Supporting group maintenance through prognostics-enhanced dynamic dependability prediction

Condition-based maintenance strategies adapt maintenance planning through the integration of online condition monitoring of assets. The accuracy and cost-effectiveness of these strategies can be improved by integrating prognostics predictions and grouping maintenance actions respectively. In complex industrial systems, however, effective condition-based maintenance is intricate. Such systems are comprised of repairable assets which can fail in different ways, with various effects, and typically governed by dynamics which include time-dependent and conditional events. In this context, system reliability prediction is complex and effective maintenance planning is virtually impossible prior to system deployment and hard even in the case of condition-based maintenance. Addressing these issues, this paper presents an online system maintenance method that takes into account the system dynamics. The method employs an online predictive diagnosis algorithm to distinguish between critical and non-critical assets. A prognostics-updated method for predicting the system health is then employed to yield well-informed, more accurate, condition-based suggestions for the maintenance of critical assets and for the group-based reactive repair of non-critical assets. The cost-effectiveness of the approach is discussed in a case study from the power industry

Validation of Simulation, With and Without Real Data

This paper gives a survey on how to validate simulation models through the application of mathematical statistics. The type of statistical test actually applied, depends on the availability of data on the real system: (i) no data, (ii) only output data, and (iii) both input and output data. In case (i), the system analysts can still experiment with the simulation model to obtain simulated data. Those experiments should be guided by the statistical theory on design of experiments (DOE); an inferior - but popular - approach is to change only one factor at a time. In case (ii), real and simulated output data may be compared through the well-known Student t statistic. In case (iii), trace-driven simulation becomes possible. Then validation, however, should not proceed as follows: make a scatter plot with real and simulated outputs, fit a line, and test whether that line has unit slope and passes through the origin. Instead, better tests are presented. Several case studies are summarized, to illustrate the three types of situations.verification;credibility;assessment;sensitivity;robustness;regression

Expert Elicitation for Reliable System Design

This paper reviews the role of expert judgement to support reliability assessments within the systems engineering design process. Generic design processes are described to give the context and a discussion is given about the nature of the reliability assessments required in the different systems engineering phases. It is argued that, as far as meeting reliability requirements is concerned, the whole design process is more akin to a statistical control process than to a straightforward statistical problem of assessing an unknown distribution. This leads to features of the expert judgement problem in the design context which are substantially different from those seen, for example, in risk assessment. In particular, the role of experts in problem structuring and in developing failure mitigation options is much more prominent, and there is a need to take into account the reliability potential for future mitigation measures downstream in the system life cycle. An overview is given of the stakeholders typically involved in large scale systems engineering design projects, and this is used to argue the need for methods that expose potential judgemental biases in order to generate analyses that can be said to provide rational consensus about uncertainties. Finally, a number of key points are developed with the aim of moving toward a framework that provides a holistic method for tracking reliability assessment through the design process.Comment: This paper commented in: [arXiv:0708.0285], [arXiv:0708.0287], [arXiv:0708.0288]. Rejoinder in [arXiv:0708.0293]. Published at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/088342306000000510 in the Statistical Science (http://www.imstat.org/sts/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org