Abstract
Only a very modest percentage of maintenance of capital goods is done condition-based, as opposed to plan-based or corrective. Doing much more would be very beneficial from a safety and operations perspective. Moreover, the basic methods have been known for some time. This paper addresses the question that, if condition-based maintenance (CBM) or Prognostic Health Management (PHM), as the terms commonly used to denote the same maintenance policy, is so logical and beneficial, why is it currently not more often applied in practice? This paper suggests that the answer lies in a complex interplay of technical and organizational issues. This interplay is best conceptualized as a data enrichment chain, which starts and ends at the physical asset to be maintained and ends at the actual prognostic maintenance being executed and evaluated. This chain is described in more detail, and illustrated with examples from an open innovation project in the process industry in the Netherlands, the CAMPIONE fieldlab. From this description, it becomes evident that this chain is currently broken in many places. If CBM/PHM is to become more established as a business practice, these breaks will need to be fixed. The paper discusses several of the options of how to fix this data enrichment chain in practice.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society 2016 |
Editors | Ioana Eballard, Anibal Bregon |
Place of Publication | Bilbao |
Publisher | PHM Society |
Pages | 673-680 |
ISBN (Print) | 9781936263219 |
Publication status | Published - 2016 |
Event | 3rd European Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society 2016 - Bilbao, Spain Duration: 5 Jul 2016 → 8 Jul 2016 |
Conference
Conference | 3rd European Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society 2016 |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | PHME16 |
Country/Territory | Spain |
City | Bilbao |
Period | 5/07/16 → 8/07/16 |