Submitted:
29 May 2025
Posted:
29 May 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
- A comprehensive data collection framework for predictive maintenance applications was designed and deployed for the container terminal at the Port of Limassol, Cyprus. This was achieved by installing multiple sensors on straddle carriers and other CHE and deploying several frameworks to gather real-time operational data. The collected data was then subjected to extensive preprocessing, through cleaning and structuring, to ensure data integrity and usability for predictive maintenance applications.
- Five different ML models were developed and tested for predicting faults related to over-temperature in CHE: artificial neural networks (ANNs), decision trees (DTs), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and Gaussian naive bayes (GNB). Additionally, a statistical model was designed and specifically tailored for anomaly detection in the hydraulic system of straddle carriers.
- Extensive experiments were performed to validate the proposed models, ensuring their effectiveness in real-world predictive maintenance scenarios. The experimental results provided insights into the reliability and accuracy of the different models, demonstrating their capability to detect and predict faults for the considered applications.
2. Literature Review
3. Proposed Methodology for PdM
3.1. Data Life Cycle
- Generation. This phase occurs naturally and organically in any business with a certain degree of digitisation, as data generation is continuously growing as more computerised systems, such as new machinery, etc., are added. In the proposed work, operational data is generated by PLCs installed on each SC.
- Capture. This stage involves the incorporation of existing data into a data analytics platform through the reading of industrial and computer communication protocols. In case the equipment is not able to transfer the data, specific equipment that helps to capture the information is integrated. In this study, data capture is conducted via Node-RED custom flows running on wired IoT gateways installed on each SC. These flows acquire data directly from the PLCs and sensors, and transmit it using the MQTT protocol to an edge server for further processing.
- Processing. In this stage of the data life cycle, data cleaning is performed (duplicates are removed, empty or invalid fields are eliminated, default values are filled in, timestamp synchronization, and formatting.), calibration (when working with machine data from industrial systems such as PLCs, data are obtained without units and often in binary scales) and formatting.
- Storage. The processed information is saved in a reliable, accessible, and scalable system so that it can be used by the rest of the data life cycle components, while guaranteeing that the data follows FAIR principles. In this study, the time-series data is stored in InfluxDB. In parallel, machine health records, fault logs, and maintenance activities are recorded and stored in LIMBLE, a private cloud-based computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) used at the EUROGATE terminal.
- Analysis. At this stage, advanced processing operations that allow additional information to be extracted from the stored data are performed. This includes calculation of aggregations, inference of statistics, determination of meaningful data blocks, and association of inferred data with blocks. In this work, both InfluxDB and LIMBLE serve as data sources for further analytics, including the development and execution of machine learning models for predictive maintenance. Analysis includes statistical aggregations, event detection, correlation inference, and fault classification.
- Visualization. Data visualization helps to present results in a clear and simple way that a human can easily understand and interpret. In many cases, a graph can represent tens of gigabytes of information in a single image. It is at this stage of the data life cycle that aesthetics needs to be considered, along with functionality, and human visual perception, to convey the results of data analysis.
3.2. AI/ML Models Lifecycle
- Problem Definition and Data acquisition/Collection: Port experts must define clear objectives based on known outputs. Data acquisition focuses on collecting data relevant to the determined goals.
-
Data Preprocessing:
- -
- Data Exploration: Understanding port related data distributions and relationships between variables as well as any possible bias inherent to the data life-cycle.
- -
- Data Cleaning: Remove noise and correct errors to improve data quality.
- -
- Feature Engineering: Transform raw data into features that enhance predictive power.
- -
- Data Splitting: Divide data into training, validation, and test sets for unbiased evaluation.
- Model Selection and Training: Choose appropriate classification or regression algorithms for the port challenges. Training involves hyperparameter tuning and validation to ensure robustness, often through cross-validation techniques.
- Model Evaluation: Use performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score to assess the expected model associated with the container terminal needs.
- Deployment: Integrate the model into existing systems while considering scalability and efficiency. Implement feedback mechanisms to refine the model post-deployment.
- Monitoring and Maintenance: Monitor model performance continuously and address model drift by retraining when necessary. Overcome operational challenges to maintain the effectiveness of ML systems.
- Problem Definition: Objectives often center around discovering inherent data structures.
- Model Selection: Involves choosing algorithms like clustering, autoencoders, statistical methods, or dimensionality reduction.
- Evaluation: Relies on metrics such as silhouette scores, cluster validity indices, or qualitative assessments.
- Monitoring: Emphasizes detecting shifts in data patterns rather than predictive accuracy.
3.3. Predictive Maintenance Architecture
4. Case Study 1: Hydraulic Anomalies on Straddle Carriers
4.1. Background
4.2. Methodology
4.3. Experimental Setting and Results
5. Case Study 2: Detecting Overtemperature Faults in Straddle Carriers
5.1. Background
5.2. Methodology
- Artificial Neural Network (ANN): The ANN is capable of capturing complex and non-linear relationships in the data. It consists of layers of neurons, where each neuron applies a transformation to the input and passes it to the next layer.
- Decision Tree (DT): The decision tree classifier is a rule-based model that splits the dataset based on feature values to form a tree-like structure of decisions.
- Random Forest (RF): RF is an ensemble learning technique that constructs multiple decision trees and combines their outputs to improve predictive accuracy and reduce overfitting. Each tree is trained on a random subset of data and features, enhancing model robustness.
- Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost): XGBoost is a powerful, optimized gradient boosting algorithm that builds an ensemble of decision trees sequentially to minimize prediction errors. It utilizes regularization techniques to improve generalization and reduce overfitting.
- Gaussian Naive Bayes (GNB): GNB is a probabilistic classifier based on Bayes’ theorem that assumes features are conditionally independent given the class and that each feature follows a Gaussian (normal) distribution.
5.3. Experimental Setting and Results
6. Discussion
7. Conclusions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| AI | Artificial Intelligence |
| ANN | Artificial Neural Network |
| CHE | Container Handling Equipment |
| DT | Decision Tree |
| DL | Deep Learning |
| GNB | Gaussian Naive Bayes |
| LR | Logistic Regression |
| ML | Machine Learning |
| PdM | Predictive Maintenance |
| PLC | Programmable Logic Unit |
| RF | Random Forest |
| RUL | Remaining Useful Life |
| SC | Straddle Carrier |
| SHAP | SHapley Additive exPlanations |
| SVM | support Vector Machine |
| XGBoost | Extreme Gradient Boosting |
References
- Aslam, S.; Michaelides, M.P.; Herodotou, H. Optimizing Multi-Quay Combined Berth and Quay Crane Allocation Using Computational Intelligence. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2024, 12, 1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalafatelis, A.S.; Nomikos, N.; Giannopoulos, A.; Trakadas, P. A Survey on Predictive Maintenance in the Maritime Industry Using Machine and Federated Learning. Authorea Preprints 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Bakdi, A.; Kristensen, N.B.; Stakkeland, M. Multiple instance learning with random forest for event logs analysis and predictive maintenance in ship electric propulsion system. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2022, 18, 7718–7728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Global fleet capacity to bulge as more containerships are delivered in 2018, 2018. https://gcaptain.com/global-fleet-capacity-bulge-containerships-delivered-2018.
- Yaqub, M.Z.; Alsabban, A. Industry-4.0-enabled digital transformation: Prospects, instruments, challenges, and implications for business strategies. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aslam, S.; Michaelides, M.P.; Herodotou, H. Internet of ships: A survey on architectures, emerging applications, and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things journal 2020, 7, 9714–9727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aslam, S.; Herodotou, H.; Garro, E.; MartÎnez-Romero, Á.; Burgos, M.A.; Cassera, A.; Papas, G.; Dias, P.; Michaelides, M.P. Emerging IoT Applications and Architectures for Smart Maritime Container Terminals. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 9th World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT). IEEE; 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Baptista, M.; Sankararaman, S.; de Medeiros, I.P.; Nascimento Jr, C.; Prendinger, H.; Henriques, E.M. Forecasting fault events for predictive maintenance using data-driven techniques and ARMA modeling. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2018, 115, 41–53. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Z.; Ma, C.; Song, D.; Liu, Y. Deep quantum inspired neural network with application to aircraft fuel system fault diagnosis. Neurocomputing 2017, 238, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shafi, U.; Safi, A.; Shahid, A.R.; Ziauddin, S.; Saleem, M.Q. Vehicle remote health monitoring and prognostic maintenance system. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2018, 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canizo, M.; Onieva, E.; Conde, A.; Charramendieta, S.; Trujillo, S. Real-time predictive maintenance for wind turbines using Big Data frameworks. In Proceedings of the 2017 ieee international conference on prognostics and health management (icphm). IEEE; 2017; pp. 70–77. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, X.; Deng, J.; Lin, H.; Li, Z.; Wen, H. Lightweight Anomalous Detection of Hydro Turbine Operation Sound Using Fusion Network Enhanced by Load Information. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T.; Yang, H.; Wang, P.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, M. Data-driven fatigue reliability evaluation of offshore wind turbines under floating ice loading. Journal of Structural Engineering 2024, 150, 05024004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Chen, L.; Xiao, G.; Wang, P.; Gu, Y.; Lu, J. Elevator fault diagnosis based on digital twin and PINNs-e-RGCN. Scientific Reports 2024, 14, 30713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jimenez, V.J.; Bouhmala, N.; Gausdal, A.H. Developing a predictive maintenance model for vessel machinery. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science 2020, 5, 358–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raptodimos, Y.; Lazakis, I. Application of NARX neural network for predicting marine engine performance parameters. Ships and Offshore Structures 2020, 15, 443–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renwick, J.T.; Babson, P.E. Vibration analysis—a proven technique as a predictive maintenance tool. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications 1985, IA-21, 324–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çınar, Z.M.; Abdussalam Nuhu, A.; Zeeshan, Q.; Korhan, O.; Asmael, M.; Safaei, B. Machine learning in predictive maintenance towards sustainable smart manufacturing in industry 4.0. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, X.; Tang, T.; Tan, L.; Zhang, H. Fault detection for point machines: A review, challenges, and perspectives. In Proceedings of the Actuators. MDPI, Vol. 12; 2023; p. 391. [Google Scholar]
- Akarte, M.M.; Hemachandra, N. Predictive maintenance of air pressure system using boosting trees: A machine learning approach. In Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the Operational Research Society of India (ORSI); 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Abidi, M.H.; Mohammed, M.K.; Alkhalefah, H. Predictive Maintenance Planning for Industry 4.0 Using Machine Learning for Sustainable Manufacturing. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zonta, T.; Da Costa, C.A.; da Rosa Righi, R.; de Lima, M.J.; da Trindade, E.S.; Li, G.P. Predictive maintenance in the Industry 4.0: A systematic literature review. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2020, 150, 106889. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Long, H.; Xu, J.; Liu, R. Wind turbine gearbox failure identification with deep neural networks. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2016, 13, 1360–1368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lazakis, I.; Gkerekos, C.; Theotokatos, G. Investigating an SVM-driven, one-class approach to estimating ship systems condition. Ships and Offshore Structures 2019, 14, 432–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- aerOS Project Consortium. Pilot 4 – Predictive Maintenance in Ports. https://aeros-project.eu/pilot-4-overview/, 2023. Accessed: 2025-05-26.
- Node-Red:, 2025. https://nodered.org/.
- MQTT Broker:, 2025. https://www.hivemq.com/info/mqtt-broker/.
- InfluxDB:, 2025. https://www.influxdata.com/.
- Lundberg, S.M.; Lee, S.I. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 2017, 30. [Google Scholar]






| Confusion Matrix | Binary Classification Metrics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predicted | Metric | Value | |||
| Actual | Positive | Negative | Total | Accuracy | |
| Positive | 5 | 1 | 6 | Precision | |
| Negative | 40 | 453 | 493 | Recall (Sensitivity) | |
| Total | 45 | 454 | 499 | Specificity | |
| Feature | Average | Feature | Average |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1InverterTemperature | 0.612 | D4InverterTemperature | 0.184 |
| D1MotorTemperature | 0.468 | Hoist2SpeedReference | 0.179 |
| D2InverterTemperature | 0.448 | Hoist1SpeedReference | 0.179 |
| H2InverterTemperature | 0.341 | D3MotorTemperature | 0.179 |
| D3InverterTemperature | 0.229 | H2MotorTemperature | 0.176 |
| H1MotorTemperature | 0.203 | D2MotorTemperature | 0.158 |
| Hoist2TorqueReference | 0.200 | EngineErrorSlot1 | 0.158 |
| AmbientTemperature | 0.198 | EngineErrorSlot5 | 0.154 |
| D1InverterTemperature | 0.195 | EngineTemperature | 0.144 |
| Hoist1TorqueReference | 0.194 | D4MotorTemperature | 0.136 |
| EngineErrorSlot3 | 0.193 |
| Model | Parameter | Options | Optimal |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANN | batch_size | 16, 32, 64 | 64 |
| epochs | 10, 20, 50 | 50 | |
| model_dropout_rate | 0.0, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5 | 0.0 | |
| model_neurons | 32, 64, 128 | 128 | |
| model_optimizer | adam, sgd | adam | |
| validation_split | 0.1, 0.2 | 0.1 | |
| DT | ccp_alpha | 0.1, .01, .001 | 0.001 |
| criterion | gini, entropy | gini | |
| max_depth | None, 10, 20, 30 | None | |
| min_samples_leaf | 1, 5, 10 | 1 | |
| min_samples_split | 2, 10, 20 | 2 | |
| splitter | best, random | random | |
| RF | criterion | gini, entropy | entropy |
| max_depth | None, 10, 20, 30 | None | |
| max_features | 10, 20, 30, 40 | 10 | |
| min_samples_leaf | 1, 5, 10 | 1 | |
| min_samples_split | 2, 10, 20 | 2 | |
| n_estimators | 100, 200, 300 | 100 | |
| XGBoost | colsample_bytree | 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 | 0.6 |
| learning_rate | 0.01, 0.1, 0.2 | 0.1 | |
| max_depth | 3, 6, 9 | 3 | |
| n_estimators | 100, 200, 300 | 300 | |
| subsample | 0.6, 0.8, 1.0 | 0.6 | |
| GNB | var_smoothing | 1.0 |
| Model | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F1 Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANN | 0.9873 | 0.975 | 0.990 | 0.980 |
| DT | 0.9441 | 0.965 | 0.885 | 0.915 |
| RF | 0.9532 | 0.970 | 0.900 | 0.930 |
| XGBoost | 0.9532 | 0.970 | 0.900 | 0.930 |
| GNB | 0.9478 | 0.970 | 0.890 | 0.925 |
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. |
© 2025 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).