IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v205y2021ics0951832020307262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Early life failures and services of industrial asset fleets

Author

Listed:
  • Dourado, Arinan
  • Viana, Felipe A.C.

Abstract

In the service market targeting fleets of industrial assets (e.g., aircraft, jet engines, wind turbines, etc.), original equipment manufacturers and service providers compete with one another through offers covering day-to-day service as well as major maintenance and repairs over. Since decision-making is highly guided by reliability models, it is safe to say that services profitability dependents on the ability to understand the complex stochastic interactions between operating conditions and component capability. Unfortunately, factors such as aggressive mission mixes introduced by operators, exposure to a harsh environment, inadequate maintenance, and problems with mass production can lead to large discrepancies between predicted and observed useful lives. This paper focuses on the quantification of the infant mortality impact on fleets of industrial assets. A numerical experiment is used to study how the number of failure observations and fleet size impacts the modeling of fleet reliability. Dynamic Bayesian networks implementing physics-based models are used to model fleet unreliability considering the effects of bad batch of materials.The results demonstrate that material capability, penetration of bad batch of material in the fleet, and fleet size drastically influence the model accuracy. Therefore, small fleet operators, which naturally observe a lownumber of failures, have to deal with larger uncertainties when quantifying infant mortality. This negatively impacts their ability to allocate resources such as inventory, labor, and account for the loss of productivity while servicing their fleet. With large fleet operators, on the other hand, large number of failure observations can cause high financial burden. Nevertheless, it also allows for reduced uncertainty in building/updating the reliability models, which can help their ability to forecast future failures and make provisions for service and maintenance. Finally, the results also show that measures such as recommissioning of the fleet and inspection campaigns can mitigate the effects of fleet-wide early life problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Dourado, Arinan & Viana, Felipe A.C., 2021. "Early life failures and services of industrial asset fleets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:205:y:2021:i:c:s0951832020307262
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2020.107225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832020307262
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2020.107225?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. An, Dawn & Kim, Nam H. & Choi, Joo-Ho, 2015. "Practical options for selecting data-driven or physics-based prognostics algorithms with reviews," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 223-236.
    2. Alaswad, Suzan & Xiang, Yisha, 2017. "A review on condition-based maintenance optimization models for stochastically deteriorating system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 54-63.
    3. Li, Xiang & Ding, Qian & Sun, Jian-Qiao, 2018. "Remaining useful life estimation in prognostics using deep convolution neural networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Al-Dahidi, Sameer & Di Maio, Francesco & Baraldi, Piero & Zio, Enrico, 2016. "Remaining useful life estimation in heterogeneous fleets working under variable operating conditions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 109-124.
    5. Schneider, Kellie & Richard Cassady, C., 2015. "Evaluation and comparison of alternative fleet-level selective maintenance models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 178-187.
    6. Zhao, Zeqi & Bin Liang, & Wang, Xueqian & Lu, Weining, 2017. "Remaining useful life prediction of aircraft engine based on degradation pattern learning," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 74-83.
    7. Iamsumang, Chonlagarn & Mosleh, Ali & Modarres, Mohammad, 2018. "Monitoring and learning algorithms for dynamic hybrid Bayesian network in on-line system health management applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 118-129.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cavalcante, Cristiano A.V. & Lopes, Rodrigo S. & Scarf, Philip A., 2021. "Inspection and replacement policy with a fixed periodic schedule," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    2. Zhang, Qin & Liu, Yu & Xiahou, Tangfan & Huang, Hong-Zhong, 2023. "A heuristic maintenance scheduling framework for a military aircraft fleet under limited maintenance capacities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. González-Muñiz, Ana & Díaz, Ignacio & Cuadrado, Abel A. & García-Pérez, Diego, 2022. "Health indicator for machine condition monitoring built in the latent space of a deep autoencoder," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    2. Lee, Juseong & Mitici, Mihaela, 2022. "Multi-objective design of aircraft maintenance using Gaussian process learning and adaptive sampling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PA).
    3. Xia, Tangbin & Dong, Yifan & Xiao, Lei & Du, Shichang & Pan, Ershun & Xi, Lifeng, 2018. "Recent advances in prognostics and health management for advanced manufacturing paradigms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 255-268.
    4. Zhuang, Jichao & Jia, Minping & Ding, Yifei & Ding, Peng, 2021. "Temporal convolution-based transferable cross-domain adaptation approach for remaining useful life estimation under variable failure behaviors," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    5. Costa, Nahuel & Sánchez, Luciano, 2022. "Variational encoding approach for interpretable assessment of remaining useful life estimation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    6. Zhu, Yongmeng & Wu, Jiechang & Wu, Jun & Liu, Shuyong, 2022. "Dimensionality reduce-based for remaining useful life prediction of machining tools with multisensor fusion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    7. Bae, Jinwoo & Xi, Zhimin, 2022. "Learning of physical health timestep using the LSTM network for remaining useful life estimation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    8. Zang, Yu & Shangguan, Wei & Cai, Baigen & Wang, Huasheng & Pecht, Michael. G., 2021. "Hybrid remaining useful life prediction method. A case study on railway D-cables," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    9. Vega, Manuel A. & Hu, Zhen & Todd, Michael D., 2020. "Optimal maintenance decisions for deteriorating quoin blocks in miter gates subject to uncertainty in the condition rating protocol," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    10. Xu, Zhaoyi & Saleh, Joseph Homer, 2021. "Machine learning for reliability engineering and safety applications: Review of current status and future opportunities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    11. Youdao Wang & Yifan Zhao, 2022. "Multi-Scale Remaining Useful Life Prediction Using Long Short-Term Memory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    12. Zhang, Wei & Li, Xiang & Ma, Hui & Luo, Zhong & Li, Xu, 2021. "Transfer learning using deep representation regularization in remaining useful life prediction across operating conditions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    13. Theissler, Andreas & Pérez-Velázquez, Judith & Kettelgerdes, Marcel & Elger, Gordon, 2021. "Predictive maintenance enabled by machine learning: Use cases and challenges in the automotive industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    14. Chang, Yang & Fang, Huajing, 2019. "A hybrid prognostic method for system degradation based on particle filter and relevance vector machine," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 51-63.
    15. Li, Xiang & Zhang, Wei & Ding, Qian, 2019. "Deep learning-based remaining useful life estimation of bearings using multi-scale feature extraction," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 208-218.
    16. Feng, Qiang & Bi, Xiong & Zhao, Xiujie & Chen, Yiran & Sun, Bo, 2017. "Heuristic hybrid game approach for fleet condition-based maintenance planning," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 166-176.
    17. Yuanju Qu & Zengtao Hou, 2022. "Degradation principle of machines influenced by maintenance," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1521-1530, June.
    18. Lee, Juseong & Mitici, Mihaela, 2023. "Deep reinforcement learning for predictive aircraft maintenance using probabilistic Remaining-Useful-Life prognostics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    19. Chen, Zhen & Li, Yaping & Xia, Tangbin & Pan, Ershun, 2019. "Hidden Markov model with auto-correlated observations for remaining useful life prediction and optimal maintenance policy," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 123-136.
    20. Aizpurua, J.I. & Catterson, V.M. & Papadopoulos, Y. & Chiacchio, F. & D'Urso, D., 2017. "Supporting group maintenance through prognostics-enhanced dynamic dependability prediction," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 171-188.

    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:eee:reensy:v:205:y:2021:i:c:s0951832020307262. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    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.