Effectiveness of Condition-Based

Maintenance (CBM) in Army

Aviation
Presented by
Dr. Abdel Bayoumi, University of South Carolina
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Presentation Overview
Part 1: Introduction to CBM
General Theory
Army Aviation CBM
Available Data
Part 2: Science of CBM
Overview of a CBM Research Program
Part 3: Economics of CBM
Cost Benefits Overview
Considerations for Program Scaling
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
GENERAL CBM THEORY
Part 1: Introduction to CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Maintenance Theory
Mechanical systems
eventually breakdown
Component life follows
observable trend
Maintenance includes
all activities to sustain
an operational state
Maintenance can have
large impact on costs

Time
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

f
a
i
l
u
r
e
s

Break-in Normal life Wear-out
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Schemes of Maintenance
Maintenance
Corrective
Event-driven
Breakdowns
Emergency
Repairs
Preventative
Time Based
Periodic
Fixed intervals
Specific time
Usage Based
Load & time
Condition Based
Vibration monitoring
Tribology
Thermography
Ultrasonics
NDT
Improvement
Reliability-driven
Modification
Redesign
Retrofit
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Usage Monitoring
Performance indicators
Deficient part replacements
Based on fatigue theory and statistics
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Methods of Condition Monitoring
Static
Surveys
Strain
Dynamic
Vibration
Ultrasonic
Active Wafer
Thermal
Temperature
Imaging
Tribology
Lubricant
Analysis
Wear Debris
Analysis
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Vibration Monitoring
Frequencies of interest:
Shaft rotation
Cage rotation
Ball spin
Inner race ball pass
Outer race ball pass
Gear mesh
Sideband

U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Ultrasonic Measurements
Improved Signal to Noise Ratio
AE
VM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Thermal Measurements and Imaging
0 fp, 80 F 100 fp, 120 F
300 fp, 180 F 600 fp, 210 F
900 fp, 230 F 1200 fp, 250 F
Lubricant starvation:
17500 20000 22500 25000 27500 30000
Time [s]
100
150
200
250
300
350
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

[
F
]
Thermo - TRGB ODB
Thermo - TRGB IDB
Thermo - TRGB GM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Tribology
Wear
Lubricant analysis
Lubricant dynamics

U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Preliminary Diagnostics Modeling

150 F
300 F
100 300 Testing time [h]
216 hours 280 hours 296 hours
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
,

V
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

W
e
a
r

Physical observations of wear:
Temperature trend with full grease
Temperature trend without grease
Vibration trend
Tooth wear trend
500
0
5
1

1

2

2

3

3

4

6/

0

6/

1

6/

0

6/

1

6/

0

6/

1

6/

0

6/

1

6/

0

6/

1

200 400
248 hours 328 hours 344 hours


488 hours
A hypothetical scheme relating temperature, vibration and wear
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
CBM IN ARMY AVIATION
Part 1: Introduction to CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Army Nomenclature
Condition Monitoring (CM) Devices:
Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS)
Digital Source Collector (DSC)
Specific Product / Program Names:
Vibration Monitoring and Enhancement Program (VMEP)
Vibration Monitoring Unit (VMU)
Modernized Signal Processing Unit (MSPU)
Health and Usage Management System (HUMS)
Integrated Mechanical Diagnostic Health and Usage
Monitoring System (IMD-HUMS)
Integrated Vehicle Health Monitoring System (IVHMS)
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
HUMS on the AH-64
First generation
VMU
Current device:
1209 MSPU
Monitors vibration of
important drive train
components
Rotor track and balance
Future technology
1239 SuperHUMS
Includes flight regime
recognition abilities
Image taken from the
AH-64 VMEP Crewmember Information Guide
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
HUMS on the UH-60
First generation
VMU
IMD-HUMS / IVHMS
Rotor Smoothing
Drive Train Health
Monitoring
Exceedance Monitoring
Structural Health
Monitoring
Engine Health
Monitoring

Tail Rotor
Tachometer
Gearbox
Tachometer
Main Rotor
Tachometer
Main Rotor
Tracker
Cockpit
Vertical (A)
Cockpit
Vertical (B)
Pilot Heel
Vertical
Right
Accessory
Gearbox
Left
Accessory
Gearbox
Left Input
Gearbox
Right Input
Gearbox
Main Gearbox
Hanger
Bearings (3)
Oil Cooler (2)
Intermediate
Gearbox
Tail Rotor
Gearbox
Left Engine
Right Engine
Cabin
Absorber
Tail Rotor
Tachometer
Gearbox
Tachometer
Main Rotor
Tachometer
Main Rotor
Tracker
Cockpit
Vertical (A)
Cockpit
Vertical (B)
Pilot Heel
Vertical
Right
Accessory
Gearbox
Left
Accessory
Gearbox
Left Input
Gearbox
Right Input
Gearbox
Main Gearbox
Hanger
Bearings (3)
Oil Cooler (2)
Intermediate
Gearbox
Tail Rotor
Gearbox
Left Engine
Right Engine
Cabin
Absorber
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Army Oil Analysis Program
Components vs. Available Analysis Methods
Possible Analysis Methods
Component

O
i
l

G
r
e
a
s
e

M
S
P
U

F
D
A

T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

T
B
O

(
h
r
)
Main Transmission 4500
Nose Gearbox (x2) 4500
Auxiliary Power Unit 4500
Hydraulic System (x2) on-condition
Intermediate Gear Box 4500
Tail Rotor Gear Box 4500
Engine on-condition
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
UNDERSTANDING THE
AVAILABLE DATA
Part 1: Introduction to CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Theoretical Framework of CM
Data
Collection
Raw Data
Signal
Processing
Transformed
Data
Feature
Extraction
Condition
Indicators
Fault
Classification
Diagnostics
Condition
Evaluation
Prognostics
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Raw and Transformed Data
Time and frequency domain vibration data
-100
-50
0
50
100
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
Asynchronous Time Data
USC-64D-TR TB-0026
12/22/2009 17:30:03 | fpg101 | Tail SP | 17:30:00
V
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

(
G
s
)

0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Spectral Plot
USC-64D-TR TB-0026
12/22/200917:30:03| FPG101| Tail SP | 17:40:58| Survey FPG101Tail SP AFD Spectrum
V
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

(
g
)
Frequency (Hz)
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Condition and Health Indicators
Condition Indicators (CIs)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
CI Trend Across Aircraft
USC-64D-TR Latest CI valuefor all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
1

T
a
i
l

S
P

S
h
o
c
k

P
u
l
s
e

E
n
e
r
g
y

J
K
1

(
g
)
Tail Number
T
B
-
0
0
0
1
T
B
-
0
0
0
2
T
B
-
0
0
0
3
T
B
-
0
0
0
4
T
B
-
0
0
0
5
T
B
-
0
0
0
6
T
B
-
0
0
0
7
T
B
-
0
0
0
8
T
B
-
0
0
0
9
T
B
-
0
0
1
0
T
B
-
0
0
1
1
T
B
-
0
0
1
2
T
B
-
0
0
1
3
T
B
-
0
0
1
4
T
B
-
0
0
1
5
T
B
-
0
0
1
6
T
B
-
0
0
1
7
T
B
-
0
0
1
8
T
B
-
0
0
1
9
T
B
-
0
0
2
0
T
B
-
0
0
2
1
T
B
-
0
0
2
2
T
B
-
0
0
2
3
T
B
-
0
0
2
4
T
B
-
0
0
2
5
T
B
-
0
0
2
6
T
B
-
0
0
2
7
T
N
-
0
0
0
1
T
R
-
0
0
1
7
T
R
-
2
2
2
2
T
R
-
T
E
S
T
T
R
-
T
E
S
T
3
T
R
-
T
E
S
T
4
T
R
-
T
E
S
T
5
T
R
-
T
E
S
T
6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
15 Thu
Oct 2009
22 Thu 1 Sun 8 Sun 15 Sun 22 Sun 1 Tue 8 Tue 15 Tue 22 Tue
CI Across Time
USC-64D-TR:TB-0026for all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
1

T
a
i
l

S
P

S
h
o
c
k

P
u
l
s
e

E
n
e
r
g
y

J
K
1

(
g
)
Calendar Time
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Diagnostics and Prognostics
Remaining Useful Life prediction

Detectable Range

Precursor
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

Time
Prognoses
Functional Failure
Faults Detected
RUL
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S Se en ns so or r F Fu us si i o on n
Vibe 1
Vibe 2
Vibe 3
Mutual Information 1
Sensor n Feature n
S Se en ns so or r s s
Temp n
Temperature Level n
AE n
Emission Rate n
F Fe ea at t u ur r e es s
( (C Co on nd di i t t i i o on n I In nd di i c ca at t o or rs s) )

Unbalance-Misalignment

Spall
Crack
Fault n
Improper Lubrication
Crack Initiation
F Fa au ul l t t C Cl l a as ss se es s
Vibe n
Mutual Information 2

H He ea al l t t h h C Co on nd di i t t i i o on n
D DI IA AG GN NO OS SI IS S
P PR RO OG GN NO OS SI IS S
F Fe ea at t u ur r e e M Ma ap pp pi i n ng g
F Fa au ul l t t / /D Di i a ag gn no os si i s s C Cl l a as ss si i f f i i e er r s s
( (S SV VM M, , V Vo ot t i i n ng g) )
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
f
H He ea al l t t h h/ /P Pr r o og gn no os si i s s C Cl l a as ss si i f f i i e er r s s
( (B Ba ay ye es si i a an n I In nf f e er r e en nc ce e, , N NN NT T) )
Failure Mode

RUL
P
f
f
f
f
f
f
C
C
C
C
C
C


. . .












F Fe ea at t u ur r e e L Le ev ve el l S Se en ns so or r F Fu us si i o on n


Good Condition

Stable Condition

Failure Condition

Shock Pulse Energy

Kurtosis
Diagnostics and Prognostics
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Usage Monitoring Data
Flight Regime Based Usage Monitoring:
Estimates component loads from maneuver
recognition and theoretical design loading
Directly Measured Usage Monitoring:
Utilizes load sensors on various components for
actual loading conditions (still in development)
Both systems estimate component life
through Fatigue Damage Fraction Calculation
and Miners Rule
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
TAMMS-A Data
Period: 1999 Present
Data sources:
ULLS-A (2408-12, 2408-13, and Document Control
Register), VMU/MSPU Database
Aircraft Models:
UH-60A, UH-60L, AH-64A, AH-64D, and CH-47D
Establishments and Environments:
ALARNG, MOARNG, PAARNG, SCARNG, TNARNG, ATTC,
FT Campbell, FT Rucker, Hunter AAF, Kosovo, Korea, Iraq
Flight Hours: Over 35,500 hours
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
DISCUSSION BREAK
Part 1: Introduction to CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
EXAMPLE OF A FULL SCALE
RESEARCH SUPPORT PROGRAM
Part 2: Science of CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
CBM Research @ USC
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Research Overview
Component
Testing
Vibration
Analysis
Fault
Characterization
Advanced Signal
Processing
Lubricant
Analysis
Lubricant
Condition
Component
Condition
Data Mining
CI Evaluation
CI Creation
Fundamental
Research
Data Integration
Cost Benefit
Analysis
Natural
Language
Processing
Sensor Fusion
Sensor
Selection
Algorithm
Development
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
USC CBM Testing Facility
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Component Testing and Characterization
TRDT test stands at the USC CBM Research Center

Tail Drive
Shafts
Intermediate
Gearbox
Hanger
Bearings
Tail Pylon
Driveshaft
Tail Rotor
Gearbox
Absorption
Motor
Drive Motor
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Tail Rotor Drive Train (TRDT)
Test Stand
AH-64 Apache Helicopter USC Test Stand
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Main Rotor Swash Plate (MRSP)
Assembly Test Stand
AH-64 Apache
Helicopter
USC Test Stand
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Laboratory Support
USC Metrology, Machine Vision Facility, and CNC Machining Facility


U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Fault Characterization
Condition Indicators
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
AH-64 Tail Rotor Gearbox Experiment
Unexpected findings
Output seal leak thought
only to affect static mast
bearings
Study proved no internal
seal between
compartments
Implications
Output seal is field
serviceable
Gearbox does not need
removal for this condition
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Advanced Signal Processing
#1-S4
R=6.678
#2-S8
R=6.735
#4-S6
R=6.667
#7-S5
R=7.022
Pre-run
Indication
of Failure
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Advanced Signal Processing
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Lubricant Analysis
Lubricant viscosity
characterization
Lubricant flow
dynamics
Grease ejection
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Measured Changes in AH-64 Grease Viscosity
Rapid loss of
lubricant viscosity
with permanent
changes
Different lubricant
might be considered
Grease ejection does
not affect gearbox
operation or safety
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Data Mining Classifiers
Beyond traditional
threshold trees
Start with test stand
experiments in which
repeated results were
observed
Attempt to find case
studies from fleet data
Evaluate results with
cross-validation and
separated training sets
CI1 CI2 CI3

Classifier
Fault Class
Membership
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Predicting Aircraft Tail Numbers
All Aircraft CIs
Correctly Classified
Instances
1823 (85 %)
Incorrectly Classified
Instances
320 (15 %)
Kappa statistic 0.8472
Mean absolute error 0.0252
Root mean squared error 0.0996
Relative absolute error 70 %
Root relative squared
error
74 %
Total Number of
Instances
2143
Tail Rotor Gearbox CIs
Correctly Classified
Instances (Aircraft)
43.3%
Total Number of Aircraft 54
Correctly Classified
Instances (Test Stand
98.3%
Total Number of
Gearboxes
5
Utilized a Random Forest classifier
with 30 decision tress with 8
randomly selected Condition
Indicators
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Evaluating Condition Indicators
Time period under study
shows varying use per
aircraft
CI examined for
dependency
relationships
Principle component
analysis found:
138 original CI functions
84 orthogonal
components
40% redundancy in
information
Individual Aircraft (tail numbers not displayed)
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

A
c
q
u
i
s
i
t
i
o
n
s
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Creating Condition Indicators
Correlation coefficient 0.8859
Mean absolute error 0.0941
Root mean squared
error
0.134
Relative absolute error 37.6%
Root relative squared
error
46.4%
Total number of
instances
1688
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Cost Benefit Analysis
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
U
S

D
o
l
l
a
r
s
Year
Cumulative Costs of Maintenance Test Flight Hour per
Mission Flight Hour
VMU/MSPU Equipped Fleet Baseline
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Integration Challenges
Depiction of the four-stage integration process

Collected
Source
Data
Single
Relational
Database
Metadata
Enhanced
Database
Results
and Case
Studies
HUMS
Files
Sensor
Value
Indicator
Fault
Action
Vehicle
Date
Vehicle Date
Component
Severity
Rarity
Importation Tagging
Sensor
Value
Indicator
Fault
Action
MMS
Database
Sensor
Value
Indicator
Fault
Action
Analysis
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Natural Language Processing
Examined fault
descriptions
Approximately follows
Poisson distribution
Average record length
is less than 8 words
Simple grammar
structure observed
Analysis of TAMMS-A Fault Records
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Number of Words per Record
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y




U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Sensor Selection
Number of paper in this text and the corresponding reference number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Evaluated parameters % 16 18 19 20 21 55 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 56 34 36 39 46
Seeded fault 16 70
Natural fatigue 6 26
Field case studies (natural fatigue) 3 13
Low lubricant, lubricant contamination 5 22
Vibration RMS analysis 9 39
Wideband vibration spectrum analysis 8 35
Advanced statistics of vibration signal 7 30
Enveloping of vibration signal 7 30
More than two CM techniques were used 3 13
Roller bearings 2 8.7
Ball bearings 22 96
Journal bearings 2 8.7
Thrust bearings 1 4.3
AE was concluded to be better 16 70
VM was concluded to be better 5 22
VM & AE were concluded to be equal 4 17
Smallest seeded fault was detected by both VM & AE 7 30
Literature review comparing vibration monitoring with AE sensors
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l



Analysis
Control/Data Acquisition
System
Control Data
Torque Temp. AE Vibration Speed
Measurement data correlation (a)
Relative comparison of predictive capabilities of
available and emerging measurement methods (b)
(a) (b)
Sensor and Data Collection Evaluation
Sensor evaluation and data fusion:

AE
Oil debris anal ysis
Vibration
ESA
Fault initiation Failure
Time
Temperature (improper lubrication, installation)
Temperature
Vibration
Temperature
Oil Analysis
ESA
AE
] , [ ) ( ) (
1
j i A t W j D
m
i
i
=
=
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Maximum vibration level over measured
frequency band and temperature plots over time

0
a

[
g
]
,

T

[
F
]


First noticeable
teeth damage
350 [h]
170 F 170 F
170 F
270 F
20
40
0
Sensors and Data Collection Evaluation
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
DISCUSSION BREAK
Part 2: Science of CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF
IMPLEMENTATION
Part 3: Economics of CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Costs and Scale of CBM Programs
Implementation
Hardware Labor Training
Optimization
Data
Centralization
Scientific
Research
Required Optional
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Pre-Implementation Cost Justification
Identify Components to
Monitor
List all process critical
components
Determine failure modes
and effects of each
Sort failures by their
criticality
Determine a
Monitoring Strategy
Determine which failure
modes can be predicted
Determine condition
indicators for the fault
Predict the TP and FP
rates of the CI
Perform a CBA
Identify system costs:
capital, labor, FPs, etc
Identify potential gains:
components, labor, time
Determine CBA metrics
for CIs in consideration
Make a Decision
Accept all CIs which show
net gains
Accept spillover CIs with
no extra costs
Install equipment and
revise procedures
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Difficulties in FMECA Process
Predicting possible failure modes and their
relative probability of occurrence requires:
detailed records for established systems
complex modeling for new systems
Bottom-line costs of a particular failure mode
are difficult to asses due to:
complex interactions between subsystems
supply chain variables which cannot be predicted
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Maintenance of Wholly-Critical Systems
WC systems are those in which the functional
failure of any component results in a total
loss of the system
Often cost of individual components are
vastly less than the whole system
Most easily addressed with aggressive
scheduled inspections and replacements
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Special Characteristics of WC Systems
Failure Profile of a
Single Component
Cumulative Failure Probabilities of
Multiple Components in Series
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Justifying CBM Costs on WC Platforms
Costs Gains
System Risk
Mitigation
Saved Parts
Improved
Operations
Capital and
Upkeep
False
Positives
Extra Training
In certain platforms, the
cost of a system loss far
exceeds that of any of the
other considered
parameters
Assume false positives
are less frequent than
aggressive schedule
replacements
Possible to justify CBM by
comparing CM upfront
costs to system costs
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Justifying CBM Costs on WC Platforms
This simplification is possible by considering
the subset of failures which cause the greatest
loss, i.e., the whole system. For WC Platforms
it will include nearly all failures
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
US Army Aviation CBM Approach
The cost ratio for a CM device on a US Army
helicopter is approximately 1:200, or 0.5%
Possible to achieve ROI by considering asset risk
mitigation, i.e., crash prevention
Perfect candidate for pre-installation CBM
CIs and thresholds could be refined later
Between 1999 present more than 700 AH-64
A/D had onboard monitoring systems installed
The next step: CI refinement
Slowed by conservative TBO schedules
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
LEAKING (LIQUID) 39%
SEAL/GASKET BLOWN 10%
WORN EXCESSIVELY 10%
SCORED 9%
GROOVED 7%
BEYOND SPECIFIED TOLERANCE 6%
PITTED 4%
TRGB causes of removal Maintenance Test Flights
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
20.0%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year
MSPU Equipped
Baseline
Unscheduled Maintenance
Maintenance Test Flights Preliminary
results show an 80% reduction in MTFs over a
8 year span.
Unscheduled Maintenance Incidences of
unscheduled maintenance as a percentage of
total maintenance actions have been reduced
significantly.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
U
S

D
o
l
l
a
r
s
Year
Cumulative Costs of Maintenance Test Flight Hour per
Mission Flight Hour
VMU/MSPU Equipped Fleet Baseline
Post-Implementation CBA U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Benefits from CBM Implementation
Tangible
Reduction in corrective
maintenance
Increased operational
readiness rates
Increased supply chain
efficiency
Reduced number of
inspections and test flights
Fewer unnecessary part
replacements
Asset risk mitigation
Intangible
Increased confidence and
morale from end users
Increased focus on mission
Requires revised
maintenance management
policies
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Cost Benefits Model for
Basic Implementation
Time
C
o
s
t
s

o
f

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Maintenance Program Costs
CBM Technology Costs
Total Costs
Net
Savings
Break-
Even Point
P
r
e
-
C
B
M

C
o
s
t

L
e
v
e
l
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Optimal Amount of Maintenance
Amount of Preventative Maintenance Performed
C
o
s
t
s

o
f

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Preventative
Maintenance
Program Costs
Maintained
System Costs
Total Costs
Optimal
Maintenance Level
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF
OPTIMIZATION
Part 3: Economics of CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Costs and Scale of CBM Programs
Implementation
Hardware Labor Training
Optimization
Data
Centralization
Scientific
Research
Required Optional
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Optimization:
Continuous Improvement
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Extra Costs of Optimization
Data Centralization Approach
Requires large volumes of data to be moved from
deployed systems to a central server
Costs include workstations, network infrastructure,
bandwidth, servers, contractors
Scientific Testing Approach
Requires a well-planned testing program to
maximize benefits and careful consideration of
components and fault modes to be studied
Costs include test stands, contracted hourly rates,
test articles, planning overhead
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Cost Benefits Model for
Data Centralization
C
o
s
t
s

a
n
d

G
a
i
n
s
Cost of Data
Centralization
Amount of Data Moved and Stored
Net Gains through
Data Centralization
Break-Even
Point
Maximum
ROI Point
Scalability Range
Technological
Limits
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Data Centralization Limits
The transmission and storage of fleet-wide data
is a significant cost for centralized CBM
programs
The benefits which can be attained from global
access and analysis are ultimately limited by the
capabilities of the technology
Intelligent transmission and storage programs
are needed to ensure an economical data
program
This means prioritizing critical data and deleting
redundant or non-useful information
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Cost Benefits Model for
Scientific Research
C
o
s
t
s

a
n
d

G
a
i
n
s
Costs of
Experiments
Number of Scientific Studies Performed
Net Gains from
Research Results
Break-Even
Point
Maximum
ROI Point
Technological
Limits
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Scientific Research Limits
Scientific research generally does not follow the
rules of economy of scale
Similar to data centralization and analysis
efforts, CBM technology will always have
limitations which must be taken into account
Attempts to improve and optimize CBM
algorithms and devices should continue only as
long as it is profitable to do so
Identifying the point of diminishing returns is
more difficult since marginal costs are roughly
constant
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Combined Cost Benefits Model
Time
C
o
s
t
s

o
f

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Maintenance Program Costs
Up-Front
Costs
Total Costs
Net
Savings
Break-Even
Point
R&D
Costs
Data Movement Costs
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
DISCUSSION BREAK
Part 3: Economics of CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Discussion Topics
Optimization Challenges
Keeping control over data
costs and management
How to select the right
data to purge
Justifying scientific
research quantitatively
Identifying the
technological limits of the
hardware
Economics
Success stories of CBM
showing costs savings
Costs of false positives vs
saved parts
Challenges of post-
implementation CBAs
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Thank you!
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
BACKUP CHARTS
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Discussion Topics
CBM Theory Army CBM
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Discussion Topics
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
TIME
TESTING
Integrating HUMS with Historical Data via Components Testing
RCM
PBL
Diagnosis &
Prognosis
CBA
MAC
Lean Six
Sigma Process
FY11 FY13 FY09 FY08 FY07 FY10 FY12
TDA
ROADMAP OF CBM RESEARCH AT USC
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Drive train control and data acquisition program
Seeded Fault Component Testing
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l



Analysis
Control/Data Acquisition
System
Control Data
Torque Temp. AE Vibration Speed
Sensors and Data Collection Evaluation
Data acquisition and sensor system installed at the USC CBM
Research Center
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Seeded Fault Component Testing
Broken and severely damaged teeth of TGB input gear,
after testing at USC CBM Research Center
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Preliminary Diagnostics Modeling
Gear mesh frequencies component amplitudes during the
final four days of gearbox life (a)
Comparison of the amplitudes of the first and second gear
mesh frequency harmonics (b)
(a) (b)
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

[
g
]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
25-Jun 26-Jun 27-Jun 28-Jun 29-Jun 30-Jun
Gear Mesh Amplitude [g]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15
Mesh Frequency Amplitude
Mesh Frequency 2nd Harmonic Amplitude
6/25/2008 6/26/2008 6/27/2008 6/28/2008
G
e
a
r

M
e
s
h

2
n
d

H
a
r
m
o
i
c
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

[
g
]
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
TGB Sideband Index CI and vibration order trends over time



10
30
50
70
0 170 [h]
O
r
d
e
r
s

0
1
2
3
4
[
g
]

Preliminary Diagnostics Modeling
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Analysis Technique Exploration
Spectrograms for a baseline shaft and shaft with
unbalanced load
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Value Engineering
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Feb
2005
Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CI Across Time
AH64A:94-00331for all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
0

A
f
t

H
B

1
R

V
ib

(
I
P
S
)
Calendar Time
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
J an2005 Apr J ul Oct
CI Across Time
AH64A:92-00482for all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
0

F
w
d

H
B

1
R

V
ib

(
I
P
S
)
Calendar Time
Aft HB replaced showed Axial
Play June 18, 2005
Aft HB replaced failed nutation
check May 20, 2005
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Feb
2005
Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
CI Across Time
AH64A:94-00337for all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
0

F
w
d

H
B

E
n
e
r
g
y

(
g
)
Calendar Time
Fwd HB TBO Replacement
July 15, 2005
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Apr
2005
J ul Oct J an2006 Apr
CI Across Time
AH64A:94-00335for all times
S
u
r
v
e
y

F
P
G
1
0
0

A
f
t

H
B

E
n
e
r
g
y

(
g
)
Calendar Time
Aft HB TBO Replacement
June 20, 2005
TBO Replacements Reducing Inspections
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Algorithm Development

S Se en ns so or r F Fu us si i o on n
Vibe 1
Vibe 2
Vibe 3
Mutual Information 1
Sensor n Feature n
S Se en ns so or r s s
Temp n
Temperature Level n
AE n
Emission Rate n
F Fe ea at t u ur r e es s
( (C Co on nd di i t t i i o on n I In nd di i c ca at t o or rs s) )

Unbalance-Misalignment

Spall
Crack
Fault n
Improper Lubrication
Crack Initiation
F Fa au ul l t t C Cl l a as ss se es s
Vibe n
Mutual Information 2

H He ea al l t t h h C Co on nd di i t t i i o on n
D DI IA AG GN NO OS SI IS S
P PR RO OG GN NO OS SI IS S
F Fe ea at t u ur r e e M Ma ap pp pi i n ng g
F Fa au ul l t t / /D Di i a ag gn no os si i s s C Cl l a as ss si i f f i i e er r s s
( (S SV VM M, , V Vo ot t i i n ng g) )
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
f
H He ea al l t t h h/ /P Pr r o og gn no os si i s s C Cl l a as ss si i f f i i e er r s s
( (B Ba ay ye es si i a an n I In nf f e er r e en nc ce e, , N NN NT T) )
Failure Mode

RUL
P
f
f
f
f
f
f
C
C
C
C
C
C


. . .












F Fe ea at t u ur r e e L Le ev ve el l S Se en ns so or r F Fu us si i o on n


Good Condition

Stable Condition

Failure Condition

Shock Pulse Energy

Kurtosis
U
S
C

p
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y

c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l