Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Structure
7.1 Introduction
Objectives
7.2 Failure Patterns
7.2.1 Definition of Failure
7.2.2 Failure Analysis through Behaviour of Machines
7.3 Machine Life Cycle (MLC) – Bath Tube Curve
7.3.1 Types of Failures Based on the Volume of Failure
7.3.2 Types of Failures Based on the Mode of Failure
7.4 Repairable and Non-repairable Systems
7.5 Failure Costs
7.5.1 Cost Involved in Machine Failure Analysis
7.5.2 Necessity or Significance of Replacement
7.6 Replacement Models
7.7 Model-1 : Replacement Policy when Money Value Does Not Change
with Time
7.8 Model 2 : Replacement Policy for Items when Money Value
Changes with Time
7.9 Model 3 : Group Replacement Policy
7.10 The Pattern of Failures with Time of Repairable Systems
7.11 Trend
7.11.1 Positive Trend
7.11.2 Negative Trend
7.11.3 No Trend
7.12 Methods of Trend Analysis
7.12.1 Graphical Methods for Trend Testing
7.12.2 Analytical Trend Tests
7.13 Test for Presence of Correlation
7.13.1 Testing for the Presence of Serial Correlation
7.13.2 Analysis with Coefficient of Correlation Test
7.13.3 Analysis of Data Free from Trends and Correlation
7.14 Summary
7.15 Key Words
7.16 Answers to SAQs
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Most of those dealing with maintenance and operation of machines will recognize more
than an element of truth in the Murphy’s laws pertaining to maintenance stated as follows
:
If an equipment can fail, it will; and
Failure will usually occur at the most inconvenient time.
We agree that occurrences of failures cannot be avoided completely but failures during
operation can be reduced through effective maintenance management programs provided
the plant engineer can predict the occurrence of failures. The trend analysis is the best 55
Condition tool for the plant engineer in preliminary estimation in this regard. Further, if cost or
Based frequency failures are beyond a certain predetermined level of tolerance it is better to
Maintenance
replace partly or completely as the case may be deemed fit.
Objectives
After studying this unit, you should be able to
analyse the failure patterns of a given equipment,
distinguish if the equipment is repairable or replaceable (non-repairable),
understand the failure-cost analysis,
identify and determine suitable replacement policy, if the equipment is
replaceable type, and
understand and interpret the failure trend of the equipment if it is repairable
type.
CURVE
Machine life cycle is classified into three phases, which is analogous to the three phases
of Human Life Cycle as shown below.
Infancy Phase
Early failures or infant failures – DFR.
Youth Phase
Random failures or rare event failures – CFR.
Old-age Wear-out Increasing Wear, Tear, Creep, Low Operate Fail and
Phase or Age Fatigue, Weakened Corrective
failures parts Maintenance
High Replacement,
Scrapping or
Reconditioning
SAQ 1
(a) Explain Bath tub curve with suitable examples. Explain various maintenance
strategies that are appropriate at each stage.
(b) Explain the different costs involved in machine failure analysis.
61
Condition
Based 7.6REPLACEMENT MODELS
Maintenance
The replacement of machine is considered as the following three types :
Model-1
Replacement policy for items when money value is assumed to remain unchanged
with time.
Model-2
Replacement policy for items when money value changes with time.
Model-3
Group replacement policy.
These are explained in detail with examples and illustrations in the sections to follow.
There fore average cost per unit time incurred over the period of n years is
ATC 1 ⎧⎪ ⎫
. . . (7.1)
n ⎪
R (t) dt
n
C S
n ⎨⎪ 0 ⎬
⎩ ⎭⎪
To obtain optimal value of n for which ATCn is minimum, differentiate ATCn with
respect to n and set the first derivative equal to zero, i.e. minimum of ATCn.
n
d 1 R (n) 1
[ ATCn ] [C S ]
dn n n
n R (t) dt 0
0
⎪ ⎧ n ⎪⎫
1
or R (n) ⎨C S R (t) dt ⎬n 0
n ⎪ ⎪
⎩ 0 ⎭
62
R (n) ATCn . . . (7.2) Trend Analysis
Hence the following replacement policy can be derived with the help of Eq. (7.2).
Policy
Replace the equipment when the average annual cost for n years becomes
equal to the current/running cost.
n
⎪⎧ ⎫⎪
i.e. 1
R (n) ⎨C S R (t) dt ⎬ . . . (7.3)
n⎪ ⎪
⎩ 0 ⎭
Case II
When time t is a discrete variable :
The average cost incurred over the period n is given by
1⎧ n ⎫
ATCn C R (t) ⎬
S
t ⎭
0
⎩ n
n ⎨
If C – S and R (t) are assumed to be monotonically decreasing and increasing
t 0
respectively, then there will exist a value of n for which ATCn is minimum. Thus
we shall have inequalities
ATCn 1 ATCn 1
R (n 1) ATCn
n n 1
1
Since ATCn + 1 – ATCn > 0, we get
R (n 1) ATCn
n 1 n 1 0
Step 2
Calculate net value by difference of cost and salvage value (C – S), i.e.
second column value – third column value and enter in Column 5.
Step 3
Observe the values in column 8 and identify the minimum value. The year
corresponding to the minimum value is the age of the equipment to be
64 replaced.
This is illustrated through the numerical example given below. Trend Analysis
Example 7.1
A firm is thinking of replacing a particular machine whose cost price is
Rs. 12,200. The scrap price of this machine is only Rs. 200. The maintenance costs
are found to be as follows :
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Maintenance
220 500 800 1200 1800 2500 3200 4000
Cost
Determine the when the firm should get the machine replaced.
Solution
The calculations of average running cost per year during the life of the machine are
shown in the following table :
Cost price machine (C ) = 12,200 : S = 200 : C – S = 12,000
Cumulative
Salvage Running Depreciation Total Cost Average Cost
Year Cost Running
Value Cost (Rs.) Cost (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) per Year
n (C) Cost (Rs.)
(S) R (n) C–S TC ATCn
∑ R (n)
(7) = (5) +
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) = (2) – (3) (6) = ∑ (4) (8) = (7)/(1)
(6)
From the above table it may be noted that the average cost per year, ATCn is minimum
th th
in the 6 year is (Rs. 3170). And this average cost is increasing from the 7 year
onwards. Hence the machine should be replaced after 6 years.
Example 7.2
A plant manager is considering replacement policy for a new machine. He estimates
the following cost in Rs.
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6
Operating Costs 25 30 40 50 65 80
Cumulative Average
Resale Operating Total Cost
Replacement Operating Annual
Year Value Net Value Cost =C–S
Cost Cost Cost
(S) = Rn + Σ Rn
= Σ Rn ATCn
1 100 60 40 25 25 65 65
3 125 40 85 40 95 180 60
From the above table it may be noticed that the average cost per year, ATCn is
nd
minimum in the 2 year, i.e. ATC2 is Rs. 57.50 which is less than ATC1 (Rs. 65/-)
and ATC3 (Rs. 60/-). Hence the machine should be replaced at the end of second
year.
Example 7.3
A fleet owner finds from his past records that the cost per year of running a vehicle
whose purchase price is Rs. 50000 are as under :
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Running cost Rs. 5000 6000 7000 9000 1500 16000 18000
Resale Value Rs. 30000 15000 7500 3750 2000 2000 2000
There after running costs increase by Rs. 2000, but resale value remains constant at
Rs. 2000. At what age is a replacement due?
Solution
The required calculations are shown in the following table :
Cum ATC
C–S TC
Year C S R (n) R (n)
(4) (7) 8
(1) (2) (3) (5) (6) = Σ
= (2) – (3) = (4) + (6) = (7)/(1)
(5)
1 50,000 30,000 20,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 25000
2 50,000 15,000 35,000 6,000 11,000 46,000 23000
3 50,000 7,500 42,500 7,000 18,000 60,500 20167
4 50,000 3,750 46,250 9,000 27,000 73,250 18313
5 50,000 2,000 48,000 15,000 42,000 90,000 18000
6 50,000 2,000 48,000 16,000 58,000 106,000 17667
7 50,000 2,000 48,000 18,000 76,000 124,000 17714
8 50,000 2,000 48,000 20,000 96,000 144,000 18000
9 50,000 2,000 48,000 22,000 118,000 166,000 18444
th
The average annual total cost minimum (17666.67) during 6 year machine hence
th
it should be replaced at the end of 6 year.
66
Example 7.4 Machin
eA
costs Rs. 45,000 and the operating costs are estimated at Rs. 1000 for the first Trend Analysis
year, increasing by Rs. 10,000 per year in the second and subsequent years.
Machine B costs Rs. 50,000 and operating costs are Rs. 2000 for the first year,
increasing by Rs. 4000 in the second and subsequent years. If we now have a
machine of type A, should we replace it with B? If so when? Assume that both
machines have no resale value and future costs are not discounted.
Solution
The calculations of average costs running per year during the life of Machines A
and B are shown in tables given below :
Table A : Calculations of Average Annual Total Cost for Machine A
From the above table it may be noted that the average running cost per year is
lowest in the third year, i.e. Rs. 26,000. Hence, Machine A should be replaced after
every three years of service.
Table B : Calculation of Average Annual Total Cost for Machine B
From the above table it may be noted that the average running cost per year is
lowest in the fifth year, i.e. Rs. 20,000. This cost is less than the average running
cost (Rs. 26,000) per year for Machine A. Hence Machine A should be replaced by
Machine B.
Now to find the time of replacement of Machine A by Machine B, the total cost of
Machine A in the successive years is computed as follows :
Year 1 2 3 4
Total Cost 46,000 57,000 – 46,000 78,000 – 57,000 1,90,000 – 78,000
Incurred (Rs.) = 11,000 = 21,000 = 31,000
67
Condition Machine A should be replaced by Machine B at the time (age) when its running
Based cost for the next year exceeds the lowest in average running cost (Rs. 20,000) per
Maintenance
year of Machine B.
Calculations show that the running cost (Rs.21,000) of Machine A in the third year
is more than lowest in average cost (Rs. 20,000) of Machine B. Hence Machine A
should be replaced by Machine B after two years.
Activity 2
Explain the type of replacement policy you are following in your organisation.
Discuss its merits and demerits that you are experiencing practically.
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………
SAQ 2
(a) The cost of a machine is Rs. 6100 and its scrap value is only Rs. 100. The
maintenance costs are found from experience to be as given below :
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Maintenance
100 250 400 600 900 1200 1600 2,000
Cost Rs.
Hence the best period to replace the machine is the period n which minimises
1 v . P . But (1 – v) = A positive constant quantity and so we can write
n
1 vn
Fn Pn
and find out the value of n the period at which to replace the machine
1
vn
that minimizes Fn. Since n can assume only discrete values [1, 2, 3, . . .] we can
use the method of finite differences to calculate its optimal values.
Fn will be minimum if
ΔFn 1 0 ΔFn
Now
ΔFn Fn 1 Fn
Pn 1
(1 n
) Pn 1 (1 V
n
) Pn
P V
1
n
n
1 V n 1 1 V
n 1 n
(1 V ) (1 V )
1
P ) (V
n 1 n
V p )]
[(P P
n 1 n n n n n 1
(1 V ) (1 V ) 1
70
We have n 1 n Trend Analysis
Pn 1 (C R1 v R2 . . . v Rn ) v Rn 1
n
Pn v . Rn 1 n
or v Rn 1 Pn 1 Pn
1
Hence Δ n n 1 n n
n 1 n [V Rn 1 V Pn V [Pn V Rn 1 ]]
Fn (1 V ) (1 V
)
1 n
[V R (1 V ) V
n n
(1 V )]
P
n 1 n n 1 n
(1 V ) (1 V )
n
V (1 V ) ⎡1 V n ⎤
⎢ Rn 1 Pn ⎥
n 1 n
(1 V ) (1 V ) ⎢⎣ 1 ⎥⎦
V
⎡1 V n
= A positive constant ⎢ ⎤
Rn 1 Pn ⎥
⎢⎣1 V
⎥⎦
Hence Fn has always the same sign as
⎡1 V
n ⎤
Rn 1 Pn ⎥
⎢
⎢1 ⎥⎦
⎣
V
n will be optimal if
⎡ V n 1 ⎤ ⎡1 V n ⎤
⎢1 1 V Rn Pn 1 ⎥0 ⎢ Rn 1 Pn ⎥
1
⎢⎣ V ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
From the above equation we have
n
1 V R
P 0
n 1 n
1 V
or Rn 1 Pn
⎡(1 V n ) ⎤
⎢ ⎥
(1 V⎣)
V 1
1
71
Condition From Eqs. (g) and (h) we conclude that
Based
Maintenance (a) The machine should be replaced if the next period cost is greater than
the weighted average of previous costs.
(b) The machines should not be replaced if the next period’s cost is
less than the weighted average of previous costs.
Note : When money value is not considered, v = 1.
Step 3
1
Calculate the present worth factor for each year by the formula
n 1
1 r)
and put in Column 3.
Step 4
n–1 nd rd
Calculate Rn v , i.e. the product of 2 and 3 column values, and enter
them in Column 4.
Step 5
C Rn v n 1
72
Step 6
Trend Analysis
Step n–1
7 Find cumulating of Column 3 and enter in Column 6, i.e. [Σ v ].
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Running Cost (Rs.) 400 500 700 1000 1300 1700 2100
Allowing a discount rate of 10% (or discounted at 0.90), find optimal replacement
interval.
Solution
The required calculations are shown in the tabular form as follows :
Average
Running Discount
Factor n–1 Annual Total
Year Cost Rn ν n – 1 C + Σ Rn ν Σ νn – 1 Cost
(Rn) νn –1 ATCn
(1) (2) (3) (4) = ( 2) – (3) (5) = C + Σ (4) (6) = Σ (3) (7) = (5)/(6)
From the above table we observe that 1953 > 1921 < 1936, i.e.
ATC5 > ATC6 < ATC7. Therefore, the optimum replacement interval is 6 years.
Example 7.6
A manufacturer is offered two Machines A and B. A is priced at Rs. 5000 and
running costs are estimated at Rs. 800 for each of the first five years, increasing
by Rs. 200 per year in the sixth and subsequent years. Machine B, which has the
same capacity as A, costs Rs. 2500 but will have running costs of Rs. 1200 per
year for six years, increasing by Rs. 2000 per year thereafter. If the money is
worth 10% per year, which machine should be purchased assuming that both
machines will eventually be sold for a scrap at a negligible value?
73
Condition Table for A : R = 10%, CA = 5000
Based
Maintenance n n ATC
Year Ri C + Ri νn – 1 ν n–1
νn – 1 Ri ν n – 1 i=1 i=1
(1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) (1) (5) = C + ∑ (4) (6) = (3) (7) = (5)/(6)
(a) A machine has been purchased at a cost of Rs. 1,60,000. The value of the
machine is depreciated in the first three years by Rs. 20,000 each year and
Rs. 16,000 per year thereafter. Its maintenance and operating costs for the
first three years are Rs. 16,000, Rs. 18,000 and Rs. 20,000 in that order
and increase by Rs. 4000 every year. Assuming an interest rate of 10%,
find the economic life of the machine.
(b) Let the value of the money be assumed to be 10% per year and suppose
that Machine ‘A’ is replaced after every three years whereas Machine B is
replaced after every six years. The yearly costs of both the machines are
given as :
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6
Machine A (Rs.) 1000 200 400 1000 200 400
Machine B (Rs.) 1700 100 200 300 400 500
Week 1 2 3 4 5
Percent Failing by
10 25 50 80 100
the End of Week
76
At what intervals all the bulbs should be replaced? At what group replacement price
per bulb would a policy of strictly individual replacement become preferable to Trend Analysis
the adopted policy.
Solution
Step 1
To find out the probability of failure of items at the end of each
week. The probability of failure of light bulbs in first week
P1 10
100 0.10
N 4 N 0 P4 N1 P3 N 2 P2 N3 P1 377
N 5 N 0 P5 N1 P4 N 2 P3 N3 P2 N 4 P1 350
N 6 0 N1 P5 N 2 P4 N 3 P3 N 4 P2 N5 P1 230
If a bulb fails in service, it costs Rs. 3.50 to replace but if all bulbs are replaced at
a time, it costs Rs. 1.20 each. Find the optimum group replacement policy.
(Assume 1000 bulbs as available in the beginning).
Solution
N0 = 1000
N1 = N0 P1
= 1000 0.1 = 100 bulbs
N2 = N1 P1 + N0 P2
= 100 0.10 + 1000 0.15 =160 bulbs
N3 = N2 P1 + N1 P2 + N0 P3
= 160 0.10 + 100 0.15 + 1000 0.25 = 281 bulbs
N4 = N3 P1 + N2 P2 + N1 P3 + N0 P4
= 281 0.1 + 160 0.15 + 100 0.25 + 1000 0.35 = 427 bulbs
N5 = N4 P1 + N3 P2 + N2 P3 + N1 P4 + N0 P5
= 427 0.1 + 281 0.15 + 160 0.25 + 100 0.35 +1000 0.12 = 279 bulbs
N6 = N5 P1 + N4 P2 + N3 P3 + N2 P4 + N1 P5 + N0 P6
= 279 0.01 + 427 0.15 + 281 0.25 + 160 0.35 + 100 0.12
+ 1000 0.03 = 260 bulbs
Total Cost of
End Cumulativ Cost of Average
No. of Group Total
of the e No. of Replacemen Cost per
Bulbs Replacement Cost
Week Failure t (Rs. 3.50) Week
Failed (Rs. 1.20)
1 100 100 350 1200 1550 1550
2 160 260 910 1200 2110 1055
3 281 540 1893.5 1200 3093.5 1031.1
4 427 968 3388.5 1200 4588 1147
5 279 1247 4364.5 1200 564.5 1113
6 260 1507 5274.5 1200 6474.5 1079.08
rd
Bulbs should be replaced by the end of every 3 week.
79
Condition SAQ 4
Based
Maintenance (a) There is a special light bulb that never lasts longer than 2 weeks. There is a
chance of 0.3 that a bulb will fail at the end of first week. There are 100 new
bulbs initially. The cost for individual replacements is Rs. 1.25 and the cost
per bulb for group replacement is Re. 0.50. Is it cheaper to replace all the
bulbs,
(i) individually,
(ii) every week, and
(iii) every second week.
(b) The following mortality has been observed for a certain type of IC’s used in
a digital computer :
Week 1 2 3 4 5
Percent Failing by
10 25 50 80 100
the End of Week
The failure rates or rate of occurrence of failures (ROCOF) of repairable systems can also
vary with time and an important implication can be derived from these trends.
A constant failure rate (CFR) is indicative of externally induced failures, as in the
constant hazard rate situation for non-repairable systems. A constant failure rate (CFR)
is also typical of complex system if subjected to repair and overhaul where different
parts exhibit different patterns of failures with the time and parts have different ages
since repair or replacement. Repairable system can show a decreasing failure rate (DFR)
when reliability is improved by progressive repair, as defective parts which fails
relatively early are replaced by good parts. An increasing failure rate (IFR) occurs in
repairable systems when wear out failure mode parts begins to predominate.
The impact of designed reliability is greatly influenced by variations in operating
environment which can be controlled through monitoring the trend. Also, to estimate the
reliability it is essential to know the failure patterns and the behaviour of the machine to
determine the distribution from which the sample has come from. Experiences say that
the simple way to predict most of the distributions is the trend analysis.
7.11 TREND
The main objective of trend analysis is directed to know whether the equipment is
deteriorating or improving. This can be known by analyzing the past failure data in
terms of TBF (in case of repairable equipment) or TTF (in case of non-repairable
equipment). From the analysis, one of the following three conclusions may be drawn.
7.11.3 No Trend
This is one of critical situations, maintenance engineers face. If failure times are neither
increasing nor decreasing, it may lead to conclusion that the equipment is experiencing
constant Failure Rate (CFR). But this is true in some cases only, which means that the
no trend situation need not be Youth of machine (Random failures) with Constant
Failure Rate. However the no trend situation implies that the failure behaviour is
independent of time. It may be in random failure stage or typical increasing failure rate
due to independent and identical distribution (i.i.d.) of failure times. Therefore, this rate
is to be further analyzed to know this fact.
81
Condition
Based 7.12METHODS OF TREND ANALYSIS
Maintenance
Trend analysis is carried out in basic ways viz. graphical and analytical. These methods
are described below.
7.12.1 Graphical Methods for Trend Testing
The following two methods are most popularly employed graphical methods for
monitoring monotonic trend.
(a) Cumulative Plot Test, and
(b) Eye Ball Analysis.
Cumulative Plot Test
This is most powerful test and gives easy understanding because of its pictorial
nature. To perform this test, first of all, the Time Between Failures (TBFs) of the
equipment is collected in chronological order. The Cumulative Time Between
Failures (CTBF) are then calculated and plotted against the cumulative number of
failures. By the presence of trend in TBFs, we mean that whether the equipment or
the item is deteriorating or improving with age.
By simply plotting cumulative TBFs against the cumulative number of failure we
can test whether the machine or item under consideration is improving or
deteriorating. If we get a curve concave upward (note the opposite characteristic
in TTT plot), this means that the TBFs are becoming shorter and shorter, that is to
say, the machine is deteriorating. On the other hand if we obtain a curve concave
downwards, this means that the machine is improving.
The data which exhibits linearity can be considered to have no trend. Such trend
plot is known to exhibit independently and identically distributed (i.i.d.) data in
statistics and has to be further analyzed by statistical distributions.
Eye Ball Analysis
This is a simple analysis of testing presence of trend. In this we pass our eye
through chronological TBFs and search for increase or decrease of the failure rate
i.e. if the TBFs are showing increasing failure magnitude towards the end, it
shows decreasing failure rate. If the magnitude of TBFs decreases towards end,
then it indicates increasing failure rate. If the magnitude of TBFs is approximately
constant through out the period then it shows constant rate of failure.
A slight modification can be done to this test. First tabulate the cumulative
frequency and divide the total period into equal number of parts usually from
5-10. (The class interval can be judged by using Sturge’s formula) then find the
number of failures in each period of operations. If there is increasing number of
failures for each period, then it indicates increasing failure rate and so on. Further,
this can be easily judged by fitting a linear trend line.
7.12.2 Analytical Trend Tests
(a) Laplace Test, and
(b) MIL HDBK 189 test.
Laplace Test
This test is highly useful for distinguishing between an HPP and a monotonic
trend. Its high degree of accuracy keeps in top position of all trend tests.
However, it is tedious and cumbersome to calculate, particularly when the data is
large.
Further, it requires the calculation from the beginning at every time while the
graphical tests can provide instant answers at any point of the data.
We will discuss the specific situation where one system is run until a pre-specified
number of failures, m has occurred. Under HPP assumption the first m – 1 arrival
times, T1, T2, . . . , Tm – 1 are the order statistics from a uniform distribution
on (0, tm).
82
Hence the test statistic ⎡⎛ 1 ⎞ k
⎤ ⎛T Trend Analysis
*⎞
⎢⎜ ⎟ . T i ⎥ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
U L ⎣⎝ i ⎦ ⎝ 2
1 . . . (7.1)
k⎠ ⎠
⎛ 1 ⎞
T * ⎜ ⎟
12 ⎝k
approximates a standardized normal Variate, the approximation being adequate at
the 5%, level of significance for m = 4.
*
[In Eq. (7.1), k = m – 1 and T = tm if observation stops at the last failure, k = m and
*
T = the time at which observation stops, otherwise. At a significance level there
is evidence of trend if : UL > Z/2 (reliability deterioration) UL < Z/2 (reliability
improvement)].
Compare the calculated ‘U’ value with normal Variate at 10% level of
significance. If calculated value is within – 1.645 to + 1.645, accept the
hypothesis, i.e. no trend, else trend exists. [At 5% level of significance the critical
values are – 1.96 to + 1.96 and 1% LOS the critical values of Normal Variate are
2.58 to + 2.58].
MIL-HDBK-189 Test
The test is based on test statistic
n 1
⎛T ⎞
U 2 ln ⎜ n . . . (7.2)
⎟
i 1 ⎝Ti ⎠
2
Under the null hypothesis of an HPP, ν is distributed as χ , with 2(m-1) degrees of
freedom.
2
If calculated “χ ” value is less than Chi-squared table value at 2 (m – 1) degrees of
freedom 5% L.O.S, Trend is present, else no Trend.
2
For degrees of freedom (ν) greater than 30, the quantity ( 2
2v 1) may be
used as a normal Variate with unit variance.
2
Z ( 2
2v 1) . . . (7.3)
If calculated ‘Z’ value is in the following range of table (critical) values then trend
is present, else no trend.
Critical Values Normal Distribution Tables
1.645 to + 1.645 (at 10% level of significance)
1.96 to + 1.96 (at 5% level of significance)
2.58 to + 2.58 (at 1% level of significance).
0 0
20 640
84
Trend Analysis -
Cumulative Plot Test
Trend Analysis
550
450
350
250
150
50
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
-2
No. of Failures
120
100
80
Failure
hours
60
40
20
5 10 15 20 25
-20
Number of Failures
90
80
70
60
(i-1)th failure
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
i th Failure
The data for Serial Correlation Test is given in the following table.
85
Condition Karl Pearson’s Coefficient of Correlation and Serial Correlation
Based
Maintenance Sl. tbf (i) x = i – 32 (i – 1) y = (i – 1) – 27.1 x y
x2 y2
No.
0 0
1 14 18 0 -27.1 324 734.41 487.8
2 12 20 14 13.1 400 171.61 262
3 9 23 12 15.1 529 228.01 347.3
4 13 19 9 18.1 361 327.61 343.9
5 7 25 13 14.1 625 198.81 352.5
6 24 8 7 20.1 64 404.01 160.8
7 11 21 24 3.1 441 9.61 65.1
8 21 11 11 16.1 121 259.21 177.1
9 6 26 21 6.1 676 37.21 158.6
10 15 17 6 21.1 289 445.21 358.7
11 19 13 15 12.1 169 146.41 157.3
12 31 1 19 8.1 1 65.61 8.1
13 36 4 31 3.9 16 15.21 15.6
14 27 5 36 8.9 25 79.21 44.5
15 57 25 27 0.1 625 0.01 2.5
16 42 10 57 29.9 100 894.01 299
17 69 37 42 14.9 1369 222.01 551.3
18 48 16 69 41.9 256 1755.61 670.4
19 81 49 48 20.9 2401 436.81 1024.1
20 98 66 81 53.9 4356 2905.21 3557.4
32 27.1 13148 9335.8 8950
2 2
Coefficient of Correlation = y/((x ) (y ))
r = 0.8078252
SAQ 5
(a) What is meant by trend? Explain different methods of trend analysis.
(b) What do you understand by ‘No Trend’? Explain with an example.
(c) What is serial correlation? Discuss its application in analysis of machine
down time.
(d) Explain the significance and application of coefficient of correlation in
machine down time analysis.
(e) The time between failures for a machine are noticed as follows :
12, 10, 7, 11, 5, 22, 9, 19, 4, 13, 17, 29, 34, 25, 55, 40, 67, 46, 79, 96
Conduct the Trend analysis by using, Cumulative Plot test and confirm by
Eye ball analysis. Also check the serial correlation and verify by Karl
Pearson’s Coefficient of Correlation.
86
7.14 SUMMAR Y
Trend Analysis
Maintenance department is often concerned with the replacement decision for which
the plant engineer is required to be aware of and keep on tracking machine health. The
trend analysis and cost analysis of failures can help the engineer in taking right
decisions easily and timely. The cost analysis for replacement depends on the money
value which is dynamic in nature. In addition to the individual replacement decisions,
the plant engineer has to examine the group replacement decisions for optimal
maintenance. Further, the trend analysis can help the engineer in taking the decisions
of maintenance scheduling and planning for the preventive actions. These are
discussed in the units to follow.
This unit focuses in two directions. Firstly, it is aimed at assessing replacement age
based on the costs. Secondly, it is directed to analyzing the length and frequency of
failures.
Behaviour of machines, Machine Life Cycle (MLC) and Bath tub curve are used to
explain different types of failure patterns. Various types of failures based on the
volume, the mode of failure are discussed. The significance of replacement and relevant
costs involved in Machine Failure Analysis are explained. Replacement models for
individual replacement i.e. replacement policy when money value does not change with
time (Model-1) and: replacement policy for items when money value changes with time
(Model-2) are discussed with numerical examples. Group replacement policy is also
narrated. The trends and patterns of failures with time of repairable systems are
described using graphical methods such as Cumulative plot test, Eye ball analysis and
analytical trend tests such as Laplace test, Mil-hdbk-189 test are elucidated. Test for
presence of correlation using serial correlation coefficient of correlation test can also
help in tracking the trend. These are also given an appropriate place.
(e) Thus, total cost during second year is 2 2175 + 2150 = 6500 and during
rd
3 year is 2 3475 + 2175 = 7129 where as the minimum average cost for
two larger machines is 2 3540 = 7080. Hence all the three small machines
should be replaced after two years before any of them reaches the normal
replacement age of 5 years.
(f) ATC3 (84.43) > ATC4 (79.97) < ATC5 (83.98), therefore the machine is to be
th
replaced at the end of 4 year.
88
SAQ 3 (a) T
h
e Machine should be replaced after 2 years. Trend Analysis
(b) Considering the life periods of the Machines A and B, i.e. 3 and 6 years,
respectively, the average years costs will be Rs. 1512.4/3 = Rs. 504.13 and
Rs. 2765.3/6 = Rs. 460.9. The cost of the Machine A (Rs. 2648 is less than
that of Machine B (Rs. 2765.3). Machine A is to be purchased.
(c) Since the present worth of future costs for the automatic stamper
(Rs. 13,460) is less than that of manual stamper (Rs. 15,773), it is better and
profitable to purchase an automatic stamper.
th
(d) Since the lowest annual average cost occurs during 5 year, it is better to
replace at the end of every 5 years.
(e) 5 years
SAQ 4
st nd
(a) Replace after every one week [87.5 (1 week) > 93.125 (2 week)].
(b) It is optimal to adopt group replacement after every two weeks
st nd rd
[1 week (425) < 2 Week (312.5) > 3 week (325.4)].
(c) ATC2 (920) > ATC3 (813.33) < ATC4 (930); therefore, it is better to go for
rd
group replacement after every 3 period.
(d) After every 3 weeks.
(e) One week group replacement policy; Average cost = $175 per week; Cost of
individual replacement per week = $196.
89
Condition
Based FURTHER READING
Maintenance
Saliho. Duffuaa, A. Raouf and John Dixon Campbell (1999), Planning and Control of
Maintenance Systems, John Wiley and Sons, USA.
Anthony Kelly, Strategic Maintenance Planning, Elsevier, New York.
B. S. Dhillon (2002), Engineering and Technology Management Tools and Applications,
Artech House, Boston.
Terry Wireman (2008), Preventive Maintenance, Industrial Press, Inc. New York.
90
Trend Analysis
CONDITION BASED MAINTENANCE
This block consists of three units.
In Unit 5, Diagnostic Maintenance, describes the various philosophies of diagnostic
maintenance and their applications. It also explains the concept of fault diagnostic and
diagnostic maintenance. Mainly this unit elaborates on elements of failure, mode, effect
and critical analysis (FMECA), applications and merits.
Unit 6, Condition Monitoring, deals with principles of conditions based maintenance,
condition monitoring and techniques of condition monitoring. It also explains the
advantages of CBM over other maintenance philosophies.
Unit 7, Trend Analysis, describes the failure patterns, machine life cycle and their types.
It also elaborates on various replacement models and their applications. Finally, it also
explains the various types of trends and methods of trend analysis.
91