Context awareness for maintenance decision making: A diagnosis and prognosis approach

Measurement: Journal of the International Measurement Confederation

Volumn 67, Issue , 2015, Pages 137-150

  Galar, Diego ^a   Thaduri, Adithya ^a   Catelani, Marcantonio ^b   Ciani, Lorenzo ^b  

^a LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Condition based maintenance; Condition monitoring; Context driven eMaintenance; Diagnosis; Prognosis

Indexed keywords

CONDITION MONITORING; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSIS; LIFE CYCLE; SYSTEMS ENGINEERING;

CONDITION BASED MAINTENANCE; CONTEXT-DRIVEN; DIAGNOSIS AND PROGNOSIS; E MAINTENANCE; MAINTENANCE DECISION MAKING; OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES; PROGNOSIS; SCHEDULE MAINTENANCES;

MAINTENANCE;

EID: 84925386908     PISSN: 02632241     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2015.01.015     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. C. Stenström, A. Parida, D. Galar, and U. Kumar Link and effect model for performance improvement of railway infrastructure. Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers Part F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 227 4 2013 392 402 (first published on June 13, 2013)
2. L.F. Mendonça, J.M.G. Sá da Costa, J.M. Sousa, Fault detection and diagnosis using fuzzy models, in: Proceedings of European Control Conference, ECC, 2003, pp. 1-6.
3. A. Kordon Applying Computational Intelligence: How to Create Value 2009 Springer
4. M. Schwabacher, A survey of data-driven prognostics, in: Proceedings of the AIAA Infotech@ Aerospace Conference, September, 2005.
5. M. Palo, D. Galar, T. Nordmark, M. Asplund, and D. Larsson Condition monitoring at the wheel/rail interface for decision-making support. Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers Part F: J. Rail Rapid Transit 2014 0954409714526164
6. D. Galar, M. Palo, A. Van Horenbeek, and L. Pintelon Integration of disparate data sources to perform maintenance prognosis and optimal decision making Insight: Non-Destruct. Test. Cond. Monit. 54 8 2012 440 445
7. R. Hummitzsch, Zur Prognostizierbarkeit des Qualitätsverhaltens von Gleisen Statistische Analyse des Gleisverhaltens zur Erstellung eines Prognosemodells [For the Predictability of Track Quality Behaviour - Statistical Analysis of Track Behaviour for the Creation of a Prediction Model], Technische Universität Graz, 2009.
8. P. Pace, L. Kontokostas, Railway Infrastructure Asset And Condition Data Collection, Data Usage And Deterioration Modelling For Maintenance Performance Measurement, 2013. < http://p.sparkrail.org/record.asp?q=PB012629 >.
9. D. Galar, U. Kumar, R. Villarejo, and C.A. Johansson Hybrid prognosis for railway health assessment: an information fusion approach for PHM deployment Chem. Eng. 33 2013 < http://www.aidic.it/cet/13/33/129.pdf >
10. R.G. Pajares, J.M. Benítez, G.S. Palmero, Feature selection for time series forecasting: a case study, in: Hybrid Intelligent Systems. HIS'08, Eighth International Conference on IEEE, September 2008, pp. 555-560.
11. A. Muller, A. Crespo Marquez, and B. Iung On the concept of e-Maintenance: review and current research Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe. 93 8 2008 1165 1187
12. D. Galar, A. Gustafson, B. Tormos, and L. Berges Maintenance decision making based on different types of data fusion Maint. Reliab. 14 2 2012
13. A.W. Labib A decision analysis model for maintenance policy selection using a CMMS J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 10 3 2004 191 202
14. T.J. Wilmering, A.V. Ramesh, Assessing the Impact of Health Management Approaches on System Total Cost of Ownership, IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, March 2005.
15. D. Galar, K. Wandt, R. Karim, and L. Berges The evolution from e(lectronic)Maintenance to i(ntelligent)Maintenance Insight-Non-Destruct. Test. Cond. Monit. 54 8 2012 446 455 10
16. A.W. Labib A decision analysis model for maintenance policy selection using a CMMS J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 10 3 2004 191 202
17. S. Nandi, H.A. Toliyat, and X. Li Condition monitoring and fault diagnosis of electrical motors - a review IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 20 4 2005 719 729
18. S.E. Bjorling, D. Baglee, D. Galar, S. Singh, Maintenance Knowledge Management with Fusion of CMMS and CM, 2013.
19. R. Isermann Fault-Diagnosis Systems 2006 Springer Berlin 197 229
20. L.H. Chiang, R.D. Braatz, and E.L. Russell Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Industrial Systems 2001 Springer
21. C. Price, and C.J. Price Computer-Based Diagnostic Systems 1999 Springer Heidelberg 65 69
22. F. Gandolfo, F.A. Mussa-Ivaldi, and E. Bizzi Motor learning by field approximation Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 93 9 1996 3843 3846
23. B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein Fault trees: sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation J. Exp. Psychol.: Human Percept. Perform. 4 2 1978 330
24. M. Baldauf, S. Dustdar, and F. Rosenberg A survey on context-aware systems Int. J. Ad Hoc Ubiquitous Comput. 2 4 2007 263 277
25. J.Y. Hong, E.H. Suh, and S.J. Kim Context-aware systems: a literature review and classification Expert Syst. Appl. 36 4 2009 8509 8522
26. M. Derntl, K.A. Hummel, Modeling context-aware e-learning scenarios, in: Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, PerCom 2005 Workshops. Third IEEE International Conference on IEEE, March 2005, pp. 337-342.
27. A.S. Paipetis, T.E. Matikas, D.G. Aggelis, and D. Van Hemelrijck Emerging Technologies in Non-Destructive Testing V 2012 CRC Press
28. B.N. Schilit, and M.M. Theimer Disseminating active map information to mobile hosts Network, IEEE 8 5 1994 22 32
29. B. Schilit, N. Adams, R. Want, Context-aware computing applications, in: Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, WMCSA 1994. First Workshop on IEEE, December 1994, pp. 85-90.
30. T. Strang, C. Linnhoff-Popien, A context modeling survey, in: Workshop Proceedings, September 2004.
31. X.H. Wang, D.Q. Zhang, T. Gu, H.K. Pung, Ontology based context modeling and reasoning using OWL, in: Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, Proceedings of the Second IEEE Annual Conference on Ieee, March 2004, pp. 18-22.
32. H. Chen, T. Finin, A. Joshi, An intelligent broker for context-aware systems, in: Adjunct proceedings of Ubicomp, October 2003, vol. 3, pp. 183-184.
33. A. Parida, and U. Kumar Maintenance performance measurement (MPM): issues and challenges J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 12 3 2006 239 251
34. B. Al-Najjar, and I. Alsyouf Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making Int. J. Prod. Econ. 84 1 2003 85 100
35. S.A. Ehikioya, A characterization of information quality using fuzzy logic, in: Fuzzy Information Processing Society, NAFIPS. 18th International Conference of the North American IEEE, July 1999, pp. 635-639.
36. W. Lampl, P. Loch, S. Menke, S. Rajagopalan, S. Laplace, G. Unal, H. Ma, S. Snyder, D. Lelas, D. Rousseau, Calorimeter Clustering Algorithms (No. ATL-LARG-PUB-2008-002), 2008.
37. J. Campos Development in the application of ICT in condition monitoring and maintenance Comput. Ind. 60 1 2009 1 20
38. K. Holmberg, A. Adgar, A. Arnaiz, E. Jantunen, J. Mascolo, and S. Mekid E-maintenance 2010 Springer
39. X. Peng, M. Li, and Z. Huang A data collection framework with extensible protocol based on XML Recent Advances in Computer Science and Information Engineering 2012 Springer Berlin Heidelberg 481 489
40. A.K. Jardine, and A.H. Tsang Maintenance, Replacement, and Reliability: Theory and Applications 2013 CRC Press
41. M. Schwabacher, A survey of data-driven prognostics, in: Proceedings of the AIAA Infotech@ Aerospace Conference, September 2005, pp. 1-5.
42. J. Luo, M. Namburu, K. Pattipati, L. Qiao, M. Kawamoto, and S.A.C.S. Chigusa Model-based prognostic techniques [maintenance applications] AUTOTESTCON 2003, IEEE Systems Readiness Technology Conference, Proceedings 2003 IEEE 330 340
43. M. Pecht, A. Dasgupta, D. Barker, and C.T. Leonard The reliability physics approach to failure prediction modelling Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 6 4 1990 267 273
44. V. Chandola, A. Banerjee, and V. Kumar Anomaly detection: a survey ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 41 3 2009 15 < http://www.dtc.umn.edu/publications/reports/2008-16.pdf >
45. P. Garcia-Teodoro, J. Diaz-Verdejo, G. Maciá-Fernández, and E. Vázquez Anomaly-based network intrusion detection: techniques, systems and challenges Comput. Secur. 28 1 2009 18 28
46. Donald Remboski, Kevin Brooks, Paula Canavan, Kenneth Douros, Judith Gardner, Robert Gardner, Joshua Hurwitz, Robert Leivian, Jens Nagel, David Wheatley, Clifford Wood, U.S. Patent No. 20,020,151,297, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC, 2002.
47. D. Bottazzi, A. Corradi, and R. Montanari Context-aware middleware solutions for anytime and anywhere emergency assistance to elderly people IEEE Commun. Mag. 44 4 2006 82 90
48. Y. Zhu, N.M. Nayak, and A.K. Roy-Chowdhury Context-aware activity recognition and anomaly detection in video Sel. Top. Signal Process.; IEEE J. 7 1 2013 91 101
49. J. George, J. Crassidis, T. Singh, and A.M. Fosbury Anomaly detection using context-aided target tracking J. Adv. Inf. Fusion 6 1 2011 39 56
50. N. Ye, and Q. Chen An anomaly detection technique based on a chi-square statistic for detecting intrusions into information systems Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 17 2 2001 105 112
51. T.D. Lane, Machine learning techniques for the computer security domain of anomaly detection, 2000.
52. T. Belvins, J. Gudaz, M. Keyes, M. Nixon, T. Schleiss, Fusion of process performance monitoring with process equipment monitoring and control, 2001. < http://www.google.com/patents/US20020077711 >.
53. G. Betta, and A. Pietrosanto Instrument fault detection and isolation: state of the art and new research trends IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 49 1 2000 100 107
54. Lorenzo Ciani, and Marcantonio Catelani A fault tolerant architecture to avoid the effects of single event upset (SEU) in avionics applications Measurement 54 August 2014 256 263 ISSN 0263-2241, < http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2014.02.018 >
55. M. Catelani, L. Ciani, and V. Luongo A simplified procedure for the analysis of safety instrumented systems in the process industry application Microelectron. Reliab. 51 9-11 2011 1503 1507 ISSN 0026-2714, doi: 10.1016/j.microrel.2011.07.044
56. M. Catelani, L. Ciani, and V. Luongo The FMEDA approach to improve the safety assessment according to the IEC61508 Microelectron. Reliab. 50 9 2010 1230 1235 ISSN: 00262714, doi: 10.1016/j.microrel.2010.07.121
57. R. Kothamasu, S.H. Huang, and W.H. VerDuin System health monitoring and prognostics - a review of current paradigms and practices Handbook of Maintenance Management and Engineering 2009 Springer London 337 362
58. M.C. Garcia, M.A. Sanz-Bobi, and J. del Pico SIMAP: intelligent system for predictive maintenance: application to the health condition monitoring of a windturbine gearbox Comput. Ind. 57 6 2006 552 568
59. T. Moan Reliability-based management of inspection, maintenance and repair of offshore structures Struct. Inf. Eng. 1 1 2005 33 62
60. R. Linker, P.O. Gutman, and I. Seginer Robust model-based failure detection and identification in greenhouses Comput. Electron. Agric. 26 3 2000 255 270
61. M. Namvar, F. Aghili, Fault diagnosis in robotic manipulators using joint torque sensing, in: IFAC Proceedings, July 2008.
62. N. Pessel, J.F. Balmat, F. Lafont, J. Bonnal, Neuronal principal component analysis for the diagnosis of a non linear system, in: Control & Automation, MED'07. Mediterranean Conference on IEEE, June 2007, pp. 1-6.
63. A. Van Horenbeek, L. Pintelon, D. Galar, Integration of disparate data sources to perform maintenance prognosis and optimal decision making. < http://pure.ltu.se/portal/files/40110675/317-Horenbeek.pdf >.
64. D. Galar, Context-driven Maintenance: An eMaintenance approach. Management Systems in Production Engineering, 2014. < http://wydawnictwo.panova.pl/pliki/15-2014/2014-03-05-GALAR.pdf >.
65. D.G. McTavish, and E.B. Pirro Contextual content analysis Qual. Quant. 24 3 1990 245 265 < http://www.clres.com/online-papers/qq.doc >