IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02860252.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Condition-based maintenance with imperfect inspections for continuous degradation processes

Author

Listed:
  • Songhua Hao

    (SCU - Sichuan University [Chengdu], School of Aeronautics and Astronautics [Chengdu] - SCU - Sichuan University [Chengdu])

  • Jun Yang

    (BUAA - Beihang University, School of Reliability and Systems Engineering [Beijing] - BUAA - Beihang University)

  • Christophe Bérenguer

    (GIPSA-SAFE - GIPSA - Safe, Controlled and Monitored Systems - GIPSA-PAD - GIPSA Pôle Automatique et Diagnostic - GIPSA-lab - Grenoble Images Parole Signal Automatique - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - Grenoble INP - Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes)

Abstract

A condition-based maintenance (CBM) strategy is now recognized as an efficient approach to perform maintenance at the best time before failures so as to save lifetime cycle cost. For continuous degradation processes, a significant source of variability lies in measure- ment errors caused by imperfect inspections, and this may lead to "false positive" or "false negative" observations, and consequently to inopportune maintenance decisions. To the best of our knowledge, researches on CBM optimization with imperfect inspections remain limited for continuous degradation processes, even though the subject is of practical inter- est for the implementation of a CBM policy. Imperfect inspections are indeed imperfect but still return interesting information on the system degradation level, and making them per- fect can be expensive. Therefore, we analyze the economic performance of a maintenance policy with imperfect inspections, and compare it with the classical policy with perfect inspections to see which policy offers the best benefit in a given situation. Furthermore, a CBM policy with a two-stage inspection scheme is proposed to take benefit of mixing both perfect and imperfect inspections in the same maintenance policy. Through numerical ex- periments and a real case study, it is shown that the policy with imperfect inspections can be better than the classical one, and that the proposed policy with a two-stage inspection scheme always leads to the minimum long run maintenance cost rate.

Suggested Citation

  • Songhua Hao & Jun Yang & Christophe Bérenguer, 2020. "Condition-based maintenance with imperfect inspections for continuous degradation processes," Post-Print hal-02860252, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02860252
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apm.2020.05.013
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02860252v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02860252v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apm.2020.05.013?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dinh, Duc-Hanh & Do, Phuc & Hoang, Van-Thanh & Vo, Nhu-Thanh & Bang, Tao Quang, 2024. "A predictive maintenance policy for manufacturing systems considering degradation of health monitoring device," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    2. Zhang, Fengxia & Shen, Jingyuan & Liao, Haitao & Ma, Yizhong, 2021. "Optimal preventive maintenance policy for a system subject to two-phase imperfect inspections," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    3. Wang, Jingjing & Qiu, Qingan & Wang, Huanhuan & Lin, Cong, 2021. "Optimal condition-based preventive maintenance policy for balanced systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    4. Esposito, Nicola & Mele, Agostino & Castanier, Bruno & GIORGIO, Massimiliano, 2023. "A hybrid maintenance policy for a deteriorating unit in the presence of three forms of variability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    5. Xinlong Li & Yan Ran & Fangming Wan & Hui Yu & Genbao Zhang & Yan He, 2022. "Condition-based maintenance strategy optimization of meta-action unit considering imperfect preventive maintenance based on Wiener process," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 204-233, March.
    6. Rodrigues, Augusto J.S. & Cavalcante, Cristiano A.V. & Lee, Chi-Guhn, 2024. "A general inspection and replacement policy for protection systems subject to shocks with state dependent effect," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    7. Arismendi, Renny & Barros, Anne & Grall, Antoine, 2021. "Piecewise deterministic Markov process for condition-based maintenance models — Application to critical infrastructures with discrete-state deterioration," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Zhang, Nan & Cai, Kaiquan & Zhang, Jun & Wang, Tian, 2022. "A condition-based maintenance policy considering failure dependence and imperfect inspection for a two-component system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    9. Golmohammadi, Elnaz & Ardakan, Mostafa Abouei, 2022. "Reliability optimization problem with the mixed strategy, degrading components, and a periodic inspection and maintenance policy," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    10. Bimal Kumar Sett & Bikash Koli Dey & Biswajit Sarkar, 2020. "Autonomated Inspection Policy for Smart Factory—An Improved Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Liu, Xingchen & Sun, Qiuzhuang & Ye, Zhi-Sheng & Yildirim, Murat, 2021. "Optimal multi-type inspection policy for systems with imperfect online monitoring," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).

    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:hal:journl:hal-02860252. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.