A generalized three-type lifetime probabilistic models-based hybrid maintenance policy with a practical switcher for time-based preventive maintenance and condition-based maintenance
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December, 2019
A generalized three-type lifetime probabilistic models-based hybrid maintenance policy with a practical switcher for time-based preventive maintenance and condition-based maintenance
This paper proposes a generalized hybrid maintenance policy for maintenance scheduling with the help of both time-based maintenance and condition-based maintenance techniques, in which three-type product lifetime probabilistic models are utilized. A dispersion of lifetime estimates-based switcher is proposed to recommend the choice of time-based maintenance or condition-based predictive maintenance schedules in a real-time manner. Within the condition-based predictive maintenance policy, which is a part of the hybrid maintenance policy, a novel weighted average of the maintenance schedules is proposed to recommend maintenance acts, which are estimated based on two types of product lifetime probabilistic models namely type-II and type-III lifetime probabilistic models. The hybrid maintenance policy includes the classical time-based maintenance policy, the traditional condition-based predictive maintenance policy, and the proposed condition-based predictive maintenance policy as special cases. An extensive numerical investigation for the stochastic linear degradation model verifies the effectiveness of the proposed hybrid maintenance policy, highlighting the existence of a special space among time-based maintenance and condition-based predictive maintenance polices, which provides even better maintenance performance than a solely condition-based predictive maintenance policy.
AlaswadSXiangY. A review on condition-based maintenance optimization models for stochastically deteriorating system. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2017; 157: 54–63.
2.
Ayo-ImoruRMCilliersAC. A survey of the state of condition-based maintenance (CBM) in the nuclear power industry. Ann Nucl Energy2018; 122: 177–188.
3.
GaoXBarabadyJMarkesetT. An approach for prediction of petroleum production facility performance considering arctic influence factors. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2010; 95: 837–846.
4.
NakagawaT. Sequential imperfect preventive maintenance. IEEE Trans Reliab1988; 37: 295–298.
5.
YouMYLiHMengG. Control-limit preventive maintenance policies for components subject to imperfect preventive maintenance and variable operational conditions. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2011; 96: 590–598.
6.
YouMYLiuFWangW, et al.Statistically planned and individually improved predictive maintenance management for continuously monitored degrading systems. IEEE Trans Reliab2010; 59: 744–753.
7.
YouMYLiLMengG, et al.Cost-effective updated sequential predictive maintenance policy for continuously monitored degrading systems. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng2010; 7: 257–265.
YouMYLiLMengG, et al.Two-zone proportional hazard model for equipment remaining useful life prediction. J Manuf Sci Eng Trans ASME2010; 132: 041008(1–6).
10.
SikorskaJZHodkiewiczMMaL. Prognostic modeling options for remaining useful life estimation by industry. Mech Syst Signal Process2011; 25: 1803–1836.
11.
SiXSWangWHuCH, et al.A Wiener-process-based degradation model with a recursive filter algorithm for remaining useful life estimation. Mech Syst Signal Process2013; 35: 219–237.
12.
YouMYGuangM. A framework of similarity-based residual life prediction approaches using degradation histories with failure, preventive maintenance, and suspension events. IEEE Trans Reliab2013; 62: 127–135.
13.
SiXSWangWHuCH, et al.Remaining useful life estimation based on a nonlinear diffusion degradation process. IEEE Trans Reliab2012; 61: 50–67.
14.
GebraeelNZ. Sensory-updated residual life distributions for components with exponential degradation patterns. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng2006; 3: 382–392.
15.
GebraeelNZElwanyAPanJ. Residual life prediction in the absence of prior degradation knowledge. IEEE Trans Reliab2009; 58: 106–116.
16.
ZioEMaioFDStasiM. A data-driven approach for predicting failure scenarios in nuclear systems. Ann Nucl Energy2010; 37: 482–491.
17.
GrallADieulleLBerenguerC, et al.Continuous time predictive maintenance scheduling for a deteriorating system. IEEE Trans Reliab2002; 51: 141–150.
18.
BaruahPChinnamRB. HMMs for diagnostics and prognostics in machining processes. Int J Prod Res2015; 43: 1275–1293.
19.
ZhouXXiLLeeJ. Reliability-centered predictive maintenance scheduling for a continuously monitored system subject to degradation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2007; 92: 530–534.
20.
GarciaMCSanz-BobiMAdel PicoJ. SIMAP: intelligent system for predictive maintenance-Application to the health condition monitoring of a wind turbine gearbox. Comput Ind2006; 57: 552–568.
21.
YouMYMengG. A modularized framework for predictive maintenance scheduling. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk and Reliability2012; 226: 380–391.
22.
ShinJHJunHB. On condition-based maintenance policy. J Comput Des Eng2015; 2: 119–127.
JardineAKSLinDBanjevicD. A review on machinery diagnostics and prognostics implementing condition-based maintenance. Mech Syst Signal Process2006; 20: 1483–1510.
30.
LeeJWuFZhaoW, et al.Prognostics and health management design for rotary machinery systems – reviews, methodology and applications. Mech Syst Signal Process2014; 42: 314–334.
31.
PengYDongMZuoMJ. Current status of machine prognostics in condition-based maintenance: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2010; 50: 297–313.
32.
AhmadRKamaruddinS. An overview of time-based and condition-based maintenance in industrial application. Comput Ind Eng2012; 63: 135–149.
33.
JongeBdTeunterRTingaT. The influence of practical factors on the benefits of condition-based maintenance over time-based maintenance. Rel Eng Syst Saf2013; 158: 21–30.
34.
KhanSYairi. A review on the application of deep learning in system health management. Mech Syst Signal Process2015; 107: 241–265.
35.
KeizerMCAOFlapperSDPTeunterRH. Condition-based maintenance policies for systems with multiple dependent components: A review. Eur J Oper Res2017; 261: 405–420.
36.
SiXWangWHuCZhouD. Remaining useful life estimation – A review on the statistical data-driven approaches. Eur J Oper Res2011; 213: 1–14.
37.
HengAZhangSTanACCMathewJ. Rotating machinery prognostics: State of the art, challenges and opportunities. Mech Syst Signal Process2009; 23: 724–739.
KanMSTanACCMathewJ. A review on prognostic techniques for non-stationary and non-linear rotating systems. Mech Syst Signal Process2015; 62-63: 62–63.
40.
KandukuriSTKlausenAKarimiHRRobbersmyr. A review of diagnostics and prognostics of low-speed machinery towards wind turbine farm-level health management. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev2016; 53: 697–708.
41.
TahanMTsoutsanisEMuhammadMKarimAA. Performance-based health monitoring, diagnostics and prognostics for condition-based maintenance of gas turbines: A review. Appl Energy2017; 198: 122–144.
42.
ZhangJLeeJ. A review on prognostics and health monitoring of Li-ion battery. J Power Sources2011; 196: 6007–6014.
43.
FariaHDJrCostaJGSOlivasJLM. A review of monitoring methods for predictive maintenance of electric power transformers based on dissolved gas analysis. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev2015; 46: 201–209.
44.
LuSTuYCLuH. Predictive condition-based maintenance for continuously degrading systems. Qual Reliab Eng Int2007; 23: 71–81.
45.
Meeker W and Escobar LA. Statistical methods for reliability data. New York: Wiley, 1998.
46.
CoxDR. Regression models and life-tables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc, Ser B1972; 34: 187–220.
47.
Gu C, He Y, Han X, et al. Product quality oriented predictive maintenance strategy for manufacturing systems. In: 8th IEEE prognostics and system health management conference, PHM-Harbin, China, 2017.
48.
HorenbeekAVPintelonL. A dynamic predictive maintenance policy for complex multi-component systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2013; 120: 39–50.
49.
Li C, Chen C and Li B. A predictive maintenance method of series-parallel system based on condition monitoring. In: Proceedings of 2016 IEEE advanced information management, communications, electronic and automation control conference, Xi'an, China, 3-5 Oct 2016, pp. 358–361.
50.
HuyngKTBarrosABerenguerC. Multi-level decision-making for the predictive maintenance of k-out-of-n: F deteriorating systems. IEEE Trans Reliab2015; 64: 94–117.
51.
YouMYMengG. A predictive maintenance scheduling utilizing residual life prediction information. Proc IMechE, Part E: J Process Mechanical Engineering2013; 227: 185–197.
52.
CamciF. System maintenance scheduling with prognostics information using genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Reliab2009; 58: 539–552.
LinDZuoMJKolarikWJ. Sequential imperfect preventive maintenance models with two categories of failure modes. Nav Res Logist2001; 48: 172–183.
55.
GebraeelNLawleyM. Residual-life distribution from component degradation signals: a Bayesian approach. IIE Trans2005; 37: 543–557.
56.
YouMYLiuFMengG. Benefits from condition monitoring techniques: a case study on maintenance scheduling of ball grid array solder joints. Proc IMechE, Part E: J Process Mechanical Engineering2011; 225: 205–215.
57.
KimYSKolarikWJ. Real-time conditional reliability prediction from on-line tool performance data. Int J Prod Res1992; 30: 1831–1844.
58.
SwindemanaRWSwindemanbMJ. A comparison of creep models for nickel base alloy for advanced energy systems. Int J Press Vessels Pip2008; 85: 72–79.
59.
KaiserKAGebraeelN. Predictive maintenance management using sensor-based degradation models. IEEE Trans Syst Man cybern A, Syst Humans2009; 39: 840–849.
