Abstract
In this article, we deal with optimal preventive maintenance policies based on online condition monitoring. The failure rate function is important for maintenance decisions. Two concepts of failure are proposed and the computing method based on condition monitoring data is given. Both un-repairable and repairable equipment are taken into consideration. For repairable equipment, the degree of degradation and failure rate will decrease after maintenance. The result of the simulation shows that taking the two types of failure rate functions into account will make the expected cost rate less than the classical method. So we draw a conclusion that the two types of failure rate functions are advantageous in maintenance decisions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
B. Bergquist, P. Soderholm, Data analysis for condition-based railway infrastructure maintenance. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 31(5), 773–781 (2015)
X. Liu, J. Li, K.N. Al-Khalifa, A.S. Hamouda, D.W. Coit, E.A. Elsayed, Condition-based maintenance for continuously monitored degrading systems with multiple failure modes. IIE Trans. 45(4), 422–435 (2013)
J. Koochaki, A.C. Jos, H. Wortmann, W. Klingenberg, The influence of condition-based maintenance on workforce planning and maintenance scheduling. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51(8), 2339–2351 (2013)
P. Ashok, G. Subra, Application of statistical techniques and neural networks in condition-based maintenance. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 29(3), 439–461 (2013)
D.V. Phuc, B. Christophe, Condition-based maintenance with imperfect preventive repairs for a deteriorating production system. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 28(6), 624–633 (2012)
P. Do, A. Voisin, E. Levrat, A.B. Iung, A Proactive condition-based maintenance strategy with both perfect and imperfect maintenance actions. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 133(1), 22–32 (2015)
N.J.M. Van, A survey of the application of gamma processes in maintenance. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94(1), 2–21 (2009)
Y. Peng, M. Dong, M.J. Zuo, Current status of machine prognostics in condition-based maintenance: a review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 50(1), 297–313 (2010)
W. Wang, Overview of a semi-stochastic filtering approach for residual life estimation with applications in condition based maintenance. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. O J. Risk Reliab. 255(2), 185–197 (2011)
E. Deloux, B. Castanier, Condition-based maintenance approaches for deteriorating system evolving in a stressful environment. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. O J. Risk Reliab. 222(4), 613–622 (2008)
N. Gebraeel, J. Pan, Prognostic degradation models for computing and updating residual life distributions in a time-varying environment. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 54(4), 539–550 (2008)
I.T. Yu, C.D. Fuh, Estimation of time to hard failure distributions using a three-stage method. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 59(2), 405–412 (2010)
L. Axel, Joint modeling of degradation and failure time data. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 193(5), 1693–1706 (2009)
M.J. Zuo, R.Y. Jiang, R.C.M. Yam, Approaches for reliability modeling of continuous-state devices. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 48(1), 9–18 (1999)
D. Lin, M.J. Zuo, R.C.M. Yam, General sequential imperfect preventive maintenance models. Int. J. Reliab. Qual. Saf. Eng. 7(3), 253–266 (2000)
D. Lin, M.J. Zuo, R.C.M. Yam, Sequential imperfect preventive maintenance models with two categories of failure modes. Naval Res. Logist. 48, 172–183 (2001)
S. Elferik, D.M. Ben, Age-based hybrid model for imperfect preventive maintenance. IIE Trans. 38(4), 365–375 (2006)
X.J. Zhou, L.F. Xi, A dynamic opportunistic maintenance policy for continuously monitored systems. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 12(3), 294–305 (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Figure 6 shows the procedure to compute the expected cost rate using Monte Carlo method. In the flow chart, cr represents the cost rate, cr = tcost/ttime.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yao, Y., Meng, C., Wang, C. et al. Preventive Maintenance Policies for Equipment Under Condition Monitoring Based on Two Types of Failure Rate. J Fail. Anal. and Preven. 16, 457–466 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-016-0111-4
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-016-0111-4