btp stage 2 final
Post on 03-Jun-2018
227 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
1/37
Indian Institute of Technology Indore
2012-13
B-Tech Projecton
Prognosis And Maintenance Planning
For Mechanical Components
Submitted by: Guided by:Janam Shah Dr. Bhupesh K. Lad
0900305
Astha Jain
0900313
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
2/37
Objective
Predicting remaining useful life of a component by using ANN.
Developing optimal maintenance strategies in the framework
of RCM
Developing optimal maintenance strategies for multi-component system based on RUL
Developing optimal maintenance strategies for multi-
component system based on age of the components
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
3/37
Predicting Remaining Useful Life
Neural Network Training And Validation
Conversion Of Data Into Signature
Identification Of Failure Signature
Identification Of Failure Parameter
Data Collection
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
4/37
Data Collection:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
5/37
Failure Parameter:
Vibration Signals
Failure Signature:
RMS and Kurtosis
)2....23
22
21
(n1 YNYYY
Yrms
4
1
4
)1(
)(
sN
yyY
N
i i
kurtosis
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
6/37
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
RMSofBear
ingA
Data points
RMS Vs Time(Data Points)
Conversion Into Data Signature:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
7/37
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
KurtosisOfBearingA
Data points
Kurtosis Vs Time(Data Points)
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
8/37
Neural Network Training & Validation:
Network Data Manager
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
9/37
Training Window
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
10/37
Result:
So, from the above graph, we can see that our training error is comingin the range of 10-11, whereas our validation error is coming to be
equal to 10-4.
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
11/37
Reliability Centered Maintenance
RCM is defined as an approach to maintenance that combinescorrective, preventive, predictive, and design out
maintenance practices and strategies so that the equipment
functions in the required manner.
RCM incurs minimum maintenance cost.
It is a philosophy that decides on which component which
technique is to be applied.
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
12/37
RUL Based Group Maintenance
Problem Statement:
To minimize the cost of group maintenance of a machine having 5components on basis of RUL with constant MTTR.
Assumptions:
1. Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of components follow a normal
distribution.2. Components are in series, even if one fails the machine will bedown, hence downtime cost is taken constant.
3. Assembling-dissembling time of the machine is constant, if it isopened once all components can be replaced/repaired as
components are assumed to be structurally independent.4. The components which are not included in preventive groupmaintenance are correctively maintained.
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
13/37
Given:
1.Mean () and standard deviations () for all the components
2.Cost of the components (C1-C5) (Rs)3.Mean Time To Replace (MTTR1) of the components (hrs)
4.Mean Time To Assemble-Dissemble for machine (MTTR2)
(hrs)
5.Mean Time To Assemble-Dissemble for individualcomponents for corrective maintenance (MTTR3) (hrs)
6.Labour Rate (CL) (Rs/hr)
7.Downtime cost (CDC)(Rs/hr)
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
14/37
Cost calculation:
1. Preventive maintenance
2. Corrective Maintenance
3. Total Cost
CT= CPM+ CCM
)()( 2#
1
#
DCLPM CCMTTRMTTRCC
)()( 31 DCLiCM CCMTTRMTTRCC i
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
15/37
Model Window:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
16/37
Result
On simulating, we get minimum cost by preventively maintaining
components 1, 3 and 5.
Probab
ilityofoccurrence
Total Cost
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
17/37
RUL based group maintenance with
varying parameters
It is similar to the previous model only the Mean Time To
Repairs (MTTR1, MTTR2and MTTR3) are varying, i.e. they are
taken with log-normal distribution.
d l d
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
18/37
Model Window
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
19/37
Result:
Minimum cost= 1,03,351
Mean cost= 1,46,682
Optimum solution occurs by doing preventive maintenance of 1, 3 and 5
M
in.Cost
No. of trials
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
20/37
Age based group maintenance
Objective:To find optimum grouping of components (having initial age)for preventive maintenance on the basis of:
minimum cost
maximum availability
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
21/37
Given:
Cost of components (C1-C5) (Rs 5000)
Current age of components (V1-V5)
Shape parameter of all the components (1- 5)
Scale parameter of all the components (1- 5hrs)
Corrective task duration (normal distribution- and )
Preventive task duration = 8 hrs
Labour Rate (CL) (Rs/hr)
Downtime cost (CDC)(Rs/hr)
Simulation time = 1yr = 8760 hrs
Component (hrs) (hrs) (hrs)
1 2000 2 8 2
2 3000 3 12 2
3 2500 3 16 4
4 3500 2 14 3
5 1800 3 20 6
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
22/37
Assumptions:
Components are in series, even if one fails the machine will bedown, hence downtime cost is taken constant
Components follow weibull failure distribution
Scheduled time is varying for preventive maintenance, which
is from 1,2,3.....,11 months The components which are not included in preventive group
maintenance are correctively maintained
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
23/37
Model:
The Cost values, weibull parameters and maintenance parameters
are fed in the block properties of all the components in the BlockSim
software. The model window is:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
24/37
Block properties
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
25/37
Scheduled task properties are given for one of the block and for adding
other blocks to the group, a maintenance group is created and the other
blocks are assigned the same group.
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
26/37
For adding components to the group:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
27/37
Simulation Window:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
28/37
General summary result window:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
29/37
After the simulations, cost of maintenances (both correctiveand preventive) and the total cost is calculated in MS-Excel.
The cost formulas used are: Cost of preventive group maintenance:
Cost of Corrective maintenance of a component:
Total Cost of group maintenance:
)(DCLPMiPMPM
CCMTTRCnC
)]()[(DCLCMCMCM
CCMTTRCnC
CMPMT CCC
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
30/37
Excel Cost File:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
31/37
Now, taking maximum availability and minimum cost of every
possible grouping in account, here 0 means we are doing corrective
maintenance for that component and 1 represents we are
performing scheduled maintenance for that component. The finaltable will be:
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
32/37
Combination Maximum Availability Minimum Cost
0 0 0 0 0 0.971157 253285.6
1 0 0 0 0 0.970634 259143
0 1 0 0 0 0.970947 256845
0 0 1 0 0 0.971174 255618.5
0 0 0 1 0 0.970884 257779.9
0 0 0 0 1 0.971465 254694.9
1 1 0 0 0 0.97128 253124.3
1 0 1 0 0 0.971921 252201
1 0 0 1 0 0.971191 254273.2
1 0 0 0 1 0.973196 249203.3
0 1 1 0 0 0.973067 248755.9
0 1 0 1 0 0.971664 252057.7
0 1 0 0 1 0.974385 241248.9
0 0 1 1 0 0.972471 250401.7
0 0 1 0 1 0.975743 232523.60 0 0 1 1 0.973782 247590
1 1 1 0 0 0.974647 231140.2
1 1 0 1 0 0.971794 245508.5
1 1 0 0 1 0.976008 223069
1 0 1 1 0 0.974141 237251.3
1 0 1 0 1 0.978142 213981.4
1 0 0 1 1 0.975541 229783.8
0 1 1 1 0 0.975298 229607.7
0 1 1 0 1 0.978911 205676.1
0 1 0 1 1 0.97663 221441
0 0 1 1 1 0.9784 212602
1 1 1 1 0 0.97694 210976.2
1 1 1 0 1 0.981598 186883.6
1 1 0 1 1 0.979017 203149.5
1 0 1 1 1 0.9811 194006
0 1 1 1 1 0.981951 185903.8
1 1 1 1 1 0.984601 162981.9
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
33/37
Results and discussion:
After simulating, it was observed that number of preventivemaintenance decreases with increasing schedule time whereas the
number of corrective maintenance increases with it. Similar trend is
observed in the downtime costs of preventive and corrective
maintenances respectively.
Minimum Cost is achieved when all the components are collectively
prevented also the system has maximum availability at that time.
The scheduled maintenance task should be performed every month
to get the optimum result.
Min cost incurred= Rs. 1,62,981.9
Max. System availability= 98.46%
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
34/37
Conclusion & Future Scope
ANN is an accurate tool to predict remaining useful life withan error of 10-4.
RCM approach is useful for optimizing the cost during thegroup maintenance of multi-component system.
For future work, we can take some more failure parameterslike noise to predict RUL accurately.
RUL based and age based maintenance models can becombined to make it more realistic, which will help inwarranty estimation.
We can also take imperfect maintenance or crew effect oravailability of repaired equipment.
-
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
35/37
References
Refngah F. N. Ahmad, Abdullah S, Jalar A, Chua L.B, Life Assessment of a
Parabolic Spring Under Cyclic Strain Loading, European Journal ofScientific Research, Vol.28 No.3 , pp.351-363, 2009.
KainulainenPerttu, Analysis of Parabolic Leaf Spring Failure, Bachelordissertation Savonia University of Applied Sciences, 2011.
Gebraeel Nagi, Lawley Mark, Liu R, Parmeshwaran Vijay, Residual lifepredictions from vibration based degradation signals: A Neural Network
Approach, IEEE Transaction of Industrial Electronics, Vol. 51, No. 3 2004. Mahamad A K, Saon S, Hiyama T, Predicting remaining useful life of
rotating machinery based artificial neural network, Computers andMathematics with Applications, Vol.60, pp 1078-1087, 2010.
https://www.ti.arc.nasa.gov
Rommert Dekker, Wildeman Ralphe, A Review of Multi-Component
Maintenance Models with Economic Dependence, MathematicalMethods of Operations Research45:411-435, 1997.
http://www.ti.arc.nasa.gov/http://www.ti.arc.nasa.gov/ -
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
36/37
Moghaddam Kamran S & Usher John S., A new multi-objectiveoptimization model for preventive maintenance and replacementscheduling of multi-component systems, Department of IndustrialEngineering, University of Louisville, 2010.
Zhigang Tian, Youmin Zhang, and Jialin Cheng, Condition BasedMaintenance Optimization for Multi-component Systems,ConcordiaUniversity, Montreal, Quebec, H3G2W1, Canada
https://www.palisade.com
https://www.reliasoft.com
Yuo-Tern Tsai, Kuo-Shong Wang, Lin-Chang Tsai (2004) A study ofavailability-centered preventive maintenance for multi-componentsystems,Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 84, 261270.
Zhigang Tian, Tongdan Jin, Bairong Wu, Fangfang Ding (2011), Conditionbased maintenance optimization for wind power generation systemsunder continuous monitoring,Renewable Energy, 36, 5, 1502-1509.
B. Castanier, A. Grall, and C. Berenguer, (2005), A condition-basedmaintenance policy with non-periodic inspections for a two-unit seriessystem, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 87, (1), 109-12
http://www.palisade.com/http://www.reliasoft.com/http://www.reliasoft.com/http://www.palisade.com/ -
8/13/2019 BTP Stage 2 Final
37/37
Thank You
top related