4.7 Article

Preventive maintenance for heterogeneous industrial vehicles with incomplete usage data

期刊

COMPUTERS IN INDUSTRY
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.compind.2021.103468

关键词

Preventive maintenance; Industrial vehicles; Fleet management; Machine learning; Classification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper examines an industrial case study on scheduling maintenance operations of a large fleet of construction vehicles, using data-driven solutions based on machine learning techniques. It shows that machine learning models can effectively predict maintenance needs even for vehicles with limited historical data, by identifying similar usage trends from other vehicles in the fleet.
Large fleets of industrial and construction vehicles require periodic maintenance activities. Scheduling these operations is potentially challenging because the optimal timeline depends on the vehicle charac-teristics and usage. This paper studies a real industrial case study, where a company providing telematics services supports fleet managers in scheduling maintenance operations of about 2000 construction vehi-cles of various types. The heterogeneity of the fleet and the availability of historical data fosters the use of data-driven solutions based on machine learning techniques. The paper addresses the learning of per-vehicle predictors aimed at forecasting the next-day utilisation level and the remaining time until the next maintenance. We explore the performance of both linear and non-liner models, showing that machine learning models are able to capture the underlying trends describing non-stationary vehicle usage patterns. We also explicitly consider the lack of data for vehicles that have been recently added to the fleet. Results show that the availability of even a limited portion of past utilisation levels enables the identification of vehicles with similar usage trends and the opportunistic reuse of their historical data.& nbsp; (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据