IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v238y2024i2p233-246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyze periodic inspection and replacement policy of a shock and wear model with phase-type inter-shock arrival times using roots method

Author

Listed:
  • Miaomiao Yu
  • Yinghui Tang

Abstract

We consider a shock and wear model in which the inter-shock arrival process is a phase-type (PH) renewal process, and the system’s lifetime is generally distributed. The system has two competing failure modes. One failure mode is due to random shocks, which cause failure by overloading the system. The other failure mode is owning to wear-out failures, which usually happen after the system has run for many cycles. System failure is not self-announcing and remains undiscovered unless an inspection is performed. The intervals between successive inspections are identical and equal to T time units. If a system failure is detected, the corrective repair or replacement is conducted immediately. If the system is found working at inspection, preventive maintenance will be carried out to prolong its useful life. Furthermore, to model the occurrence of events with an underlying monotonic trend, the extended geometric process (EGP) is employed to account for the impact of different types of failures on the system’s degradation. Moreover, for establishing the cost rate function in our model, the counting process generated from a PH renewal shock process is studied in detail using the roots method and formula for calculating residues. Based on these results, the survival function and other characteristics of the system are further investigated. Finally, numerical examples that determine the optimal inspection period T * and the optimal replacement policy N * , which minimizes the long-run average cost rate, are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Miaomiao Yu & Yinghui Tang, 2024. "Analyze periodic inspection and replacement policy of a shock and wear model with phase-type inter-shock arrival times using roots method," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 238(2), pages 233-246, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:238:y:2024:i:2:p:233-246
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X221151094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X221151094
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X221151094?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:238:y:2024:i:2:p:233-246. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.