechanism itself, the reader is directed to Pearl [51],
Chapter 4. The notation and implementation of the
belief updating rules has been changed signicantly so
as to maintain consistency with the data structures and
hood of each of the states of a particular node, given all
evidence received thus far. This evidence includes all train-
ing data, as well as the current instantiation of particular
nodes as a result of sensor observations. During the belief
updation and inferencing, the conditional probability vec-
tors, hij, remain xed. These updated belief probabilities
will be denoted as a vector B(Xi), indicating the prob-
ability, or likelihood of each of the possible states of Xi.
The message passing procedure occurs as follows:
when new evidence is introduced into the network,
each node updates its own belief, based on messages
ingly generates messages to be sent to its parents as
well as to its children. Fig. 2 describes the notation to
be used in message passing. The set of parents of node
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591 81

Fig. 2. Message passing conventions for belief updating.

Xi will be denoted Xi . The number of parents will equal For all k, and all j,
the cardinality of the set, denoted jXi j. The set of chil- 8 9
dren of node Xi will be denoted Wi , with cardinality < jXj
Y =
jWi j. A message from one of the parents, m 2 Xi , to Nkl Nkl hijk xmi pij o ;
: o1;Xo6p ;
node Xi will be denoted xim , while a message from a
child, n 2 Wi , to node Xi will be denoted win . l pij ojXo p
The steps are as follows: Condition N on values of wi :
X
ci
Step 1Belief updating. When node Xi is activated, For all l, wip l Nkl wi k
it simultaneously inspects the messages commu- k1
nicated by its parents, xmi , and the messages com-
municated by its children, win . It then updates it is Step 3Generation of messages to be sent to children.
belief according to the following relationships: For each child, c,
8 9 ( )
< Y jWi j =X jXi j
Y
For all k; Bi k wi k  xi k;
  xic k w k hijk xmi pij o ;
1 :o1;W o6c in ; j o1
Bi P Bi i

k Bi k m Xi o; n Wi o
jWi j
Y
For all k; wi k win k; n Wi o The propagation of messages is triggered by instantia-
o1 ( ) tion of evidence into the network. Once the evidence
X jXi j
Y enters the network via the evidence nodes, the beliefs of
For all k; xi k hij k xim pij o ;
j o1
these nodes are updated. The next step is to post mes-
sages to all the parents and children of the availability
m Xi o
of evidence and set ags on them that indicate that they
Step 2Generation of messages to be sent to parents. should be updated. The nodes containing these ags are
For each parent, p 2 Xi of node Xi. then required to update their own belief. For each node
Create conditional probability matrix N: whose belief is updated, new messages are again gener-
82 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
ated and sent to the children and parents. Flags are also
set for the parents and children as the messages are sent.
The presence of undirected loops in the network
introduces signicant challenges to the message propa-
gation and belief updating procedure. Because there
may be multiple paths between two nodes, the message
passing could propagate indenitely. The problem, in
general, is NP hard. For large networks with many
loops, the computational challenges become signicant.
For small networks with a small number of loops, a
threshold approach may be employed [56]. The propa-
gation in such a case would follow all the rules of nor-
mal propagation for singly connected networks. It
would also compare the change in the belief between
successive belief updations of a node. If the dierence
is not greater than a small threshold, which is pre-
determined, the propagation is terminated.
2.5. Application of the Bayesian belief network
methodology
We now provide an overview of the procedure for
applying the Bayesian belief network to root cause
diagnosis of process variation. In Section 3, we will
describe the specic sensor metrics and experimental
methodology for training and utilizing the network.
Fig. 3 graphically illustrates the procedure for train-
ing and applying the network. The rst step is the
identication of the network structure. For our root
Fig. 3. Initialization and application of the Bayesian belief network methodology.
cause diagnosis application, the network is limited to
two levels. The top level contains the root nodes encap-
sulating the state of the process variations. The second
level contains evidence nodes representing the states of
the various sensor metrics. The selection of the individ-
ual process metrics, and the determination of whether a
causal link between a particular root node and a parti-
cular evidence node is to exist in the network will be
described in detail in Section 3.
Once the network structure has been determined
(initialization), initial values for the conditional prob-
abilities must be learned from a training database. The
learning procedure has been described previously in
Section 3.2. A training database is provided through an
initial experimental design.
After the database structure has been identied and the
conditional probability tables have been initialized, the
network is ready for application. The rst step in appli-
cation of the network is the instantiation of evidence.
When new sensor data are available, the correspond-
ing metrics are evaluated, and the evidence nodes are
forced into the corresponding state.
The next step is propagating the evidence that has
been instantiated into the network to the dierent
nodes in the network. Evidence propagation proceeds
per the rules described previously in Section 2.4. This is
followed by the updating of the belief in light of the
evidence received from both parents and children.
After the belief of a particular node is updated, its
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
Table 1
Acoustic emission and spindle power metrics investigated
Acoustic emission sensor metrics
Standard deviation of the AE data from the mean
Mean of the 10% largest amplitude peaks
Mean of the absolute value of the AE data
Pulse rate with a variety of threshold levels
Peak amplitude in the FFT of the data
Frequency at which the peak amplitude occurs
Power spectral density in 25 kHz frequency bands
Power spectral density between 75 and 500 kHz
belief propagated to the surrounding nodes in accord-
ance with the propagation rules. This is an iterative
procedure and is carried out until saturation is reached.
Saturation is obtained when there are no other nodes
to propagate the evidence or its eect to.
3. Development of sensor metrics and network
structure
A primary objective of this work was to make use of
input from multiple sensors on multiple processes in an
attempt to more reliably discern the root cause of pro-
cess faults. The three faults of interest were dimen-
sional workpiece variation, tool wear, and workpiece
hardness. These three faults would commonly manifest
themselves in similar ways from a process monitoring
perspective (i.e. increase in power levels, cutting forces,
etc.). We are interested in attempting to discriminate
between these commonly confounded root causes.
The case study that was developed to validate the
methodology involved two sequential machining opera-
tions carried out on a single workpiece. The workpiece
material was 100 diameter 4140 bar stock with hardness
varying from 24 to 32 Rockwell C. A face milling oper-
ation was conducted using a 45 lead, 3.1500 diameter
v
face mill with four carbide inserts (Kennametal part
#SEKT443AEEN7GP) to machine a at on one end of
the bar stock. Next, a blind hole was drilled into this
v
newly generated at. The drill was a 118 point angle,
v 00
45 helix, 0.375 diameter tin-coated HSS twist drill
(Kennametal part #KHSS13324). The process para-
meters were as recommended by the Machining Data
handbook. It was hoped that the cumulative infor-
mation from the sequential process steps might aid in
discriminating between multiple causes.
Care was taken to utilize sensors that may be cost
eective and practical in a production machining
environment. For this reason, direct measurement of
cutting forces through a multi-axis dynamometer was
avoided. The two sensors employed were an acoustic
emission sensor and a spindle power sensor, both pro-
vided by Montronix, Inc. Data from each sensor were
obtained during each of the two machining operations.
83
Spindle power sensor metrics
Mean of the spindle power data
Standard deviation of the spindle power data
Mean of the 10% largest amplitude peaks
Power spectral density at tooth passing frequency (milling)
Power spectral density in 10 Hz bands (drilling only)
Power spectral density between 10 and 100 Hz (drilling)
Mean of data during partial immersion (drilling only)
3.1. Development of sensor metrics
In order to identify a variety of sensor metrics that
had statistically signicant correlations with the process
faults of interest, a set of preliminary experiments were
conducted. A wide range of both time domain and fre-
quency domain metrics were investigated, and ANOVA
analysis was used to determine statistical signicance.
The intent of the metrics is to encapsulate signicant
features in the data stream with a scalarizing variable
that would be suitable as an evidence node in the Baye-
sian network. The metrics investigated are listed in
Table 1.
The acoustic emission sensor was sampled at 1 MHz
and band pass ltered between 10 and 500 kHz. Dur-
ing face milling, the AE sensor responds in bursts to
the engagement of the individual inserts. The sensor
metrics were evaluated over these data bursts.
3.1.1. Preliminary experimental study and ANOVA
analysis
After the candidate set of metrics had been identied, a
three variable, two-level full factorial experimental study
was performed to identify those metrics with a statistically
signicant correlation to the process faults of interest. The
three variables were the process variations of interest: tool
wear, workpiece hardness, and dimensional workpiece
variation. After the subset of statistically signicant varia-
tions was identied, those corresponding metrics were
used as nodes in the Bayesian network.
A 23 full factorial experimental design was executed
with two repetitions. The sequence of experiments was
randomized. The average value of the repetitions was
used in the ANOVA analysis. The workpiece hardness
ranged from 24.0 to 32.0 Rockwell C. The geometric
stock size variation was 0.07000 .
A full-factorial experimental design was conducted
because we are also interested in the interaction eects
between the variables. The ANOVA analysis was con-
ducted for each variable using the F-test with a 95%
condence interval.
The metrics were chosen based on the following set
of rules that were intended to distinguish between sig-
nicant causal relationships and confounded eects:
84 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591

Table 2
Acoustic emission and spindle power metrics identied through ANOVA analysis

Process Sensor Label Metric ANOVA sensitivity

AEFM1 Standard deviation TWM
AEFM2 Pulse rate, 0.8 threshold SS, TWM
AEFM3 PSD (75475 kHz) SS, TWM, SS TWM
Acoustic emission
AEFM4 Mean of peaks SS
Face milling AEFM5 Frequency of peak SS
AEFM6 Mean, absolute value SS, TWM, SS TWM
PFM1 Mean WH, TWM
Spindle power PFM2 Standard deviation SS, TWM
PFM3 Mean of peaks SS, TWM
AED1 Mean of peaks SS TWD
AED2 Pulse rate, 0.9 threshold WH TWD
Acoustic emission AED3 Mean, absolute value TWD
AED4 PSD TWD
Drilling AED5 Standard deviation TWD
PD1 Dierence between means, full and partial engagement WH
PD2 Mean during partial engagement SS
Spindle power
PD3 Standard deviation TWD
PD4 PSD (10100 Hz) TWD

1 If only the main eects are signicant, all the main
eects that are signicant are included as causative
agents for the metric in question.
2 If the main eects and one or more rst order inter-
actions are signicant, then:
If the interactions are the combinations of variables
that show up as signicant in the main eects, then
include the variables in the interaction as being
causative agents for the metric in question.
If the interactions are the combinations of vari-
ables that are other than the variables that show
up as signicant in the main eects, the result is
confounded and ignore the result.
3 If none of the main eects are signicant and one or
more rst order interactions are signicant then:
If there are multiple interactions, the result is con-
founded and thus should be ignored.
If there is one interaction then the variables in the
interaction are the causative agents for the metric
in question.
4 If the second order interaction is signicant, then:
If none of the main eects or the rst order interac-
tions are signicant, then all the variables involved
in the second order interaction are taken as signi-
cant and causal agents for the metric in question.
If some or all of the main eects are signicant
with no rst order interaction being signicant,
the results are confounded and thus ignored.
If any of the rst order interactions are signi-
cant, the results are confounded and ignored.
If all the eects are signicant, the results are
completely confounded and are ignored.
Application of the above rules resulted in the
identication of the causally signicant sensor
metrics listed in Table 2 for the two processes and
two sensors employed. The last column of the table
lists the root nodes with which a statistically signi-
cant correlation was found. Each of these relation-
ships represents a causal arc that will be added to
the Belief network.
3.2. Initialization of the network structure
Fig. 4 illustrates the resulting network structure. There
are a total of 18 evidence nodes representing individual
sensor metrics. There are four root notes, representing the
four root causes of concern: stock size variation, work-
piece hardness variation, tool wear state of the face mill,
and tool wear state of the endmill. Each of these root
cause nodes contained two discrete states, high and low.
The evidence nodes were discretized with either two or
three states. Each of the links represents a causal relation-
ship as enumerated in Table 2. In the event that a statisti-
cally signicant relationship between a particular metric
and an interaction eect exists and was not eliminated by
the ltering rules above, a causal link between both of the
corresponding root nodes and the sensor metric in ques-
tion were added to the Bayesian network.
4. Results and conclusions
The network shown in Fig. 4 was trained on the 23 full
factorial DOE with two repetitions as described in Section
3. The raw training data and the corresponding table of
states from which the conditional probabilities were
learned is containing Appendix A, Tables A1A3. Sub-
sequent to training the network, its diagnostic perform-
ance was evaluated on 18 new trials. For these trials,
experimental training data were obtained, and the metrics
were evaluated and introduced as evidence into the net-
work. The belief updation procedure was executed and
the beliefs of the root nodes were recorded. Tables 35
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
Fig. 4. Structure of Bayesian belief network for root cause diagnosis.
summarize the predictive success of the network on these
18 trials. Three dierent scenarios are reported: belief
updation using milling evidence only (Table 3), drilling
evidence only (Table 4), and both milling and drilling evi-
dence (Table 5). The percentages reported in the tables
represent the belief in the correct state of the trial.
For example, consider the rst trial (rst row of
data) in Table 3. In this trial, and as indicated on the
rst row of the table, the tool wear of the face mill was
in the low state, the tool wear of the drill was in the
high state, the stock size dimension was in the low
state, and the workpiece hardness was in the low state.
Because Table 3 represents a situation in which only
the milling evidence is utilized, there is no ability to
predict the tool wear state of the drill. For this reason,
N/A appears in the corresponding cell of the table.
Belief predictions are available, however, for each of
the remaining three diagnoses. In this trial, all three of
these beliefs are greater than 80%, indicating a greater
than 80% belief in the correct state of the stock size,
face mill wear state, and workpiece hardness level.
Higher percentages represent greater degrees of cer-
tainty, and therefore more successful diagnostic ability.
85
A percentage in the neighborhood of 50% represents
diagnostic ambivalencethe network is unable to dis-
cern the state given the training data and current sen-
sor evidence. A percentage below 50% represents an
incorrect diagnosisthe belief is stronger in the
opposite (incorrect) state. Tables 35 have been color-
coded to provide a visual summary of the diagnostic
successlighter shades of gray indicate increasing
levels of diagnostic condence.
Table 6 and Fig. 5 summarize the diagnostic per-
formance of the network. As may be seen in Fig. 5, the
predictive success increases with the use of data from
both processes. This is an important observation. Sel-
dom has data from subsequent machining operations
been combined to provide a greater level of condence
in the diagnosis of process faults. Using evidence from
both the milling and drilling metrics, the network was
able to correctly diagnose the state at a 60% condence
level in all 18 trials for the drilling tool wear, workpiece
hardness, and stock size nodes, and provided a correct
diagnosis in 17 of 18 cases for the face mill tool wear
state. As the condence threshold is increased to 70%
and 80%, the predictive success declines, as would be
86 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591

Table 3
Diagnostic beliefs on 18 trials using milling evidence only

Table 4
Diagnostic beliefs on 18 trials using drilling evidence only
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591 87

Table 5
Diagnostic beliefs on 18 trials using milling and drilling evidence

Table 6
Diagnostic success on 18 trials at 60%, 70%, and 80% condence levels

Process fault
TWM TWD SS WH
Diagnosis condence 60% 70% 80% 60% 70% 80% 60% 70% 80% 60% 70% 80%
Drilling only, both sensors N/A N/A N/A 15 15 8 17 16 8 17 15 6
Evidence Milling only, both sensors 16 16 12 N/A N/A N/A 15 14 11 18 17 11
utilized Both processes, both sensors 17 17 13 18 16 10 18 16 12 18 18 13

expected. Nevertheless, using evidence from both pro-
cesses, the network was capable of achieving an 80%
condence level in between 10 and 13 of the 18 trials.
In conclusion, the Bayesian belief network method-
ology appears to be an eective tool for explicitly address-
ing uncertainty and utilizing data from multiple sources.
In this application, data from two non-intrusive sensors
(spindle power and acoustic emission) and two subsequent
processes (face milling and drilling) have been combined
to successfully diagnose a state of tool wear, workpiece
hardness, and a stock size dimensional variation.
After training on a data set of 16 trials, the network
was able to correctly diagnose the correct state at a
60% condence level in all but one of the 18 test cases.
The belief network was able to correctly diagnose the
state of the drill tool wear at the 80% condence level
in 10 of the 18 trials, and the stock size variation,
workpiece hardness, and face mill tool wear state in
either 12 or 13 of the 18 trials.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of
Montronix, Inc., Ford Motor Company, the NIST
ATP program, and the National Science Foundation
(award DMI-9941214) for support of this work. Dr.
W. Kline and R. Sriram of Montronix, Inc. are person-
ally acknowledged for their support and guidance.
Appendix A.
Tables A.1A.3.
88 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591

Fig. 5. Diagnostic success on 18 trials at 60% and 80% condence levels.

Table A.1
Face milling metrics from training data

Acoustic emission metrics Spindle power metrics

AEfm1 AEfm4 AEfm6 AEfm2 AEfm5 AEfm3 Pfm1 Pfm2 Pfm3
1 0.56 1.59 0.42 1519 140,512 0.64 75.84 15.74 16.77
2 0.52 1.54 0.39 1328 140,343 0.57 74.90 15.51 16.60
3 0.61 1.21 1.05 920 920 920.31 80.95 16.79 18.01
4 0.53 1.04 0.88 649 649 649.19 80.04 15.78 16.52
5 0.49 1.48 0.36 1244 136,072 0.53 79.75 13.28 12.88
6 0.51 1.60 0.36 1209 133,606 0.52 78.87 14.21 14.16
7 0.49 1.03 0.80 416 416 416.75 85.27 14.56 14.74
8 0.49 1.07 0.80 407 407 407.99 84.69 15.25 15.59
9 0.56 1.59 0.42 1519 140,512 0.64 76.16 16.18 17.67
10 0.52 1.54 0.39 1328 140,343 0.57 73.86 14.83 15.64
11 0.61 1.21 1.05 920 920 920.31 81.46 16.95 18.42
12 0.53 1.04 0.88 649 649 649.19 79.94 15.66 16.57
13 0.49 1.48 0.36 1244 136,072 0.53 79.83 13.29 12.94
14 0.51 1.60 0.36 1209 133,606 0.52 75.30 13.43 12.17
15 0.49 1.03 0.80 416 416 416.75 85.37 14.32 14.47
16 0.49 1.07 0.80 407 407 407.99 80.63 14.50 13.45
Table A.2
Drilling metrics from training data

Acoustic emission metrics Spindle power metrics

AEd5 AEd1 AEd3 AEd2 AEd4 Pd3 Pd1 Pd4 Pd2
1 0.18 1.17 0.13 247 0.06 7.66 48.09 25.63 77.73
2 0.22 1.36 0.15 757 0.10 8.08 61.17 29.05 74.97
3 0.20 1.47 0.14 476 0.08 7.87 52.21 29.20 81.40
4 0.20 1.33 0.13 543 0.08 8.26 64.15 32.45 78.05
5 0.16 1.13 0.12 226 0.05 7.13 49.68 25.39 73.39
6 0.17 1.12 0.12 287 0.06 7.91 70.05 26.19 72.43
7 0.15 0.84 0.11 51 0.04 7.12 44.74 22.72 78.73
8 0.14 1.00 0.10 104 0.04 7.24 43.86 21.08 81.19
9 0.18 0.99 0.13 147 0.06 8.53 62.81 32.23 73.84
10 0.20 1.20 0.14 513 0.08 8.04 58.61 38.77 72.60
11 0.18 1.34 0.12 327 0.06 7.37 39.27 28.99 80.50
12 0.20 1.33 0.13 543 0.08 8.26 64.15 32.45 78.05
13 0.18 1.38 0.13 561 0.07 7.57 53.83 23.33 73.96
14 0.18 1.36 0.12 362 0.06 7.14 52.41 21.49 73.87
15 0.19 1.27 0.13 425 0.07 7.16 42.78 22.63 82.04
16 0.15 1.06 0.11 244 0.04 6.97 45.88 25.07 79.28

Table A.3
Evidence and process states for training data
Trial Process state Face milling metric state Drilling metric state

TWM SSV Hardness TWD AEFM1 AEFM2 AEFM3 AEFM4 PFM1 PFM2 AEFM5 PFM3 AEFM6 PD1 AED1 AED2 PD2 AED3 AED4 AED5 PD3 PD4
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
3 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591

12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
13 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1
14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
89
90 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
References
[1] D. Li, J. Mathew, Tool wear and failure monitoring techniques
for turninga review, International Journal of Machine Tools
and Manufacture 30 (4) (1990) 579598.
[2] E. Dimla, Sensor signals for tool-wear monitoring in metal cut-
ting operationsa review of methods, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 40 (8) (2000) 10731098.
[3] E. Jantunen, A summary of methods applied to tool condition
monitoring in drilling, International Journal of Machine Tools
and Manufacture 42 (9) (2002) 9971010.
[4] Y. Koren, T.-R. Ko, G.A. Ulsoy, K. Danai, Flank wear esti-
mation under varying cutting conditions, Journal of Dynamic
Systems, Measurement and Control 113 (2) (1991) 300307.
[5] S.C. Lin, R.J. Yang, Force-based model for tool wear monitor-
ing in face milling, International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture 35 (9) (1995) 12011211.
[6] S.K. Choudhury, S. Rath, In-process tool wear estimation in
milling using cutting force model, Journal of Materials Proces-
sing Technology 99 (1) (2000) 113119.
[7] Y. Yao, X.D. Fang, Modeling of multivariate time-series for
tool wear estimate in nish turning, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 32 (4) (1992) 495508.
[8] H.V. Ravindra, Y.G. Srinivasa, R. Krishnamurthy, Modeling of
tool wear based on cutting forces in turning, Wear 169 (1) (1993)
2532.
[9] S.A. Kumar, H.V. Ravindra, Y.G. Srinivasa, In-process tool
wear monitoring through time series modeling and pattern rec-
ognition, International Journal of Production Research 35 (3)
(1997) 739751.
[10] T. Szecsi, Cutting force modeling using articial neural networks,
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 9293 (1999) 344349.
[11] S.C. Lin, R.J. Lin, Tool wear monitoring in face milling using
force signals, Wear 198 (12) (1996) 136142.
[12] S.C. Lin, C.J. Ting, Tool wear monitoring in drilling using force
signals, Wear 180 (12) (1995) 5360.
[13] S.Y. Liang, D.A. Dornfeld, Tool wear detection using time-ser-
ies analysis of acoustic emission, Journal of Engineering for
Industry 111 (3) (1989) 198205.
[14] E.N. Diei, D.A. Dornfeld, Acoustic emission sensing of tool
wear in face milling, Journal of Engineering for Industry 109 (3)
(1987) 234240.
[15] K. Jemielniak, Some aspects of AE application in tool condition
monitoring, Ultrasonics 38 (18) (2000) 604608.
[16] X. Li, A brief review: acoustic emission method for tool wear
monitoring during turning, International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 42 (2) (2002) 157165.
[17] T.I. El-Wardany, D. Gao, M.A. Elbestawi, Tool condition
monitoring in drilling using vibration signature analysis, Inter-
national Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 36 (6)
(1996) 687711.
[18] Y. Yao, X.D. Fang, G. Arndt, Online estimation of groove wear
in the minor cutting edge for nish machining, Annals of the
CIRP 40 (1) (1991) 4144.
[19] J. Rotberg, S. Braun, E. Lenz, Vibration generation models for
cutting tool diagnostics, Diagnostics, Vehicle Dynamics and Spe-
cial Topics, 18(5)ASME Design Engineering Division, DE, 1989,
pp. 16.
[20] N. Constantinides, S. Bennett, An investigation of methods for
online estimation of tool wear, International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 27 (2) (1987) 225237.
[21] D. Cuppini, G. DErrico, G. Rutelli, Tool wear monitoring based
on cutting power measurement, Wear 139 (2) (1990) 303311.
[22] R.X. Du, M.A. Elbestawi, S. Li, Tool condition monitoring in
turning using fuzzy set theory, International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 32 (6) (1992) 781796.
[23] J.H. Tarn, M. Tomizuka, On-line monitoring of tool and cutting
conditions in milling, Journal of Engineering for Industry 111
(3) (1989) 206212.
[24] X. Li, A. Djordjevich, P.K. Venuvinod, Current-sensor-based
feed cutting force intelligent estimation and tool wear condition
monitoring, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 47 (3)
(2000) 697702.
[25] R.J. Seethaler, I. Yellowly, Identication of radial runout in
milling operations, Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Engineering 121 (3) (1999) 524531.
[26] S. Sastry, S.G. Kapoor, R.E. DeVor, Compensation of progress-
ive radial run-out in face-milling by spindle speed variation,
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 40 (8)
(2000) 11211139.
[27] Y. Altintas, I. Yellowly, The identication of radial width and
axial depth of cut in peripheral milling, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 27 (3) (1987) 367381.
[28] Y. Altintas, I. Yellowly, In process prediction of tool failure in
milling using cutting force models, Journal of Engineering for
Industry 111 (2) (1989) 149157.
[29] J.G. Choi, M.Y. Yang, In-process prediction of cutting depths in
end milling, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manu-
facture 39 (5) (1999) 705721.
[30] L. Yang, R. Zhu, R.E. DeVor, S.G. Kapoor, W.A. Kline,
Identication of stock size variation and its application to pro-
cess monitoring in end milling, Proceedings of the 2000 Japan
USA Symposium on Flexible Automation, 2000, pp. 18, Paper
No. 2000JUSFA-13212.
[31] L. Yang, R.E. DeVor, S.G. Kapoor, A model-based method-
ology for detection of depth of cut variations in end milling,
Proceedings of the 2002 JapanUSA Symposium on Flexible
Automation, 2002.
[32] D.E. Dimla Jr., P.E. Lister, N.J. Leighton, Neural network sol-
ution to the tool condition monitoring problem in metal cutting-
a critical review of methods, International Journal or Machine
Tools and Manufacture 37 (9) (1997) 12191241.
[33] R.X. Du, M.A. Elbestawi, S. Li, Tool condition monitoring in
turning using fuzzy set theory, International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 32 (6) (1992) 781796.
[34] X. Li, S.K. Tso, J. Wang, Real-time tool condition monitoring
using wavelet transforms and fuzzy techniques, IEEE Transac-
tions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics Part C: Applications
and Reviews 30 (3) (2000) 352357.
[35] X. Li, S.K. Tso, Drill wear monitoring based on current signals,
Wear 231 (2) (1999) 172178.
[36] H.M. Ertunc, K.A. Loparo, H. Ocak, Tool wear condition
monitoring in drilling operations using hidden Markov models,
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 41 (9)
(2001) 13631384.
[37] L. Atlas, M. Ostendorf, G.D. Bernard, Hidden Markov models
for monitoring machining tool-wear, Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Pro-
cessing, vol. 6, 2000, pp. 38873890.
[38] S.A. Kumar, H.V. Ravindra, Y.G. Srinivasa, In-process tool
wear monitoring through time series modeling and pattern rec-
ognition, International Journal of Production Research 35 (3)
(1997) 739751.
[39] E. Govekar, J. Gradisek, I. Grabec, Analysis of acoustic emis-
sion signals and monitoring of machining processes, Ultrasonics
38 (18) (2000) 598603.
[40] D. Yan, T.I. El-Wardany, M.A. Elbestawi, A multi-sensor strat-
egy for tool failure detection in milling, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture 35 (3) (1995) 383398.
[41] B. McCabe, Belief networks for engineering applications, Inter-
national Journal of Technology Management 21 (34) (2001)
257270.
 S. Dey, J.A. Stori / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 45 (2005) 7591
[42] B. Zheng, Y.-H. Chang, X.-H. Wang, W.F. Good, Comparison
of articial neural network and Bayesian belief network in a
computer-assisted diagnosis scheme for mammography, Proceed-
ings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks,
vol. 6, 1999, pp. 41814185.
[43] C.E. Kahn, J.J. Laur, G.F. Carrera, A Bayesian network for
diagnosis of primary bone tumors, Journal of Digital Imaging 14
(2) (2001) 5657.
[44] P. Antal, H. Verrelst, D. Timmerman, Y. Moreau, S. Van
Huel, B. De Moor, et al., Bayesian networks in ovarian cancer
diagnosis: potentials and limitations, Proceedings of the IEEE
Symposium on Computer based Medical Systems, 2000, pp. 103
108.
[45] V. Pavlovic, B.J. Frey, T.S. Huang, Time-series classication
using mixed-state dynamic Bayesian networks, Proceedings of
the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition, vol. 2, 1999, pp. 609615.
[46] K.-C. Chang, J. Liu, J. Zhou, Bayesian probabilistic inference
for target recognition, Proceedings of SPIEThe International
Society for Optical Engineering 2755 (1996) 158165.
[47] C.-H. Wu, Sub-syllable-based discriminative segmental Bayesian
network for mandarin speech keyword spotting, IEEE Proceed-
ings: Vision, Image and Signal Processing 144 (2) (1997) 6571.
[48] R.W. Lewis, R.S. Ransing, Semantically constrained Bayesian
network for manufacturing diagnosis, International Journal of
Production Research 35 (8) (1997) 21712187.
91
[49] E. Wolbrecht, B. DAmbrosio, R. Paasch, D. Kirby, Monitoring
and diagnosis of a multi-stage manufacturing process using Baye-
sian networks, Articial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analy-
sis and Manufacturing: Aiedam 14 (1) (2000) 5367.
[50] A. Prateepasen, Y.H.J. Au, B.E. Jones, Acoustic emission and
vibration for tool-wear monitoring in single-point machining
using belief network, IEEEInstrumentation and Measurement
Technology Conference, vol. 3, 2001, pp. 15411546.
[51] J. Pearl, Probabilistic Inference in Intelligent Systems: Networks of
Plausible Inference, Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo (CA), 1988.
[52] M. Ramoni, P. Sebastiani, Parameter estimation in Bayesian
networks for incomplete databases, Intelligent Data Analysis 2
(2) (1998).
[53] D.J. Spiegelhalter, S.L. Lauritzen, Sequential updating of con-
ditional probabilities on directed graphical structures, Networks
20 (1990) 157224.
[54] D. Heckerman, A tutorial on learning with Bayesian networks,
in: M. Jordan (Ed.), Learning in Graphical Models, MIT Press,
Cambridge (MA), 1999, Also appears as Technical Report
MSR-TR-95-06, Microsoft Research.
[55] D. Geiger, D. Heckerman, A characterization of the Dirichlet
distribution through global and local independence, The Annals
of Statistics 25 (1997) 13441369.
[56] K.P. Murphy, Y. Weiss, M.I. Jordan, Loopy belief propagation for
approximate inference: an empirical study, UAI 99: Proceedings of
the 15 Conference on Uncertainty in Articial Intelligence, 1999.