Submitted:
21 March 2024
Posted:
22 March 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
- How can digital twins support real-time predictive maintenance?
- What benefits will a digital twin framework implemented based on a standardized framework offer to a predictive maintenance solution in IIoT?
- How can this proposed digital twin framework be extended to act as an intelligent digital twin with a prediction feedback loop?
2.1. Digital Twins and Predictive Maintenance
2.2. Computing Infrastructure for Digital Twins
2.2.1. Cloud, Fog, and Edge Computing
- Fog computing is an extension of the cloud, introduced by Cisco in 2012 [7], as a concept that brings computing power closer to the data sources, thereby reducing latency and improving other computational benefits.
- Edge Computing is like the fog computing concept. It deals with the ability for Internet of Things (IoT) devices distributed in remote locations to process data at the “edge” of the network [25]
2.2.2. IIoT Protocols and Middleware
2.2.3. Microservices and DT Platforms
| Concept | Description | Tool |
|---|---|---|
| Containerization | Utilizing microservices architecture for loosely coupled, capabilities oriented and packaged deployment software. | [29] Docker [30], Kubernetes |
| DT Middleware | Platforms supporting connectivity middleware, device, and data integration. | [29] Eclipse Kapua, Eclipse Kura, Eclipse Ditto [31] |
| Real time/Batch stream processing | Technologies supporting processing data with compute capabilities in batch or real-time | [29] Apache Kafka, Apache Flink, Apache Spark [31], Apache Hadoop |
2.3. Digital Twin Architecture
- Edge/IoT Device Layer: The lower layer deals with unit level DT, acquiring data from individual components such as the gearbox and pre-processing it through data cleaning and transmission to the upper layer.
- Fog Layer: The middle layer handles the system level monitoring and feedback mechanism on prediction from the ML algorithms in real-time. This is the layer where the middleware and microservices of the DT are also utilized.
- Cloud Layer: This layer deals with monitoring of global level - systems of systems, for example the whole wind farm in our case study, training and retraining using historical data.

2.4. Reseacrh Gap
- Prediction feedback loop (DT to PT)
- Accuracy
- Computational Latency
3. Theoretical Framework
3.1. Hypothesis
3.2. Architectural Framework
3.2.1. Layer 1: Edge Devices Layer
- Data Acquisition Sub-Layer: This layer is responsible for collecting and pre-processing real-time data from sensors and IoT devices.
- Sensors and Actuators Sub-Layer: Along with sensors that collect data, the actuators that will receive control commands from the upper layers are also in this layer.
3.2.2. Layer 2: Fog Computing Layer
- Data Storage Layer: This layer is responsible for storing the pre-processed data in a distributed data store such as Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS), Cassandra, MongoDB, or influx DB, as they all support distributed processing. However, we selected influx DB because it supports real time seamlessly.
- Data Processing Layer: This layer is responsible for processing the pre-processed data to generate insights that can be used to train the predictive maintenance model. This layer can be implemented using technologies such as Apache Spark, Flink, or Hadoop MapReduce.
- Feedback Loop Layer: This layer is responsible for capturing feedback from the Dt to the physical twin and using it to improve the predictive maintenance model. This layer can be implemented using technologies such as Apache NiFi or StreamSets.
3.2.3. Layer 3: Cloud Computing Layer
- Machine Learning Layer: This layer is responsible for training the predictive maintenance model using the insights generated by the data processing layer. This layer can be implemented using technologies such as Scikit-learn, TensorFlow and PyTorch. Depending on the ML model implemented, these ML packages were used for the predictive maintenance algorithms.
- Model Deployment Layer: This layer is responsible for deploying the trained model in a distributed environment to make real-time predictions. This layer can be implemented using technologies such as Kubernetes, Docker Swarm, or Apache Mesos. However, to support our architectural framework and experimental platform, we used docker at the fog and cloud layer to deploy the ML models.
3.3. Framework Standardization
- Observable Manufacturing Element (OME) domain: Context for the physical twin (each wind turbine component) which is the basis of the DT. This interacts with DT interfaces for data collection and device control – feedback mechanism.
- Data Collection and Device Control Domain: This connects the physical twin (OME) to its unit DT through sensor data collection, synchronization, and actuating feedback to regulate operational conditions with decisions from the DT.
- Core Domain: This domain handles all DT services from analytics and simulations to feedback and user interaction.
- User Domain: This is the application layer through which users access the DT and see results through visualizations and other functionalities.
- Selection of Standards for sensor interfaces, data collection and processing
- Selection of interfaces for device control and handling of feedback from DT to PT.
- Selection of Communication protocols and middleware
- Selection of technology stack for representation of DTs such as JSON, DTDL and other software implementation frameworks.
- Selection of deployment platforms based on specific data and processing requirements.
- Selection of functional services platform for visualization interaction with users via ERP, CAD, CAM or others.
4. Methodology
4.1. System Architecture
- I.
- Components: The components were selected based on a review by NREL showing the most failure prone components of a wind turbine. This was used to select two of the components for this work. These are the Generator as system DT and its sub-components as unit DTs and Gearbox as system DT and its sub-components as unit DTs.
- II.
- Software Architecture: The Digital Twin was developed using the Digital Twin Definition Language (DTDL) and C# Object Oriented Programming concepts to replicate the relationship between entities, and the operations of the DT such as the Predictive Maintenance model, alerts, and fault classification algorithms for feedback operations. Figure 7 describes the modelling approach [38].
4.2. Metrics
- I.
- Accuracy of the model to support PHM with respect to the real time scenarios of turbine operation.
- II.
- Prediction feedback loop (DT to PT): How the computational platform whether edge or cloud supports the overall aim of the framework: data collection, pre-processing, and prediction feedback.
- III.
- Computational Latency: Time it takes for model run and feedback.
- Does the Distributed DT framework improve the effectiveness of a predictive maintenance solution?
- Does applying the standardization for DT show relevant improvement to the PHM solution?
4.3. Software
4.3.1. Machine Learning Algorithms
- Multiple Linear Regression (MLR): This algorithm uses scikit learn to model the relationship between the inputs and the output by fitting a linear equation.
- Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM): This is a version of Recurrent Neural Network (RNNs) that makes its predictions by using the order sequence of data to learn the termly dependencies of data. This is why it is suitable for IoT timeseries predictions.
- XGBoost: This algorithm uses decision trees for gradient boosting and works by combining weaker learners to create a stronger learner . It is considered one of the best algorithms for time series predictions and hence why it is suitable for IoT data.
| Algorithm 1: |
![]() |
| Algorithm 2: |
![]() |
4.3.1. Feature Extraction
4.3.2. Prediction Feedback
| Algorithm 3: |
![]() |
4.4. Data Platform
4.5. Connectivity Middleware
4.6. Functional Requirement
| Algorithm 4: |
![]() |
5. Experiment Set Up
- I.
- Edge IoT Devices: This layer is equipped with raspberry 3 devices (64-bit @ 1.4GHz 1GB SDRAM) that simulates “sensors” which publish real-time sensor data using MQTT brokers, from each wind turbine component, and receive feedback from the upper layers DT.
- II.
- Fog Nodes Layer: This layer is equipped with a fog node serve/pc (Lenovo IdeaCentre Mini PC 1.5GHz 4GB RAM 128 SSD). This aggregates the components for each turbine using containerized microservices, Docker, that pushes the real-time sensor readings to influx DB buckets in the fog (batch data streaming point will be good here) for short term storage and the cloud for longer term storage. This layer also hosts the system DT (DT for each turbine). The script, described in Algorithm 3, that regulates the components behavior once faults are predicted is also hosted in this layer. Both batch and real-time data collected from the sensors are processed in this layer. All the activities highlighted later in the feedback section relates to this layer.
- III.
- Cloud Layer: This layer is equipped with a higher computational capacity, using a PC (Intel Core i5 CPU @ 3.30GHz 8.00GB RAM 64-bit OS). This layer hosts the Global DT, training and testing set of all the ML models for each component, periodically retrains the models as more data and faults are identified over time using the longer-term historical data in the influx DB.


6. Result
6.1. Model Pre-Processing
6.2. Model Processing
6.2.1. Gearbox
6.2.2. Generator
6.2.3. Further Analysis

6.3. Model Post-processing
6.3.1. Failure Prediction - Gearbox
6.3.2. Failure Prediction - Generator


6.4. Prediction Feedback Loop
6.4.1. Pre-Failure Assessment
6.4.2. Feedback

6.4.3. Accuracy
| Turbine | Year | MLR | XGBoost | ||||
| RMSE | MAE | R2-Score | RMSE | MAE | R2-Score | ||
| T06 | 2017 (Gear) | 0.99 | 0.71 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.63 | 0.96 |
| T07 | 2017 (Gen) | 3.29 | 3.02 | 0.87 | 3.64 | 2.43 | 0.89 |

7. Discussion
8. Conclusion and Future Work
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bloomberg UK, "Wind Turbines Taller Than the Statue of Liberty Are Falling Over," Bloomberg, Oregon, 2023.
- A. Fuller, Z. Fan, C. Day and a. C. Barlow, "Digital Twin: Enabling Technologies, Challenges and Open Research," IEEE Access, 2020. [CrossRef]
- Y. Lu, K. I.-K. W. Chao Liu, H. Huang and a. X. Xu, "Digital Twin-driven smart manufacturing: Connotation, reference model, applications and research issues," Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 2020. [CrossRef]
- L. Errandonea, S. Beltran and a. S. Arrizabalaga, "Digital Twin for maintenance: A literature review," Computers in Industry, 2020. [CrossRef]
- R. v. Dinter, B. Tekinerdogan and a. C. Catal, "Predictive maintenance using digital twins: A systematic literature review," Information and Software Technology, 2022. [CrossRef]
- Y. QAMSANE, J. MOYNE, M. TOOTHMAN, I. KOVALENKO, E. C. BALTA, J. FARIS, D. M. TILBURY and A. K. BARTON, "A Methodology to Develop and Implement Digital Twin Solutions for Manufacturing Systems," IEEE Access, 2021. [CrossRef]
- Cisco, "What Is Edge Computing?," Cisco, 31 12 2012 [Online]. Available online: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/computing/what-is-edge-computing.html (accessed on 12 July 2022).
- "ISO 23247 - Digital twin framework for manufacturing," ISO (International Organization for Standardization), Geneva, 2021.
- M. Grieves and a. J. Vickers, "Digital Twin: Mitigating Unpredictable, Undesirable Emergent Behavior in Complex Systems," in Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems, Springer Link, 2016, pp. 85-113.
- E. H. Glaessgen and a. D. Stargel, "The Digital Twin Paradigm for Future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles," in 53rd Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2012.
- J. MOYNE, Y. QAMSANE, M. TOOTHMAN, I. KOVALENKO, E. C. BALTA and J. FARIS, "A Requirements Driven Digital Twin Framework: Specification and Opportunities," IEEE Access, 2020. [CrossRef]
- A. Haghshenas, A. Hasan, O. Osen and a. E. T. Mikalsen, "Predictive digital twin for ofshore wind farms," Energy Informatics, 2023. [CrossRef]
- W. UDO and A. Y. MUHAMMAD, "Data-Driven Predictive Maintenance of Wind Turbine Based on SCADA Data," IEEE Access, 2021. [CrossRef]
- M. Garan, K. Tidriri and a. I. Kovalenko, "A Data-Centric Machine Learning Methodology: Application on Predictive Maintenance of Wind Turbines," Energies - MDPI, 2022. [CrossRef]
- E. Cinar, S. Kalay and a. I. Saricicek, "A Predictive Maintenance System Design and Implementation for Intelligent Manufacturing," Machines - MDPI, 2022. [CrossRef]
- l. Costantini, G. D. Modica, J. C. Ahouangonou, D. C. Duma, B. Martelli, M. Galletti, M. Antonacci, D. Nehls, P. Bellavista, C. Delamarre and a. D. Cesini, "IoTwins: Toward Implementation of Distributed Digital Twins in Industry 4.0 Settings," Computers - MDPI, 2022. [CrossRef]
- L. Abdullahi S. Perinpanayagam and I. Hamidu, "A Fog Computing Based Approach Towards Improving Asset Management and Performance of Wind Turbine Plants Using Digital Twins," in 2022 27th International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC), Bristol, UK, 2022. [CrossRef]
- H. Huang and X. Xu, "EDGE COMPUTING ENHANCED DIGITAL TWINS FOR SMART MANUFACTURING," in ASME 2021 16th International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference MSEC2021, Virtual, 2021. [CrossRef]
- T. Böttjer, D. Tola, F. Kakavandi, C. R. Wewer, D. Ramanujan, C. Gomes, P. G. Larsen and A. Iosifidis, "A review of unit level digital twin applications in the manufacturing industry," CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, vol. 45, pp. 162-189, 2023. [CrossRef]
- D. McKee, "Platform Stack Architectural Framework: An Introductory Guide," Digital Twin Consortium, 2023.
- Bofill, M. Abisado, J. Villaverde and a. G. A. Sampedro, "Exploring Digital Twin-Based Fault Monitoring: Challenges and Opportunities," Sensors - MDPI, 2023. [CrossRef]
- Amazon Web Services, "What is cloud computing?," Amazon. 2023. Available online: https://aws.amazon.com/what-is-cloud-computing/ (accessed on 29 July 2023).
- Microsoft Azure, "What is Cloud Computing?," Microsoft. 2023. Available online: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-au/resources/cloud-computing-dictionary/what-is-cloud-computing (accessed on 29 July 2023).
- IBM, "What is cloud computing?," IBM. 2023. Available online: https://www.ibm.com/topics/cloud-computing (accessed on 29 July 2023).
- Microsoft Azure, "Cloud computing vs. edge computing vs. fog computing," Microsoft. 2023. Available online: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-gb/resources/cloud-computing-dictionary/what-is-edge-computing/ (accessed on 29 July 2023).
- F. P. Knebel, J. A. Wickboldt and E. P. d. Freitas, "A Cloud-Fog Computing Architecture for Real-Time Digital Twins," Journal of Internet Services and Applications, 2021. [CrossRef]
- G. Peralta, M. Iglesias-Urkia, M. Barcelo, R. Gomez, A. Moran and J. Bilbao, "Fog computing based efficient IoT scheme for the Industry 4.0," in 2017 IEEE International Workshop of Electronics, Control, Measurement, Signals and their Application to Mechatronics (ECMSM), Donostia, Spain, 2017.
- G. Shao, "Use Case Scenarios for Digital Twin Implementation Based on ISO 23247," National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2021.
- V. Damjanovic-Behrendt and W. Behrendt, "An open source approach to the design and implementation of Digital Twins for Smart Manufacturing," International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, pp. 366-384, 2019. [CrossRef]
- Docker, "Docker," [Online]. Available: Docker. [Accessed 12 August 2023].
- V. Kamath J. Morgan and M. I. Ali, "Industrial IoT and Digital Twins for a Smart Factory : An open source toolkit for application design and benchmarking," in 2020 Global Internet of Things Summit (GIoTS), Dublin, Ireland, 2020.
- N. Ouahabi, A. Chebak, M. Zegrari, O. Kamach and M. Berquedich, "A Distributed Digital Twin Architecture for Shop Floor Monitoring Based on Edge Cloud Collaboration," in 2021 Third International Conference on Transportation and Smart Technologies (TST), Tangier, Morroco, 2021.
- B. Tekinerdogan and C. Verdouw, "Systems Architecture Design Pattern Catalog for Developing Digital Twins," Sensors, 2020. [CrossRef]
- S. Sundaram and A. Zeid, "Smart Prognostics and Health Management (SPHM) in Smart Manufacturing: An Interoperable Framework," MDPI Sensors 2021. [CrossRef]
- M. Picone and M. M. a. F. Zambonelli, "A Flexible and Modular Architecture for Edge Digital Twin: Implementation and Evaluation," ACM Transactions on Internet of Things, 2023. [CrossRef]
- A. Villalonga, E. Negri, L. Fumagalli, M. Macchi, F. Castaño and R. Haber. "Local Decision Making based on Distributed Digital Twin Framework. International Federation of Automatic COntrol 2020, 53, 10568–10573. [CrossRef]
- E. Ferko, A. Bucaioni, P. Pelliccione and M. Behnam, "Standardisation in Digital Twin Architectures in Manufacturing," in 2023 IEEE 20th International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA), L'Aquila, Italy, 2023. [CrossRef]
- S. V. Nath and P. V. Schalkwyk, Building Industrial Digital Twins, Packt Publishing, 2021.
- EDP Group, "EDP Open Data," 2022.
- Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, "How Do Wind Turbines Work?," US Department of Energy, [Online]. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/how-do-wind-turbines-work (accessed on 17 September 2023).













| Component | Inputs | Output | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gearbox |
Nacelle Temperature Rotor Speed Active Power Ambient Temperature Gearbox oil temperature |
Gearbox Bearing Temperature |
[13] |
|
Generator |
Nacelle Temperature Active Power Generator speed Generator stator temperature |
Generator Bearing Temperature |
[13] |
| Turbine | Component | Timestamp | Failure Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| T06 | GEARBOX | 2017-10-17T08:38 | Gearbox bearings damaged |
| HYDRAULIC_GROUP | 2017-08-19T09:47 | Oil leakage in Hub | |
| T07 | GENERATOR | 2017-08-21T14:47 | Generator damaged |
| GENERATOR_BEARING | 2017-08-20T06:08 | Generator bearings damaged | |
| HYDRAULIC_GROUP | 2017-06-17T11:35 | Oil leakage in Hub | |
| HYDRAULIC_GROUP | 2017-10-19T10:11 | Oil leakage in Hub | |
| T11 | HYDRAULIC_GROUP | 2017-04-26T18:06 | error in the brake circuit |
| HYDRAULIC_GROUP | 2017-09-12T15 | error in the brake circuit |
| Turbine | Year | MLR | LSTM | XGBoost | ||||||
| RMSE | MAE | R2-Score | RMSE | MAE | R2-Score | RMSE | MAE | R2-Score | ||
| T01 | 2016 (Gear) | 0.93 | 0.68 | 0.97 | 1.15 | 0.86 | 0.99 | 0.75 | 0.53 | 0.98 |
| 2016 (Gen) | 3.91 | 3.25 | 0.90 | 3.86 | 3.10 | 0.90 | 3.98 | 3.17 | 0.90 | |
| 2017 (Gear) | 1.01 | 0.74 | 0.97 | 0.85 | 0.64 | 0.98 | 0.79 | 0.56 | 0.98 | |
| 2017 (Gen) | 4.28 | 3.17 | 0.89 | 4.04 | 2.94 | 0.90 | 3.83 | 2.77 | 0.91 | |
| T06 | 2016 (Gear) | 0.96 | 0.72 | 0.97 | 1.21 | 0.91 | 0.99 | 0.78 | 0.56 | 0.98 |
| 2016 (Gen) | 2.99 | 2.01 | 0.92 | 3.19 | 2.26 | 0.91 | 3.36 | 2.44 | 0.90 | |
| 2017 (Gear) | 1.07 | 0.81 | 0.97 | 0.84 | 0.61 | 0.98 | 0.86 | 0.61 | 0.98 | |
| 2017 (Gen) | 3.63 | 2.26 | 0.89 | 3.89 | 2.38 | 0.85 | 3.63 | 2.2 | 0.87 | |
| T07 | 2016 (Gear) | 1.04 | 0.74 | 0.96 | 1.15 | 0.86 | 0.99 | 0.81 | 0.57 | 0.98 |
| 2016 (Gen) | 2.55 | 2.04 | 0.95 | 2.49 | 1.96 | 0.95 | 2.60 | 2.05 | 0.95 | |
| 2017 (Gear) | 1.03 | 0.76 | 0.96 | 0.86 | 0.65 | 0.97 | 0.79 | 0.56 | 0.98 | |
| 2017 (Gen) | 3.59 | 3.11 | 0.92 | 4.87 | 4.42 | 0.80 | 3.83 | 2.77 | 0.91 | |
| T11 | 2016 (Gear) | 1.16 | 0.87 | 0.96 | 1.12 | 0.80 | 0.99 | 0.86 | 0.62 | 0.98 |
| 2016 (Gen) | 3.30 | 2.61 | 0.89 | 3.45 | 2.68 | 0.88 | 3.31 | 2.62 | 0.89 | |
| 2017 (Gear) | 1.22 | 0.92 | 0.96 | 1.02 | 0.76 | 0.97 | 0.87 | 0.64 | 0.98 | |
| 2017 (Gen) | 3.75 | 2.95 | 0.90 | 3.43 | 2.82 | 0.91 | 3.46 | 2.80 | 0.90 | |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).



