Improvement of Industrial Maintenance Plans through Assistance-Driven Reliability-Centered Maintenance and Case-Based Reasoning Design
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodology
2.1. Fundamentals
2.2. Improved RPN Methodology
2.2.1. Fuzzy Logic
2.2.2. Fuzzy Logic Applied in the Calculation of RPN (Fuzzy RPN)
3. Application and Results
3.1. Case Base
3.2. Design and Implementation of a Conductive RCM: Application
3.3. Case Studies: Resolution of a New Failure Case Conducted by an Improved Assistance-Driven System
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Records on the CSV File That Make Up the Case Base (Note: Cases from 26 to 32 Omitted for Simplicity)
IDP | S | I | E | FF | F |
1 | EW | Resmas | Axis | Fit format out of range | Fit to format width |
2 | EW | Resmas | Axis | Do not center the axes with each other | Center all the axes with respect to each other on the machine axis |
3 | EW | Resmas | Axis | Do not center any axes on the rest | Center all the axes with respect to each other on the machine axis |
4 | EW | Resmas | Folders | Does not fold | Lateral folding of the package v = 15 folded/min |
5 | EW | Resmas | Folders | Does not fold | Lateral folding of the package v = 15 folded/min |
6 | EW | Resmas | Folders | Does not fold | Lateral folding of the package v = 15 folded/min |
7 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
8 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
9 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
10 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
11 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
12 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
13 | EW | Resmas | Glue | Do not dose the glue through any nozzle | Dosage of glue for gluing the package dc/dt = 15 lines/min × 3 nozzles |
14 | EW | Unwinder | Edge Trimmer | Do not cut | Cut the width of the package wrapping paper format (vp = 4 bar, ph = 2 bar) |
15 | EW | Unwinder | Edge Trimmer | Does not cut accurately | Cut the width of the package wrapping paper format (vp = 4 bar, ph = 2 bar) |
16 | EW | Unwinder | Edge Trimmer | Does not cut accurately | Cut the width of the package wrapping paper format (vp = 4 bar, ph = 2 bar) |
17 | EW | Unwinder | Edge Trimmer | Does not cut accurately | Cut the width of the package wrapping paper format (vp = 4 bar, ph = 2 bar) |
18 | EW | I/0 Palletizer | Palletizer | During loading, the pallet turns as it passes through the intermediate belt | Automatic loading and positioning of empty pallets |
19 | EW | I/0 Palletizer | Palletizer | It does not position the pallet correctly | Automatic loading and positioning of empty pallets |
20 | EW | I/0 Palletizer | Palletizer | It does not position the pallet correctly | Automatic loading and positioning of empty pallets |
21 | EW | I/0 Palletizer | Palletizer | Do not transfer the loaded pallet | Transfer loaded pallets by belt to the transport line |
22 | EW | I/0 Palletizer | Palletizer | Do not transfer the loaded pallet | Transfer loaded pallets by belt to the transport line |
23 | EW | Resmas | Pads | No adequacy of the minimum pressure according to the optimum operating value | The pads must be adjusted to the height of the package and introduce a pressure between a minimum and a maximum to achieve adequate quality in the wrapped package. 1st PRESS p1(min = 1_max = 2.5) bar. 2nd PRESS p2(min = 0_max = 1.5) bar. 3rd PRESS p3(min = 1_max = 2) bar |
24 | EW | Resmas | Pads | No adequacy of the minimum pressure according to the optimum operating value | The pads must be adjusted to the height of the package and introduce a pressure between a minimum and a maximum to achieve adequate quality in the wrapped package. 1st PRESS p1(min = 1_max = 2.5) bar. 2nd PRESS p2(min = 0_max = 1.5) bar. 3rd PRESS p3(min = 1_max = 2) bar |
25 | EW | Resmas | Brakes | It does not perform braking in the time required for the maneuver. Excessive braking time | Perform motor braking act in the maneuver |
… | … | … | … | … | … |
33 | EW | Unwinder | Loading of Coils | Partial cargo handling assistance | Assist in the loading of packaging reels to the operator in the form of ergonomic loading |
34 | EW | Despalletizer | Protection | Uncontrolled rise | Package Feeding Lift Platform Rise |
35 | EW | Despalletizer | Protection | Uncontrolled rise | Package Feeding Lift Platform Rise |
References
- Al-Turki, U.M. A framework for strategic planning in maintenance. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 2011, 17, 150–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez-Padial, N.; Marín, M.M.; Domingo, R. Strategic framework to maintenance decision support systems. Procedia Eng. 2015, 132, 903–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez-Padial, N.; Marín, M.M.; Domingo, R. An Approach to Integrating Tactical Decision-Making in Industrial Maintenance Balance Scorecards Using Principal Components Analysis and Machine Learning. Complexity 2017, 2017, 3759514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitak, P.; Belak, L.; Pihler, J.; Ribič, J. Maintenance Management of a Transmission Substation with Optimization. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez-Padial, N.; Marín, M.M.; Domingo, R. Assisted-Driven Design of Customized Maintenance Plans for Industrial Plants. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 7144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Silva, R.F.; Melani, A.H.d.A.; Michalski, M.A.d.C.; de Souza, G.F.M. Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance: A Novel Method for Supporting Maintenance Management. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, M.; Santos, I.F.; Zhang, X.; Wu, J.; Lind, M. Explicit Representation of Mechanical Functions for Maintenance Decision Support. Electronics 2023, 12, 4267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García, F.J.A.; Salgado, D.R. Analysis of the Influence of Component Type and Operating Condition on the Selection of Preventive Maintenance Strategy in Multistage Industrial Machines: A Case Study. Machines 2022, 10, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García, F.J.A.; Salgado, D.R. An Approach for Predictive Maintenance Decisions for Components of an Industrial Multistage Machine That Fail before Their MTTF: A Case Study. Systems 2022, 10, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, M.; Zhang, X.; Lind, M. Automatic identification of maintenance significant items in reliability centered maintenance analysis by using functional modeling and reasoning. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2023, 182, 109409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivančan, J.; Lisjak, D. New FMEA Risks Ranking Approach Utilizing Four Fuzzy Logic Systems. Machines 2021, 9, 292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nazeri, A.; Naderikia, R. A new fuzzy approach to identify the critical risk factors in maintenance management. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 92, 3749–3783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tortorella, G.M.; Fogliatto, F.S.; Cauchick-Miguel, P.A.; Kurnia, S.; Jurburg, D. Integration of industry 4.0 technologies into total productive maintenance practices. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 240, 108224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cachada, A.; Barbosa, J.; Leitão, P.; Gcraldcs, C.A.S.; Deusdado, L.; Costa, J.; Teixeira, C.; Teixeira, J.; Moreira, A.H.J.; Moreira, P.M.; et al. Maintenance 4.0: Intelligent and predictive maintenance system architecture. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Turin, Italy, 2–7 September 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bampoula, X.; Siaterlis, G.; Nikolakis, N.; Alexopoulos, K. A Deep Learning Model for Predictive Maintenance in Cyber-Physical Production Systems using LSTM Autoencoders. Sensors 2021, 21, 972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longo, F.; Mirabelli, G.; Nicoletti, L.; Solina, V. An ontology-based, general-purpose and Industry 4.0-ready architecture for supporting the smart operator (Part I–Mixed reality case). J. Manuf. Syst. 2022, 64, 594–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabir, S.; Papadopoulos, Y. A review of applications of fuzzy sets to safety and reliability engineering. Int. J. Approx. Reason 2018, 100, 29–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, A.; Pasaribu, E.; Nugraha, Y.; Khair, F.; Soebandrija, K.E.N.; Wijaya, D.I. Industry 4.0 and society 5.0 through lens of condition based maintenance (CBM) and machine learning of artificial intelligence (MLAI). IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 852, 012022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Recio-García, J.A.; González-Calero, P.A.; Díaz-Agudo, B. jcolibri2: A framework for building Case-based reasoning systems. Sci. Comput. Program. 2014, 79, 126–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Recio-García, J.A. jCOLIBRI: Una Plataforma Multi-Nivel Para la Construcción y Generación de Sistemas de Razonamiento Basado en Casos. Ph.D. Thesis, Departamento de Ingeniería del Software e Inteligencia Artificial, Facultad de Informática, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, 2008. (A Multi-Level Platform for the Construction and Generation of Case-Based Reasoning Systems) (In Spanish). [Google Scholar]
- Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 1965, 8, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baghbani, M.; Iranzadeh, S.; Khajeh, M.B. Investigating the relationship between RPN parameters in fuzzy PFMEA and OEE in a sugar factory. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2019, 60, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ben-Daya, M.; Raouf, A. A revised failure mode and effects analysis model. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 1996, 13, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowles, J.B. An assessment of PRN prioritization in a failure modes effects and criticality analysis. J. IEST 2004, 47, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braglia, M.; Frosolini, M.; Montanari, R. Fuzzy criticality assessment model for failure modes and effects analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2003, 20, 503–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.L.; Liu, P.H.; Wei, C.C. Failure mode and effects analysis using grey theory. Integr. Manuf. Syst. 2001, 12, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilchrist, W. Modelling failure modes and effects analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 1993, 10, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pillay, A.; Wang, J. Modified failure mode and effects analysis using approximate reasoning. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2003, 79, 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sankar, N.R.; Prabhu, B.S. Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2001, 18, 324–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renjith, V.R.; Kalathil, M.J.; Kumar, P.H.; Madhavan, D. Fuzzy FMECA (failure mode effect and criticality analysis) of LNG storage facility. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2018, 56, 537–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, N.; Dvořák, A.; Štěpnička, M.; Valášek, R. Redundancy criteria for linguistic fuzzy rules. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 214, 119112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francis, R.S.; Colli, A. Information-based reliability weighting for failure mode prioritization in photovoltaic (PV) module design. In Proceedings of the Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM 12), Honolulu, HI, USA, 22–27 June 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.M.; Chin, K.S.; Poon, G.K.K.; Yang, J.B. Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 1195–1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mentes, A.; Akyildiz, H.; Yetkin, M.; Turkoglu, N. A FSA based fuzzy DEMATEL approach for risk assessment of cargo ships at coasts and open seas of Turkey. Saf. Sci. 2015, 79, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calvo, L.M.; Domingo, R. CO2 Emissions Reduction and Energy Efficiency Improvements in Paper Making Drying Process Control by Sensors. Sustainability 2017, 9, 514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Occurrence (O) | fNO | m − α | m | m + β | α | β | μL | μR | μO |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very High, Danger is almost inevitable | (08, 10, 10) | 08 | 10 | 10 | 2.00 | 0.00 | −2.33 | 10.00 | 6.67 |
High, Frequent Dangers | (05, 07, 09) | 05 | 07 | 09 | 2.00 | 2.00 | −1.33 | 3.00 | 2.67 |
Average | (03, 05, 07) | 03 | 05 | 07 | 2.00 | 2.00 | −0.67 | 2.33 | 2.00 |
Low | (01, 03, 05) | 01 | 03 | 05 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.00 | 1.67 | 1.33 |
Low, Danger is relatively rare | (00, 00, 02) | 00 | 00 | 02 | 0.00 | 2.00 | 1.00 | 0.67 | 0.33 |
Severity (S) | fNS | m − α | m | m + β | α | β | μL | μR | μS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dangerous without Warning | (09, 10, 10) | 09 | 10 | 10 | 1.00 | 0.00 | −4.00 | 10.00 | 7.50 |
Dangerous with Warning | (08, 09, 10) | 08 | 09 | 10 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −3.50 | 5.00 | 4.75 |
Very High | (07, 08, 09) | 07 | 08 | 09 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −3.00 | 4.50 | 4.25 |
Medium | (05, 06, 07) | 05 | 06 | 07 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −2.00 | 3.50 | 3.25 |
Low | (04, 05, 06) | 04 | 05 | 06 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −1.50 | 3.00 | 2.75 |
Very Low | (03, 04, 05) | 03 | 04 | 05 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −1.00 | 2.50 | 2.25 |
Weak | (02, 03, 04) | 02 | 03 | 04 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −0.50 | 2.00 | 1.75 |
Very Weak | (01, 02, 03) | 01 | 02 | 03 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.50 | 1.25 |
None | (01, 01, 02) | 01 | 01 | 02 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Detection (D) | fND | m − α | m | m + β | α | β | μL | μR | μD |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Absolutely Low | (09, 10, 10) | 09 | 10 | 10 | 1.00 | 0.00 | −4.00 | 10.00 | 7.50 |
Very Weak | (08, 09, 10) | 08 | 09 | 10 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −3.50 | 5.00 | 4.75 |
Very Low | (07, 08, 09) | 07 | 08 | 09 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −3.00 | 4.50 | 4.25 |
Low | (05, 06, 07) | 05 | 06 | 07 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −2.00 | 3.50 | 3.25 |
Medium | (04, 05, 06) | 04 | 05 | 06 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −1.50 | 3.00 | 2.75 |
Almost High | (03, 04, 05) | 03 | 04 | 05 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −1.00 | 2.50 | 2.25 |
High | (02, 03, 04) | 02 | 03 | 04 | 1.00 | 1.00 | −0.50 | 2.00 | 1.75 |
Very High | (01, 02, 03) | 01 | 02 | 03 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.50 | 1.25 |
Absolutely Definitive | (01, 01, 02) | 01 | 01 | 02 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Weights (W) | fNW |
---|---|
Very High | (0.75, 1, 1) |
High | (0.5, 0.75, 1) |
Medium | (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) |
Low | (0, 0.25, 0.5) |
Very Low | (0, 0, 0.25) |
Weights (W) | fNW | m − α | m | m + β | α | β | μL | μR | μW |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Very High | (0.75, 1, 1) | 0.75 | 1 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 1.00 | 0.90 |
High | (0.5, 0.75, 1) | 0.50 | 0.75 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.40 | 0.80 | 0.70 |
Medium | (0.25, 0.5, 0.75) | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.75 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.50 |
Low | (0, 0.25, 0.5) | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.80 | 0.40 | 0.30 |
Very Low | (0, 0, 0.25) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 1.00 | 0.20 | 0.10 |
Attributes | Description | Selected Values |
---|---|---|
E | Equipment | |
FF | Functional_Failure | |
I | Installation | |
IDP | CaseID | |
S | Section | |
F | Required Function | |
FE | Failure_Effect | |
FM | Failure_Mode | |
IDC | Problem Case Raised ID | |
II | Initial_Interval | |
MC | Maintenance_Classify | OM, RD, CBM, TBM, CM, PFF |
RPN | Risk Priority Number | |
PT | Proposed_Task | |
R | Responsibility | TM, TE, PROD, MP |
First Stage: CBR-FMECA Integration | ||
New Problem | New Problem Raised (Query) | Selected Best Retrieved Case |
IDC | S/I/E/FF | IDS/S/I/E/FM |
A | EW/RESMAS/AXIS/Do not center the axis | 2/EW/RESMAS/AXIS/Mismatch between axis 3, 5, and 6’s width due to poor alignment |
B | EW/RESMAS/GLUE/Do not eject glue for anyone | 9/EW/RESMAS/GLUE/In the tail pump the valve seals wear out |
C | EW/RESMAS/FOLDERS/Break the package | 5/EW/RESMAS/FOLDERS/Poor regulation of restrictions in the act. Pneumatic (cylinder)—see diagram—does not perform pneumatic braking due to poor regulation or not having external flow limiters, contemplated in the original diagram |
D | No data entry/No data entry/No data entry/Pallets get stuck | 21/EW/RESMAS/I/0 PALLETIZER/The loaded pallet bumps into the intermediate belts (located between the stacker belts and the pallet outlet), offering resistance to the forward movement |
E | No data entry/No data entry/Brakes/failure | 25/EW/RESMAS/BRAKES/The fault is reproduced at the moment of the maneuver where the engine is ordered to brake within an established time interval. If there is deterioration of the engine brake disc (wear or crystallization), this time is exceeded |
Second Stage: Conductive RCM with New fRPN Calculation Method | ||
Relative Importance Parameters | Risk Factor Degree | Final Review RCM Process Parameters (Defined by Operational Context) |
wO/wS/wD | O/S/D | Decision Diagram Answers Sequence |
High/High/Low | High/Medium/Low | NO/YES/YES |
Medium/High/Medium | Low/Very High/Low | NO/YES/YES |
Medium/High/Very Low | Very High/Very High/Very Weak | NO/YES/NO/NO/NO/NO |
Low/High/Very High | Very Low/Medium/Absolutely Low | NO/YES/NO/NO/NO/NO |
Medium/Very High/Medium | Very Low/Very High/Absolutely Low | NO/YES/NO/NO/YES |
Results | ||
wLR Defuzzy and MC | Final Review RCM Process Parameters (Defined by Operational Context) | |
fRPN/MC | II/R/PT | |
300/OM | 23/TM/Grease and Recalibrate all axes, according to the manufacturer’s instructions | |
279/OM | 15/PROD/Detached glue each work shift | |
528/RD | 24/TM/Redesign the folding guides within the original manufacturer specifications; in geometrics and materials | |
337/RD | 25/TM/Adjust the height of the exit planes of the roller line in a circular manner from top to bottom | |
252/TBM | 30/TM/Replace the brake discs with new ones |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rodríguez-Padial, N.; Marín, M.M.; Domingo, R. Improvement of Industrial Maintenance Plans through Assistance-Driven Reliability-Centered Maintenance and Case-Based Reasoning Design. Electronics 2024, 13, 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13030639
Rodríguez-Padial N, Marín MM, Domingo R. Improvement of Industrial Maintenance Plans through Assistance-Driven Reliability-Centered Maintenance and Case-Based Reasoning Design. Electronics. 2024; 13(3):639. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13030639
Chicago/Turabian StyleRodríguez-Padial, Néstor, Marta M. Marín, and Rosario Domingo. 2024. "Improvement of Industrial Maintenance Plans through Assistance-Driven Reliability-Centered Maintenance and Case-Based Reasoning Design" Electronics 13, no. 3: 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13030639
APA StyleRodríguez-Padial, N., Marín, M. M., & Domingo, R. (2024). Improvement of Industrial Maintenance Plans through Assistance-Driven Reliability-Centered Maintenance and Case-Based Reasoning Design. Electronics, 13(3), 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13030639