Proceedings of the 26th Chinese Control Conference July 26-31, 2007, Zhangjiajie, Hunan, China

Modeling and Simulation of Complex Maintenance System Dynamics *

Yin Xiaohu, Wen Xisen, Qian Yanling, Yang Yongmin
Institute of Mechatronics Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, P. R. China E-mail: phenixtiger@163.com Abstract: Equipment maintenance system is naturally a complex dynamical system. The effective maintenance management must be based on the knowledge of the systems intrinsic dynamics. This paper analyzes the basic structure and elements of maintenance system for complex multi-components equipment. The maintenance system is considered as a dynamic system whose behavior is influenced by its structures feedback and interaction, and available resources. Building the dynamical model with Simulink, we show some results about the maintenance systems nonlinear dynamics, which are never given by stochastic process methods. The model can be used for understanding and determining maintenance system behaviors, towards which operational adjustments of maintenance infrastructure, precise prediction of maintenance requirements and timely supply of maintenance resources can be made in a more informed way. Key Words: Maintenance System, System Dynamics, Structure and Nonlinear, Simulation

INTRODUCTION1

In the information age, precise and efficient maintenance support has been necessary for systematic counterwork. In terms of system structure, equipment maintenance system is naturally a multi-scale system. On the scale of systems evolvement life, the change of equipment performance is continuous, while the maintenance activities stochastic and discrete. However, when the systems constitution is explored, it may deal with equipments, maintenance workers, maintenance resource etc. And on the scale of maintenance decision, three levels should be taken into account: the strategic, the tactic, and the organizational. The characteristics on different scales of maintenance system are interactive and affected with maintenance information, so that the system will exhibit complex dynamical behaviors in the equipment life cycle. In order to manage maintenance activities in more informed and rational manner, it is very important to understand the inherently complex and dynamics of the system, to evaluate the systems whole performance focusing on the maintenance information flow[1], and to catch the feedback and interaction between different scales of the system[2]. Traditionally the stochastic simulation or markov process method has been used to model the equipment maintenance system, which considers the system as probabilistic and contained several different possible states. Based on the reliability of the single component or subsystem and some assumptions of system structure, maintenance effects and equipment faults, various optimal models and/or statistical models can be built. Although this method is very flexible with the application of various probability distributions, the drawback is obvious[3]. On one hand, these assumptions have hard and fast preconditions; on the other hand, because of many complex feedbacks and delays in the system, the effect of the model and the system characters described by it
*This work is supported by Preliminary Research Foundation of National Defense.

cannot be observed and estimated. As to maintenance management, what does people care is not the single components change, but the whole systems changes, such as maintenance requirement, resource demand, equipment availability and degradation. It is necessary that we should explore and analyze maintenance system at a new angle. In system theory, it is the structure that determines the systems behavior. This paper considers the changes of the whole equipment maintenance system as complex behaviors resulting from its intrinsic feedbacks, in order to explore the effects of the feedbacks and the systems dynamics.

PROBLEM ARTICULATIONS DYNAMICS HYPOTHESIS

AND

This paper deals with the maintenance system for multi-components complex equipment. Although the events in the maintenance systems may be discrete, such as sudden unexpected failures, there are lots of continuous and interacting processes, such as degradation and repairing of machines, changes of maintenance requirements and supply of maintenance resources. So, continuous approximations can be used with dynamical simulation to model and analyze the complex equipment maintenance system. If complex equipment consists of many components, each having a different mean life and variance which are randomly distributed, then the system malfunction rate becomes essentially constant as failed parts are replaced[4]. From dynamic simulation point of view, the probabilistic nature of failures is noise. Compared with the average failure rate, when the number of independent components in the complex equipment increases, the proportion of noise becomes smaller and smaller. Therefore, the maintenance system is simplified so that the stochastic behavior of failures can be considered as the deterministic function of the average of the components population[3]. And the failure rate of the multi-components complex equipment could be approximated with exponential function. Compared to the 487

traditional methods, the fundamental difference is that its concern is the proportion of broken-down components in the whole, rather than the failure probability of each component. Failures or not depends on the level of equipment degradation and cumulative defects of components. On account of manufacture arts and crafts and wearing in use, there are some inevitable defects in equipment or its components. During the operational cycle, defects are continually stimulated to make the equipment degrade continuously. When the degradation level or the number of accumulative defects goes beyond critical value, the failure happens. With the repair of failures or instant maintenance of defects, the effect of degradation and defects could be eliminated and the performance of equipment could be restored. According to the execution time of maintenance, there are three maintenance policies: preventive maintenance (PM), condition based maintenance (CBM) and corrective maintenance (CM). PM is the maintenance work generating on the ground of determinate schedule in equipments operational cycle. PM is often performed within established time after some stated interval period, and is considered to be useful to eliminate the defects and restore equipments performance. However, the overload of equipment will speed up and exacerbate the degradation with limited PM capability. If the defects could be detected real-time, then CBM will be started. Otherwise, the accumulative defects will make failures happen and CM is required. PM and CBM dont require the stoppage of machine, but CM must be performed when the equipment is stopped. Only after the performance has been restored to stated level with CM, the equipment could be boot-strap again. With the assumptions mentioned above, if the maintenance resource is not limited, the whole equipment maintenance system can be made up of defects subsystem, failures subsystem, PM subsystem, CBM subsystem, CM subsystem and performance subsystem. Their mutual relations are described as Fig. 1 A number of defects are eliminated by PM and CBM, and the rest is accomplished by failure repairing with CM. The numbers of accumulative defects, failures and all the maintenance tasks in maintenance system determine the whole performance of the equipment. Meanwhile, the performance subsystem interacts with PM subsystem, CBM subsystem and CM subsystem and changes their maintenance requirements based on the current equipment performance.

THE MODEL AND ITS COMPONENTS

In Fig. 1, there are six subsystems involved in the whole structure representing different functions. Mapping these subsystems and depicting their relationships diagrammatically is important to gain a broad overview of the model. Fig. 1 also conveys information on the boundary and level of aggregation in the model, then the components of each subsystem and their inter-feedback relation could be depicted as Fig. 2.
CM capacity (manhours) per time Failures + correct rate + Failures subsystem + Defects + eliminating rate + CBM caacity(manhours) per time + CBM complete rate Average CBMs for eliminating per defect Average failures corrected by per CM + CM complete rate AccumulaitveFailures + Average defects required by per failure Accumulative+ defects Accumulative CBMs(manhours) + Failure + generate rate CM subsystem Required CM complete rate + + CM generate rate + + + Defects + generate rate + The effect of The effect of defects on + CBM generate rate accumulative PMs on degradation degradation + + Defects subsystem + + CBM quality + + Duration of CBM Required CBM complete rate + CBM subsystem PM capacity per time Duration of PM cycle + Required PM complete rate + PM interval period Workload PM + subsystem PM generate rate + + PM schedule Equipment degradation level The effect of degradation on the generation of PM

PM complete rate Accumulative PMs(manhours) +

CM quality

Accumulative + CMs(manhours)

The effect of degradation on defects generating

Duration of CM cycle

Maximum defects per component

Performance subsystem -

Average CMs required by per failure(manhours)

- Equipment working state(operational time)

Maximum defects in the equipment Equipment availability +

Defect detection coverage

Average CBMs (manhours) for per defects

Fig. 2

Model structure

3.1 PM Subsystem As the most often used maintenance policy, PM is the scheduled maintenance tasks with specified time intervals during the equipments operational life. Normally, the scheduled maintenance tasks per unit time and the time intervals determine the workload of PM. And these works are used to prevent the equipments degradation. But if the workload of PM cannot be completed in time, it will exacerbate the degradation to require more PMs. Moreover, the more abominable the operational environment is, the more rapidly the equipment degrades. Thus, PM tasks generation rate depends on the scheduled PMs, PM interval, equipments degradation and working strength. And if there are much more real data, the parameters of such factors will be identified. For example, in literature[1], the function of PMs generation rate and equipments degradation can be approximated with exponential function. In Fig. 1, the symbols + and - reflect the effect of such factors on PMs generation rate, completion rate and accumulative amount. So is the same symbols effect in the following sections. 3.2 Defects Subsystem The generation of defects is dependent on the equipments degradation, failures, accumulative CBMs and CMs[5]. When the degradation adds up to some threshold, defects will generate. At the same time, due to the maintenance quality, CBMs and CMs may create defects. Furthermore, failures may cause cascade fault and defects. With the data from the literature[1], we find that the relation of equipment degradation and defects generation rate can be fitted well with Gauss function, in which the defects generation rate can be described with the proportion between the defects caused by degradation at present and the rest in a whole. Defects can be eliminated by CBM and CM. If the defects can be de488

Fig. 1 Subsystem structure of maintenance system

tected instantly, CBM will start. If not, failures will happen and CM is required. When CBM and CM are completed, the defects will be cleared. 3.3 Cbm Subsystem Because CBM is triggered by the defect detection, the generation rate of CBM is relevant to defects generation rate, detection coverage, and maintenance time required for per defect. Maintenance time usually falls into following three probability distribution forms: normal distribution, suitable for mechanical or electromechanical equipment; exponential distribution, suitable for electronic equipment with built-in test capability; and log normal distribution, suitable for electronic equipment without built-in test capability[6]. In following sections, we assume that the maintenance time probability distribution of CBM and CM both follow normal distribution, and the real completion rate of CBM depends on the CBM capability (man hours) available in unit time. 3.4 Failure Subsystem If the defects cannot be detected instantly, then the accumulative defects will result in failure. So the generation rate of failures is relevant to defects generation rate, detection coverage and the maximum possible defects in per component. CM is required to repair these failures. The completion rate and quality of CM and average failures repaired by per CM will affect the repair rate of failures. 3.5 CM Subsystem After failure happens, some CM tasks will be needed to carry out. Its generation rate deals with failures generating rate and CM maintenance time required for per failures. And the available CM capability (man hours) determines the execution rate of CM. 3.6 Performance Subsystem The accumulative maintenance tasks, failures, defects together with cumulative degradation level determine the equipments availability. Moreover, the degradation is relative to accumulative defects and PM tasks to be accomplished, and the functions can be identified with practical data. For example, in [1], the effect of PM on degradation can be approximated with exponential function, and the effect of defects on degradation can be fitted well with rational fraction.

4.1 Periodic Oscillations Supposing that the duration of PM is 1 week and the PM interval is 9 weeks, 19 weeks, 24 weeks, the simulation of accumulative maintenance tasks (PM,CBM and CM) and equipment degradation is simulated showed as Fig. 3.
Cumulative PM tasks(manhours) Cumulative CBM tasks(manhours) 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 20 40 t(weeks 60 80 100 PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks

20

40 t(weeks

60

80

100

Cumulative CM tasks(manhours)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 20 40 t(weeks 60

Equipment degradation

PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks

0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0

PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks

80

100

20

40 t(weeks

60

80

100

Fig. 3 Periodic behaviors of maintenance system

Because PM is carried out periodically, its accumulative growth has a typical periodism. The growth of CBM and CM is similar to the growth of PM, but just the change of their crest values is on the small side. Moreover, the periodicity of CBM and CM is not more than PMs, and their frequency-changing increases rapidly when the PM cycle grows. On the ground that the cumulative PM tasks to be completed are the main factor which determines the equipment degradation, the periodism of degradation is well seen and matter-of-course. Obviously, these period-like behaviors stem from the periodicity of PM cycle. So finding a rational PM cycle is one of the main research objectives in modeling and analyzing of maintenance system. As shown in Fig ., we simulate and compare the effects of different PM cycles on equipment degradation and availability. The result indicates that it is adverse to the system performance when PM cycle is too long or short. For example, the longer PM cycle will sharpen the equipment degradation and result in the descent of availability.
0.2 Equipment degradation 0.15 PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks

0.1

0.05

0 0

100

200

300

400

500 t(weeks)

600

700

800

900

1000

Equipment availability(operatiional weeks)

800

600

PM cycle =10 weeks PM cycle =20 weeks PM cycle =25 weeks

DYNAMICAL BEHAVIORS ANALYSIS

400

Based on the above-mentioned assumption and analysis, we construct the dynamics model of equipment maintenance system with Simulink. Some data required for simulation are from literature [1, 3], and the results indicate that the equipment maintenance system is a complex dynamical system and has some interesting nonlinear behaviors.

200

0 0

100

200

300

400

500 t(weeks)

600

700

800

900

1000

Fig .4 Effect of PM cycle on equipment availability

4.2 Exponential-Like Growth And Adaption On account of the periodic-like behaviors mentioned above, we further analyze the system behaviors in one PM cycle. We find that, in the PM cycle, the behaviors growth or decay is similar to exponential growth or de489

cay, which is consistent with literature[1]. We consider that it is the result of positive feedbacks in maintenance system. For example, in Fig. 5 the deterioration of degradation will bring on the increase of maintenance requirements. But the completion of these requirements is subject to the constraint of maintenance capability currently, and they will further worsen the degradation without the instant accomplishment.
25 Cumulative CBM tasks(manhours) Cumulative PM tasks(manhours) PM cycle =40 weeks 20 15 10 5 0 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 t(weeks) 30 35 40 PM cycle =40 weeks

10

15

20 25 t(weeks)

30

35

40

defects is used to express the capability of condition monitoring. We simulate with the possible variations of condition monitoring capability and maximum CBM capability, and the results are showed as Fig. 7 We find that, the enhancement of condition monitoring capability can reduce the required CM tasks effectively, but have little effect on equipment degradation. Meanwhile, the enhancement of condition monitoring capability will increase CBM tasks. So the maintenance system must have enough CBM capability (more workers and more resources), which will cause the rapid increase of maintenance cost. If not, these maintenance tasks will not be completed instantly, which will bring on the decrease of equipment availability.
3 detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours Cumulative CBM tasks (manhours) 2 detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours 1

0.7 Cumulative CM tasks(manhours) PM cycle =40 weeks 0.6 Equipment degradation 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 t(weeks) 30 35 40

0.04 PM cycle =40 weeks 0.035 0.03 0.025 0.02 0.015 0.01
Equipment degradation

0 0 100 20 0 30 0 4 00 500 t(weeks) 0.025 detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours 6 00 70 0 8 00 900 1 000

0.005 0

10

15

20 25 t(weeks)

30

35

40

0 .0 2

detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours

0.015

Fig. 5 Exponential-like behaviors of growth (decay)

0 .0 1

0.005 0 100 20 0 30 0 4 00

But considering the long term behaviors of the whole maintenance system, we can see that, the periodic-like and exponential-like behaviors tend to be equilibrium and stable, and their amplitudes are changed in a limited small region. It is the negative feedbacks in system that generate these behaviors. As shown in Fig. 6 taking the defects for example, failures grow with the increase of defects and further result in the increase of CM maintenance requirements. Under the constraint of available maintenance capability, these CMs are completed gradually. Their completion repairs the failures and eliminates the defects, which will restrain the equipment degradation.
40 PM cycle =40 we eks 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 t(weeks) 600 700 800 900 1000 Cumulative CBM tasks(manhours) Cumulative PM tasks(manhours) 1500 2000 PM cyc le =40 wee ks

500 t(weeks)

6 00

70 0

8 00

900

1 000

60 0 detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours Equipment availability detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=150 manhours 40 0 detectio n coverage=0 .6 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours detectio n coverage=0 .8 , maximum CBM capability=200 manhours 20 0

0 0 100 20 0 30 0 4 00 500 t(weeks) 6 00 70 0 8 00 900 1 000

Fig. 7 Effect of condition monitoring

CONCLUSIONS

1000

500

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 t(we eks) 600 700 800 900 1000

3 PM cycle =40 we eks 2.5 Cumulative CM tasks(manhours)

0.2 PM cyc le =40 wee ks

0.15 2 Equipment degradation

1.5 1

0.1

0.05

0.5

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 t(weeks) 600 700 800 900 1000

0 0 100 200 300 400 500 t(we eks) 600 700 800 900 1000

Fig. 6 Adaption of maintenance system

Acquiring equipments maintenance requirement well and truly is the premise and basis of the accomplishment of smart and efficient maintenance. As a complex dynamical system, catching the complex feedbacks in maintenance system and resulting nonlinear dynamics is the only way to obtain and predict the equipments maintenance requirements. This paper analyzes the structure of components and the relation of their constraints and feedbacks in maintenance system and builds the system dynamics model based on Simulink. The simulation results explore the dynamics of maintenance system, which is never given by classical stochastic process method. These beneficial conclusions establish the foundations for understanding the essence of maintenance informatization, and bring forth new challenges for analyzing and studying the effective control of maintenance system.

4.3 Effect Of Condition Monitoring As the concept of equipment health management is well known, the effect of condition monitoring is often mentioned and given great expectations. According to the definition of detection coverage[3], the proportion of defects detected by condition monitoring and the whole 490

REFERENCES
[1] Kothari Vishal. Assessment of Dynamic Maintenance Management [D], Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2004. [2] ED Adamides, YA Stamboulis , AG Varelis. Model-based assessment of military aircraft engine maintenance systems [J], Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2004, 55: 957-967. [3] Honkanen Tuomo. Modelling Industrial Maintenances ystems

and the Effects of Automatic Condition Monitoring [D], Helsinki University of Technology, 2004. [4] Chen X. C. Modern Maintenance theory [M], Beijing, China: National Defense Industry Press, 2003 . [5] Ledet Winston J., Ledet Winston P. Dynamic Benchmarking:

Experiencing the Best Practices of Others in Your Plant[R], 2002. [6] Blanchard, B. Verma D., Perterson E., Maintainability: A key to effective serviceability and maintenance management [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons,1995.

491