Abstract
The aim of Integrated Vehicle Health Management (IVHM) is to improve the management of maintenance operations through the implementation of health monitoring tools on key components either by diagnosing deterioration or by estimating Remaining Useful Life (RUL) so as to effect timely, and cost effective, maintenance. Regarding the use of IVHM technology in legacy aircraft, one has to keep in mind that hardware modifications to improve the reliability of components is not normally considered a viable alternative to diagnostic and prognostic tools due to high certification costs. At the same time, the data and expertise gathered over years of operating the aircraft help to estimate much more accurately how different health monitoring tools could impact maintenance activities. Consequently, selecting the optimal combination of health monitoring tools for legacy aircraft is significantly easier than for a new design. While computer simulations of the maintenance process are essential to determine how different IVHM tools generate value for the stakeholders, it is not practicable to simulate all possible combinations in order to select which tools are to be installed. This paper describes a process to reduce their number of toolsets to be simulated starting with the identification of those components that present a higher potential to reduce maintenance costs and times in case their faults could be detected and/or predicted. This is followed by the definition of the minimum required accuracy of diagnostic and prognostic tools for each component. This enables designers to determine which tools—available or still being developed—can be implemented to achieve the expected improvement in maintenance operations. Different combinations of IVHM tools are then subjected to a preliminary risk and cost-benefit analysis. A significantly reduced number of combinations are then simulated to select the optimal blend of technologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ashby MJ, Byer RJ (2002) An approach for conducting a cost benefit analysis of aircraft engine prognostics and health management functions. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE aerospace conference, vol 6, pp 6–2847
Azzam H, Beaven F, Gill L, Wallace M (2004) A route for qualifying/certifying an affordable structural prognostic health management (SPHM) system. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE aerospace conference, vol 6, pp 3791
Banks J, Reichard K, Crow E, Nickell K (2009) How engineers can conduct cost-benefit analysis for PHM systems. Aerosp Electron Syst Mag IEEE 24(3):22–30
Dunsdon J, Harrington M (2008) The Application of Open System Architecture for Condition Based Maintenance to Complete IVHM, In: 2008 IEEE aerospace conference, pp 1
Esperon-Miguez M, John P, Jennions IK (2012) The effect of current military maintenance practices and regulations on the implementation of Integrated Vehicle Health Management technology. A-MEST’ 12, Seville
Esperon-Miguez M, John P, Jennions IK (2012) Uncertainty of performance metrics for IVHM tools according to business targets. In: First european conference of the prognostics and health management society 2012, vol 11, Dresden, pp 11
Grubic T, Redding L, Baines T, Julien D (2011) The adoption and use of diagnostic and prognostic technology within UK-based manufacturers. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 225(8):1457–1470
Hess A, Calvello G, Frith P, Engel SJ, Hoitsma D (2006) Challenges, issues, and lessons learned chasing the “ Big P”: real predictive prognostics part 2. In: IEEE 2006 Aerospace Conference, pp 1
Kacprzynski GJ, Roemer MJ, Hess AJ (2002) Health management system design: development, simulation and cost/benefit optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE Aerospace Conference, vol 6, pp 6–3065
Lopez I, Sarigul-Klijn N (2010) A review of uncertainty in flight vehicle structural damage monitoring, diagnosis and control: Challenges and opportunities. Prog Aerosp Sci 46(7):247–273
MacConnell JH (2007) ISHM & Design: A review of the benefits of the ideal ISHM system. In: IEEE 2007 Aerospace Conference, pp 1
Saxena A, Celaya J, Saha B, Saha S, Goebel K (2010) Metrics for offline evaluation of prognostic performance. Int J Prognostics Health Manage 1(1), 20, 73
Wheeler K, Kurtoglu T, Poll S (2009) A survey of health management user objectives related to diagnostic and prognostic metrics
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by the IVHM Centre at Cranfield University. The authors would like to thank the partners of the IVHM Centre for their support in this project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Esperon-Miguez, M., Jennions, I.K., John, P. (2015). Implementing IVHM on Legacy Aircraft: Progress Towards Identifying an Optimal Combination of Technologies. In: Tse, P., Mathew, J., Wong, K., Lam, R., Ko, C. (eds) Engineering Asset Management - Systems, Professional Practices and Certification. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09507-3_70
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09507-3_70
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09506-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09507-3
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)