4.7 Article

Preventive maintenance for heterogeneous parallel systems with two failure modes

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2021.108310

关键词

Delay-time concept; Inspection; Maintenance; Multiple failure modes; Parallel system

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71971176, 72071005, 71725001, 71910107002]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [JBK2103010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research discusses the optimal maintenance policies considering multiple failure modes in parallel systems and evaluates their applications through simulation experiments. The findings provide valuable insights for choosing the best policy.
The parallel structure in the reliability engineering is widely used in many industrial systems such as power generation systems, pump systems, production systems and computing systems. Designing the optimal maintenance policies for these parallel systems can minimize the operation cost while achieving a satisfying system availability. Previous studies have studied various maintenance optimization for parallel systems. However, little research has considered the multiple failure modes that widely exist in many real industrial systems. This research considers a parallel system that consists of heterogeneous components subject to two types of competing failures: a one-stage catastrophic failure and a two-stage delay-time failure. Inspections are conducted periodically to identify the state of each component. Three maintenance policies are proposed in this research. To find the optimal inspection interval, we analyze the renewal process of the system to minimize the long-term expected cost per unit time. A simulation procedure is proposed to evaluate the long-term expected cost per unit time. Numerical experiments are carried out to illustrate the applications of the proposed maintenance policies. The discussion provides useful insights on choosing the best policy under different system performance requirements.

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