Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.

com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS

Maintenance 4.0 to fulfil the demands of Industry 4.0 and Factory

oftheFuture
Basim Al-Najjar*, Hatem Algabroun*, Mikael Jonsson**
Mechanical Engineering Department, Linnaeus University, Sweden*
E-Maintenance Sweden AB,Sweden**
Corresponding Author:Basim Al-Najjar

ABSTRACT: In today‟s high market competition, industries attempt adapt new technologies retain their
market share. With technology advancement in factories, maintenance methods are developed to suit the new
manufacturers‟ demands. Now, with the Industry 4.0, new maintenance techniques have to be developed to
fulfill the new demands which we refer to as Maintenance 4.0. Each currently used maintenance technique has
its own advantages and disadvantages. Until now it is unclear if these techniques are suitable for Industry 4.0.
This study shows how to identify the maintenance technique that is the most suitable to be further developed for
Industry 4.0. In this paper, the tasks and features of Maintenance 4.0 are identified, and the suitability of the
most popular maintenance techniques is examined with respect to Industry 4.0 demands. This is done by using
Multiple Attribute Decision Making combined with the Simple Additive Weight. The results show that Total
Quality Maintenance(TQMain) and then Condition Based Maintenance(CBM) are the highest ranked among the
examined maintenance techniques, and therefore it is concluded that these maintenance techniques could be
used as a based to develop Maintenance 4.0.
Keywords- Maintenance 4.0, maintenance for Industry 4.0, maintenance for smart factories, maintenance
techniques comparisons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Date Of Submission:16-11-2018 Date Of Acceptance:30-11-2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I. INTRODUCTION: STATE-OF- ART Factories of Industry 4.0, CPS monitor physical

AND MOTIVATIONS processes, create a virtual copy of the physical
In today‟s high market competition, world and make decentralized decisions. Over the
industries attempt to adapt new technologies to IoT and CPS communicate and cooperate with each
fulfill customer needs and retain their market share. other and humans in real time. Via the IoS, both
Industry has experienced threerevolutionsduring internal and cross- organizational services are
the past 200 years, driven by mechanization, offered and utilized by participants of the value
electrical power and the electronics & Information chain. (p.11)
technology(Kagermann et al. 2013; Drath & Horch Itisprovenbymanyresearchersthatmaintena
2014; Deloitte 2015).With the recent technology nce plays an important role to enhance production
advance in Cyber Physical Systems (CPS), the performance (Waeyenbergh & Pintelon 2002; Al-
Internet of Things (IoT) and the internet of Services Najjar & Alsyouf 2003; Al-Najjar 2007). With
(IoS), Industry 4.0 has been announced as the 4th technology advancement in factories andincreased
industrial revolution. Thisrevolution is driven by complexity n the manufacturing machines,
the need of shorter time to market, customized maintenance methodsaredeveloped in order to suit
mass production and increased efficiency(Helmrich thenewmanufacturers‟ demands.Furthermore,
2015).Industry 4.0 is characterized by the vertical several commercial software solutions evolved to
integration of systems at different hierarchical improve the production performance and its
levels of the value creation chain and the business profitability. However, the profitability of
process, as well as, by the horizontal integration of maintenance and assessment of its pay-back is not
several value networks within and across the common among maintenance commercial software.
factory. This is done through end-to-end Nevertheless, it is still considered in some of the
engineering across the entire value maintenance software systems such as Smart
chain(Kagermann et al. 2013; Hermann et al. 2016; eMDSS (Smart eMaintenance Decision Support
Stock & Seliger 2016).Hermann et al. (2016) System) uses deterministic and statistical
defined Industry 4.0 as,a collective term for approaches) from E-maintenance Sweden ABand
technologies and concepts of value chain EXAKT (uses the probabilistic approach) from
organization. Within the modular structured Smart OMDEC Inc.

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203120|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

Now, with the Industry 4.0,new To examine and rank the suitability
maintenance paradigm,innovative methods, tools of the most popular maintenance techniques, we
and systems have to be developed to fulfill the new will:1) Identify possible tasks that are needed to be
demands whichisreferredto as Maintenance handled by a maintenance technique in the factory
4.0.Industry 4.0 is a relatively new technology of the future and when Industry 4.0 is implemented.
(Deloitte 2015; Qin et al. 2016) and therefore a 2) Identify the features that such a maintenance
little research is performed in the area of its technique/system should acquire to be able to
maintenance. There is a lack of studies that conduct the tasks in 1 above.3) Examine and rank
examine the suitability of the current used the suitability of the most popular maintenance
maintenance techniques for Industry 4.0. Therefore, techniques to Industry 4.0.
the problem addressed in this study is:How to
identifythe maintenance technique that isthe most III. MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUES
suitable to be developed for meeting the demands In the recent decades the recognition of
stated by factory of the future implementing the maintenance as an effective part of the company
concept of Industry 4.0? The need of this study competitiveness and existence has
arises from the fact that each maintenance grown(Waeyenbergh & Pintelon 2002; Al-Najjar &
technique has its own features, advantages and Alsyouf 2003; Maletic et al. 2014).The most
disadvantages. However, until now it is unclear relevant and widely implemented maintenance
how these techniques will perform in Industry techniques that are considered in this paper are:
4.0environment. This study aims to examinethe Failure Based Maintenance/Breakdown
most popular maintenance techniques with respect maintenance (FBM), Preventive Maintenance
to the maintenance features demanded by the (PM), Condition Based Maintenance (CBM), Total
maintenance suitable for Industry 4.0. It is Productive Maintenance (TPM) and Total Quality
necessary to give an insight to maintenance Maintenance (TQMain).
professionals that helps indeveloping proper Failure Based Maintenance (FBM)strategy
maintenance strategy that suits Industry 4.0. (it is also called breakdown or corrective
Next describes the methodology to maintenance) is a reactive maintenance. It is doneat
achieve the aims of this paper. Section 3 and 4 failure torestore a machine to a working condition
describe and classify the most popular maintenance as before. It is based on the concept: wait until the
techniques. Then, section 5, reveals the industry breakdown then fix it as soon as possible to as good
demands, potential maintenance tasks and the as before(Al-Najjar 1997; Pintelon & Parodi-herz
features of the maintenance technique/system that 2008). In FBM the failure may occur during
is suitable for Industry 4.0 (i.e. Maintenance 4.0). inconvenient time, therefore long downtime and
Section 6 explains the tools to examine the negative consequences should be expected. In order
suitability of the selected maintenance techniques to reduce downtime and increase the availability,
with respect features demanded by Maintenance additional spare, redundancy equipment, labor and
4.0. Section 7 examines the maintenance spare parts are often needed, which are very costly.
techniques using the features of Maintenance 4.0, However, even that the FBMis in some
which is followed by results and discussions in cases,consideredcost effective technique especially
section 8. Finally, conclusions will be drawn in when no other maintenance technique is
section 9. applicable(Waeyenbergh & Pintelon 2002; Chan &
Prakash 2012).
II. METHODOLOGY The fundamental concept of Preventive
To achieve the objective of this study, the Maintenance (PM) strategy is to reduce the
suitability of the most popular maintenance probability of failures by replacing parts at
techniques will be explored, discussed and intervals predefined by the manufacturer, end-user
examined with respect to the maintenance features and/or experts for example at time T, regardless of
demanded by Industry 4.0. The examination of the the system condition(Waeyenbergh & Pintelon
maintenance techniques will be done by using 2002; Pintelon & Parodi-herz 2008; Prajapati et al.
Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) 2012).T represents calendar time, age or real
combined with the Simple Additive Weight (SAW) running time. So component will be replaced at
in order to see the collective performance. This failure or at fixed time T whichever comes first.PM
combination is used by several researchers (Al- is used in different industries when it is assumed to
Najjar & Alsyouf 2003; Chan & Prakash 2012) to be cheaper than FBM and easier to plan as it is
examine and rank maintenance techniques. It is relied on scheduled time. However, there might be
used in this study for its simplicity and suitability always a probability of over-maintenance and
for the study‟s purpose. losing unnecessary production time, or early and

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203121|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

unnecessary maintenance actions, e.g. make a cost-effective decision before the

replacements, with additional losses of resources. deviation/damage impacts the production
StrategyofCondition Based performance. It advocates integration of relevant
Maintenance(CBM)concept advocates databases in order to detect damage causes, damage
thatactionsare planned only if there are initiation and deviations and
indications/symptoms assessed using relevant followupdamage/deviation development in, e.g.
condition monitoring (CM) parameters. The production cost, quality, production, machine
CMparameters could be temperature, pressure, condition at an early stage.
vibration, etc. CBM is a technique that utilizes the TQMain uses the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-
acquired information by CM parameters in order to Act) cycle to continuously improve the process
act just before a failure when the deviations reach a elements. But, its action is applied earlier than the
predetermined level (Al-Najjar 1997; Chan & failure occurrence because it is based on detecting
Prakash 2012; Rastegari 2015). CBM can be used changes in the machine/process condition and
as proactive when enough information of high performance using data from relevant CM
quality is available and predictive otherwise. technologies(Al-Najjar 1997; Sherwin 2000; Chan
Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is a & Prakash 2012). The performance indicators used
philosophy that involves all the employees in an in the TQMain is the Overall Process effectiveness
organization, from the top management to the floor (OPE). It is a modification of OEE covering whole
shop. It advocates operator maintenance that process and not only the equipment (Sherwin 2000;
consists of well-defined activities, such as the daily Al-Najjar & Ingwald 2002). The measure of
maintenance work to reduce downtime, material maintenance Cost Effectiveness (Ce) advocated by
waste, improve quality and overall equipment TQMain is the proportion of the difference between
effectiveness. Simple problems are rectified by the the cost of producing high quality item before and
operator whereas complicated ones are forwarded after maintenance improvement or policy changes
to the maintenance staff (Al-Najjar & Ingwald (Bb) and (Ba) respectively, to (Bb), i.e.(Ce) = 1-
2002; Chan & Prakash 2012). The assumed results Ba/ Bb.
are claimed to be earned in the long-term which TQMain aims to maintain the quality of
make it difficult to be accepted by the higher the elements involved in a production
management as they tend to focus on the early processbasedon using a common database of real-
results (Al-Najjar 1997). The Overall Equipment time data. Information provided by TQMainis
Effectiveness OEE is advocated by TPM to easily accessible by all stakeholders at different
measure the equipment effectiveness technically. managerial and technical levels fulfilling the
However, there is no methodology presented in the demand of vertical and horizontal integration of an
framework for data gathering, management, organization. This helps to maintain the quality of
processing and handling (analysis, diagnosis, the production process. It emphasizes the
prognosis and prediction) in order to be able integration of the data from different disciplines
developing as much as possible of a production such as production, maintenance, economy and
holistic view. This increases the difficulties in the quality.
follow up of the technical and economical results of
the improvement activities. TPM provides some IV. MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUES
tools and methods to investigate and analyze CLASSIFICATIONS
technical problems e.g. Phenomenon-Mechanism In Industry 4.0, the entire value chain will
Analysis. However, originally in TPM there is no be integrated and share digitalized information to
special technique for effective utilization of CM cooperate and execute tasks. This will generate an
technologies and data. It is left to the operator‟s enormous data mass from different elements over
experience to decide what and how to measure (Al- the network. An environment of gigantic data from
Najjar & Ingwald 2002). The main goal of TPM is different systems could provide tremendous value
to maximize the equipment effectiveness through to achieve more accurate;detectionofproblemsand
reducing the six big losses in order to meet the JIT theirroot-causes as well asdiagnosis and prediction
(Just-In-Time) manufacturing tough needs, i.e. of damage development, assessment of effects, and
improve overall equipment effectiveness. reliableplanningof maintenance activities, which at
Total Quality Maintenance (TQMain)is a the end avoids unplanned downtime (Lee et al.
philosophy that was developed to detect deviations 2015). Hence, data coverage,quality and its
in the condition and performance of the essential utilization are important factors for maintenance in
elementsinvolved in a production process(e.g. Industry 4.0.However, dealing with an environment
operation, quality control system, personal of such huge data and developing tools to transform
competence, methods, raw material quality and data into information could be challenging(Lee et
environment) and not only the machine, in order to al. 2014; Wabner 2018).

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203122|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

Based on data coverage, quality, and the predict and respond rapidly to changes, e.g. in
level ofutilization thatdescribes the condition of a production, delivery, failures, etc. and able to
machine and component, maintenance techniques compensate temporary shortages. Theflexibility in
are classified as shown below: Industry 4.0 will result in a better working
condition for the workers and better life-work
Class 1; maintenance techniques able to utilize balance.InIndustry 4.0, new ways of services will
relevant real-time data from different relevant be created and therefore, a new business models
working areas, e.g. production, economic, quality, and opportunities will appear(Kagermann et al.
operation andeconomy toachieve more accurate: 2013). In a conclusion, Industry 4.0 will result in:
 Diagnosis, prognosis, prediction and  High customization ability to meet individual
recommendations customer requirements
 Assessment of the technical and economic  Continuous improvement and optimized
impact of maintenance on company business. decision making
 Identification of root causes and reliable  Productivity and resources efficiency
opportunity for elimination.  Work-Life Balance
 Cost effective maintenance decisions.  New business opportunities
 Holistic view of a production station, line and
consequently production process. The objectives of Industry 4.0 are driven
 Follow up of deteriorationdevelopment to by the need of shorter time to market, customized
select the most profitable maintenance time. mass production and increased efficiency(Helmrich
An example of Class 1is TQMain. 2015).In order to sustain the successfulness of
Class 2; maintenance techniques Industry 4.0; Maintenance 4.0, i.e. maintenance
able to utilizeonlytechnical data and information meeting Industry 4.0 demands, should have the
related to the producing machine components in following objectives(Al-Najjar 2015):
question. The data and information that are  Rapid responsiveness to meet the dynamic and
gathered using, for example FMEA, FMECA, FTA, rapid changes in the operating conditions and
CM techniques, statistical tools for describing and surroundings
modeling time to failure behavior. The accuracy of  Maintain quality of machines at low cost,
the maintenance developed based on only this type which makes maintenance and production
of data varies depending on the availability of processes more profitable, and
thetechnicaldata, e.g. CM-data, failure data, andthe  Achieve high quality performance of
methods/modelsused(Al-Najjar 2012). However, as producing machines
all of the data gathered in this class are technical,
therefore the outcomes that are not technical- 5.2 Maintenance 4.0; Tasks and Features
related are not expected. Examples of the In general, maintenance activities are
maintenance techniques under this category are responsible of reducing the probability of failure
TPM, CBM and PM and unplanned stoppages. This minimizes the
Class 3; maintenance techniques that are not using impact of failure consequences on company
any data, for example FBM, i.e. nothing is done performance through maintaining the continuity of
before a failure is occurred. a production process and product quality at a
predetermined rate, andreducingproduction cost. In
V. MAINTENANCE 4.0 addition, maintenance activities have a very high
5.1 Industry 4.0 and its demands on advanced influence on company‟s internal effectiveness, due
maintenance to its internal interaction and impact on different
Several advantages are expected from important working areas, such as production cost,
Industry 4.0. For example, the technologies of CPS, energy consumption, safety, delivery on time and
IoT,IoS and the networking allow the integration of working environment(Al-Najjar 2007; Maletic et
data/information from different working al. 2014). Therefore, a reliable and efficient
areas/disciplines (e.g., sales, quality, production, maintenance not only increases the profitability,
production cost and price, risk management, but it also improves the overall performance of the
environment, etc.) which facilitates the company (Waeyenbergh & Pintelon 2002).
coordination among them and draw synergies. In Therefore, reliable and effective maintenance
addition, the utilization of the available data by methods are an important factor for Industry 4.0 to
intelligent systems provides theability to utilize the succeed.
resources efficiently as well as the ability Several researchers discussed maintenance
tocustomize evenin small production quantities, tasks for different intelligent maintenance
and yet remains profitable. The different data systems(Labib 2006; Lee et al. 2011).However, in
sources in Industry 4.0 will make factories able to the context of thispaper, the below are

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203123|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

themaintenance tasksnecessary to meet the needs 3. Damage detection: Able to detect damage
stated by Industry 4.0: initiation at an early stage and follow up its
 Abnormalities detection:It should be able to development in order to avoid failures and
detect abnormalities in the condition of assets unplanned stoppages.
and production process performance in 4. Automation: Able to be automated, i.e. to
addition to abnormalities in energy automate all maintenance steps/activities, to
consumption, working environment and easily fit with digitalized and automated
operating conditions (e.g. speed, load and production process
temperature). 5. Real time presentation: Provide accessibility of
 Diagnosis, prognosis and prediction: to real-time and relevant data in an easy way to
identify and localize the causes and enable production process an easy re-
damages,estimate damage severity and follow configuration and re-planning of production
up its development, predict its future with respect to the condition of the
development and alsoassess the manufacturing machines.
assetremaininglife. 6. Intelligence: Intelligentand be improved
 Maintenance scheduling: tosuggest the most continuously toenhance the decisions‟
profitable time for maintenance associated accuracy basing on its ability in
with the resources and competence required. extractinginformation from data andbe self-
Also, it shouldautomatically generate the learned.
maintenance action schedule to synchronize 7. Cost effective:To be sustainable maintenance
maintenance actions with production planning. technique, cost effectiveness should be
 Maintenance execution: to conduct specific considered.
actions automatically to achieve self-healing 8. Scalable:To meet the dynamic operation and
assets. For those problems where automatic technology growing demands, it should be able
actions are still impossible from technological to be integrated with different new modules,
point of view, the maintenance system should adds-on and software. For example, a fleet
automatically provide report surveying the could require a new machine technology and
condition of the machines and work the machine also could require a new CM
orders/recommendations to conduct actions for technique, a new sensors type,and new analysis
the components suffering of severe damage software. Maintenance 4.0 should be flexible
development. to include and exclude modules and activities.
 Short time to repair: It should able to 9. Monitoring production process: Able to
communicate with Augmented Reality (AR) monitor additional element in addition to the
system to provide maintenance engineers the machine, such as working environment, energy
assistant required for conducting actions consumption and operating condition.
properly, reliably and in a short time. 10. Accurate decisions: Able to provide more
 Self-learning: to learn from past data (failures accurate recommendations and decisions. It is
and condition-based actions)to continuously economically necessary to utilize as long as
improve and optimize maintenance decisions possible a component/equipment life length
and actions. without increasing the risk of failures.
11. Digitalized: Able to be digitalized in order to
 Data presentation: to present relevant and real-
ease maintenance automation and integration
time information, and results from analysis,
with digitalized and automated production.
diagnosis,predictions,maintenance work
12. Production KPIs consideration: Ability of
progress, completed tasks and pending tasks.
considering real-time performance
measurements (production and maintenance
In order for Maintenance 4.0to be able to perform
process KPIs). The maintenance
the above mentioned tasks in a factory of
future implementing concepts of Industry 4.0, technique/system should be able tomap
production performance indicators in order to
it should possess the following features:
identify and assess the maintenance impact and
1. Real-time communication: Ability to easily
improve it.
communicate with data gathering platform,
import and export data with relevant working
areas and be user friendly for different VI. TOOLS TO DISTINGUISH
stakeholders and at different levels. MAINTENANCE TECHNIQUE
2. Decentralization: Capable to be suited for SUITABILITY FOR DEVELOPMENT
decentralized production as it is advocated OF MAINTENANCE 4.0
strongly by Industry 4.0. In this paper, thesuitability of the
discussed maintenance techniques in section3 is

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203124|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

examined and ranked with respect to their

suitability to be developed for Maintenance 4.0. Sb =maxSm = cn=1 WnVmnform = 1,2,3, … j(1)
The features introduced in section 5.2 are used as Sb is the best alternative
examination criteria. Multi Attribute Decision Sm is the overall score of the m-alternative
Making (MADM) issuedas it is suitable for this C is the number of the decision criteria
case (since the purpose is to evaluate alternatives V is the value of the m-th alternative with the
over criteria), as well asit is a well-known tool in respect to n-th criterion
the decision making (Triantaphyllou & Shu Wn is the weight of the n-th criterion
1998).There are several techniques for the MADM
such as Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), VII. RANKING MAINTENANCE
Weighted Product Method (WPM), Technique for TECHNIQUE WITH RESPECT TO
Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution THE FEATURES OF
(TOPSIS), etc. In this study, SAW is selected due MAINTENANCE 4.0
to its simplicity as well as it is often used as Fivepopularmaintenancetechniques
benchmarking method to compare results from (alternatives)and 12features (criteria)are used.
other MADM methods(Janic & Reggiani 2002). Thefive maintenancetechniques and the 12 features
Next sections will explain the used tools to that are described in Section 1.1 and 2.2
distinguish maintenance technique suitability for respectively. For simplicity, all of the
development of Maintenance 4.0. features/criteria areassumed to be equally valuable
and therefore no weights have been assigned. The
6.1 Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) MADM matrix then was constructed as shown in
Multi Attribute Decision Making Table 2.
(MADM) is considered to be one of the most Each alternative Am assigned a value Vmnagainst
known branch of decision making (Triantaphyllou criterion Cn.It was not possible to obtain precise
& Shu 1998). In general, the steps of the MADM quantified values for Vmn. In this case, the
are: forming the criteriaC and assessing their MADM matrixrequires information that
weight Wby experts/decision-makers, thenthe experts/decision-makers assign. As the human
possible alternativesA are determined. judgments often are ambiguous, it will be very
In the decision matrix, the difficult to assess the value Vmn in a precise
experts/decision-makers score the value quantitative form. Thus using the linguistic
Vmnthatdescribes the alternativeAm(m = 1,2,3 approach is more realistic(Herrera & Herrera-
..i)with respect to the criterionCn (n = 1,2,3 .. j )and Viedma 2000; Chan & Prakash 2012). Therefore,
its weight Wn. Then applying a MADM method, in linguistic variables are used to assign the value
order to get collective evaluation and ordering of Vmn. The linguistic values are: “high”, “middle”,
each alternative(Al-Najjar & Alsyouf 2004; Chan “low” and “none”, the corresponding numerical
& Prakash 2012). Table 1 shows the decision values are: 9, 6, 3 and 0 respectively. The
matrix. assessment of the values Vmn was done basing on
the author Al-Najjar‟s long experience in the
Table 1. Decision matrix industry and maintenancetechnology, table 2,
shows the linguistic value of the matrix. These
valuesare related to the working domain of rotating
machines, and different applications may possess
different values.

As this is a human judgment, there could

be some degree of uncertainty and subjectivity in
the assigned values. Therefore, in the discussions
section below, the authors chose to provide
arguments to reveal and motivate the reasons
behind assigning a particular valuein Table 2 to
each alternative against each criterion.
6.2 Simple Additive Weighting (SAW)
In a decision matrix where A is the alternatives and
Cis the criteria withW assigned weights, the best
alternatives is the one with the highest
score(Triantaphyllou & Shu 1998). This can be
modeled as follow:

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203125|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

level of dynamic interactivity and integration with

the operational process, so the value “middle” is
Table 2: Linguistic estimation of the suitability given. TQMain has high level of communication,
of the most popular maintenance techniques as it emphasizes using real-time relevant
with respect to the features of Maintenance 4.0 information from other working areas utilizing
common database to achieve cost-effective
decisions and planning of maintenance activities,
so it possessed the value “high”.
The values given to the criterion
“Decentralization” highlight the ability of the
maintenance technique to execute maintenance
tasks in a decentralized production. In many cases,
the decentralized production is associated with an
inconsistent production process(Garrehy 2015), as
the management is left to each unit manager. This
will vary the production process and hence will
vary the deterioration process, failures types and
their quantity among the machines. However, this
will not prevent the maintenance techniques from
performing their tasks specially if they are applied
decentrally as well. Therefore, all of the
maintenance techniques are set to be “high”.
Data from CM technologies are effectively
utilized by CBM and TQMain, but at different level
of accuracy. TQMain is considered superior
compared with CBM, thanks to the additional data
supporting the description of the machines
condition. TQMain acquires data from other
relevant working areas, for example production,
quality, economy, working environment, and also it
has its own tools for reducing uncertainty in the
measured data. For example, Common database is
advocated by TQMainto, compare information, and
Cumulative Sum Chart (CUSUM) chart for
7.1 Discussion of the linguistic values and reducing randomness in the picked up vibration
numerical analysis measurements. This suggests that the ability of
The suitabilityof every examined TQMain in detecting initiation of damage is “high”,
maintenancetechnique in Table 2, is assessed based while it is “middle” in CBM due to the randomness
on its actual definition and successful applications. in the measurements. Other maintenance
The suitability of combined techniques, e.g. CM techniques, such as PM and TPM may use data
associated with TPM, is out of the scope of this from CM technologies. However, in many cases,
study and is a subject for a future study. CM data is used just for statistical modelling of the
In Table 2, the criterion “Real time condition data to estimate the time to failure
communication”, FBMcannotcommunicatewith without giving a reliable attention to the dynamic
other systems because it is only relying on action changes of the damage development rate during
after failure. PM have low level of communication operation. The latter is important to follow-up
with other working areas/systems/activities, deterioration process and choose the most suitable
because they have usually a static planning of time for maintenance action in order to enhance
regular maintenance actions while production and maintenance decision accuracy.Observe thatFBM
operation are in dynamic changes. This makes acquires no data and consequentlyno ability for
active interactions between these maintenance detecting damage initiation.
techniques and other systems low. Using TPM- Generally, the practice of FBM in the
circles for never ending improvement provides a industry does not involve automation, while in
special space for communication with, e.g. many cases, TPM and PM has some level of it.
production and quality working areas. This is why Applying, PM, maintenance planning system
it acquires middle level. In many cases, CBM can triggers work orders automatically at the time of
utilize real time operational data, such as the planned preventive maintenance actions.
production speed and loading, thus it has higher TQMain and CBM are much more prepared for

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203126|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

digitalized data management and communication demand special efforts, configuration and planning
with other systems; therefore, they are highly as they may have different problems, deterioration
prepared for automation. For example, CBM can be processes and behavioral model. In the discussion
used to trigger different physical actions, such as of this ability/criterion, we still consider the degree
stopping producing machine when the CM-level, of maintenance technique scalability and accuracy
e.g. vibration level, exceeds a predetermined level. simultaneously. Observe that the repair actions
While in TQMain, the same machine can also be belonging to any of these maintenance techniques
triggered off basing on additional parameters than are equivalent to those demanded by FBM. In
vibration, for example if the number of defective general, scalability of PM and TPM demands
items or a production cost exceeds a predetermined reliable analysis and understanding the machine
level and a work order is automatically sent to the structure, functions and behavior of the time to
maintenance engineer. failure in order to design a suitable maintenance
For the criterion “Real-time data plan and actions. In the CBM and TQMain the
presentation”, as discussed previously, only biggest efforts will be mainly when selecting and
TQMain has this feature. In CBM only some implementing the suitable CM first time. Basing on
operational data e.g. Loadand speed of machine, the fact that, this does not require technical
could be associated in the monitoring dashboards. analyses only, -which could be complex in many
This motivates to set all of the techniques to be cases- but also requires economic analyses to select
“none” except TQMain and CBM to be “high” and the suitable and profitable CM technique.
“low” respectively. Therefore, it is assumed that the effort in this case
In order for Maintenance 4.0 to be is the highest in the first implementation time. But,
intelligent in supporting decisions, real if applying CM, e.g. using vibration, temperature,
time,relevant,wide coverage and high quality data CBM or TQMain for monitoring and maintaining
is essential in addition topossessing cognitive rotating machines/components, its scalability will
algorithms. There are several studies forthe be increased much higher (than the first
application of this criterion in CBM and implementation). It does not demand more than
TQMain(Durbhaka & Selvaraj 2016; Maliha Salem reconfiguration of the CM-system i.e. identify
et al. 2010; Gerdes 2013; Cheng et al. machine and components IDs and define warning
2008).TQMain has the accessibility to these levels for the components in the new machines. In
required data as well as it uses Smart eMDSS with many cases, it is also possible to do this
built-in intelligence and self-learning feature. CBM configuration automatically as the case, for
provide less data as described previously and there example in Smart eMDSS. This is why it has high
is algorithms and techniques to utilize these data scalability when it concerns components of the
e.g. Machine Learning(Coraddu et al. 2016). For same category, for example rolling elements
these reasons, TQMain is given the value “high”, bearings, pulleys, gears, shafts, does not matter the
CBM is “middle”. FBM, PM, and TPM do not machine type. In TQMain, as long as many relevant
provide sufficient data nor there are intelligent information parameters are already considered,
algorithms with self-learning feature. therefore its scalability can be higher than CBM,
In general, CBM and TQMain often are because it is designed to easily include and exclude
more cost effective when they are applied properly, different CM parameters. What is really needed in
as they detect damages initiation before they this case is the reconfiguration of the system as
impact the production(Maletic et al. 2014; described above in CM. For these reasons, the
Baoqiang et al. 2014).Therefore, they both are highest value for scalability is given to FBM and
given the value “high”. PM, and TPM have tools TQMain. The value “middle” is given for CBM,
and methods to reduce the probability of while “low” is given to PM and TPM.
production stoppages. However, they are not TQMain emphasizes using common
always early enough. While FBM, has no meansto database and monitoring the essential elements
reduce probability of failure and reduce stoppages involved in a production process. Thus, it is given
and consequently becomes cost-effective. This the value “high” for the criterion “Able to monitor
motivates to set PM and TPM to be “middle” and additional element”. CBM possessed lesser value
FBM to be “low”. “low”, as in practice, it can be used to identify
For the scalability, in general, most of the whether external disturbing factors, such as load,
maintenance techniques have high ability to be ambient/operating temperature, imported shock and
applied on additional similar machines and vibration, are influencing, e.g. vibration signals The
components. But, for dissimilar machines and rest of the techniques, in general, have no
components, i.e.of different design, functions, possibility to monitor the condition/quality of
operating conditions or technology, scalability otherproduction elements, so the value “none”
willnot be equally easy. In the contrary, it may isgiven to them.

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203127|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

The previous discussions suggest FBM to ability for that, as it relies on digitalized techniques
be “none” in the criteria “Accurate decisions” when and data which can easily be combined with real-
other maintenance techniques can be implemented time process data. TQMain gives the best
for the same machines to avoid failures. PM is possibility among the discussed maintenance
based on historical failure data to make the techniques, since real-time, relevantand wide
decision, which is not always easy to find due to covered data from the production process could be
lack of such data because of the condition-based used to assess the maintenance impact,
replacements are done to avoid failures. Thus, it is performance and improvements. Therefore, FBMis
given the value “low”. TPM have besides the past given the value “none”.PM,and TPM are given the
data acquired by PM, knowledge and experience value “low”, CBM is “low” and TQMain is “high”.
accumulated when conducting analysis for
improving machine performance and availability VIII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
(in the case of TPM working groups) using, for After the conversion from the linguistic
example Failure Mode Analysis (FMEA), Failure into numerical values, SAW is then performed to
Mode and Criticality Analysis (FMEACA) and obtain the global value for the performance of each
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), therefore, TPMis given alternative, see table 3, and the maintenance
the value “middle”.CBM can even gather real-time techniques are ranked.
CM data but due to the uncertainty in measured Table 3 shows that the lowest scores are
data, for example randomness in the vibration acquired by FBM and then PM (24) and (36)
signal, make the accuracy moderate, therefor it is respectively, followed by TPM which scored
also given value“middle”.A more accuracy could (equally 42). CBM acquired double the score that
be obtained by using real-time CM data and acquired by TPM, while TQMain‟s score is almost
techniques for reducing the impact of the three times that acquired by TPM and more than
randomness in the CM signals associated with data one and a halve times the score acquired by CBM.
gathered from other relevant working areas and The ranking of the selected maintenance techniques
thus “high” is given to TQMain. can be re-considered based on the modifications
The value “high” is given to the TQMain done in the contents and structure of any of these
and CBM in the criterion “Digitalized”; as in maintenance technique.
general, most of steps of these maintenance We will discuss the possibility of dramatic
techniques are digitalized. PM, and TPM have variation inthevalues given to the featuresPM, and
lower level of digitalized,e.g. the maintenance plan, TPMwith more focus for the values 0 or 3. This
triggering work orders, and thus they are given the discussion is considered instead of sensitivity
value “middle”. While the maintenance process of analysis, because the linguistic assessmentdone is
FBM is the lowest in the digitalization. knowledge and experience based.
Maintenance activities aim to improve the The possibility that any of the
production performance. Hence utilizing maintenances techniques will be able to detect
production KPIs -e.g. production quality, damage initiation (feature number 3) except CBM
productivity and production time- and mapping and TQMain is relatively very low. If any of the
them to the maintenance activities will help to other techniques applies CM technologies, then it
identify and asses the maintenance impact. The should be re-ranked to be equivalent to it utilization
ability of considering the production KPIs in the of the data provided by CM.
maintenance activities, -i.e., the criterion “To Ability of PM and TPM in providing real-
consider real-time performance measurements”- time communicating with other systems for;
has no mean in FBM. As it has no tools and process datagathering/data accessibility and monitoring
of collecting, storing and analyzing production production process condition, (features 1, 5, 9 and
data. While in TPM it is possible to utilize the 12) is either 3 such as in features 1 and 12, or 0 in
production KPIs to improve the maintenance features 5 and 9. These values will not be easy to
performance through TPM circles. But, it is not be improved due to the concept and structure of
easy to handle when it concerns PM as long as PM and TPM.
maintenance planning is static as we discussed When using statistical models, the
above. However, some KPI‟s, for example the costs possibility that PM and TPM becomes more
and losses related to production and maintenance intelligent and effectively competing with CBM
are usually considered when developing and and TQMain is rather low.To enhance the
optimizing statistical models for PM. But, these estimation of the failure rate and expected time to
models are, in general, not able to follow the failure, it is important to change or modify the
costs‟/losses „dynamic changes during operation. In probability distribution function. The latter
general, CBM does not consider real-time demands very big amount of failure data of
performance measurements. But, it gives better identical/similar components, which is not easy and

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203128|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

maybe impossible to find due to condition-based design such a technique. The major
replacements conclusionis;the most important featuresthat should
Ability of PM and TPM to be more be possessed by Maintenance 4.0are;Real-time
scalable is also low because the latter demandshigh communication, Decentralization, Damage
level of digitization, ability to provide wide real- detection, Automation, Real-time data presentation,
time data coverage of high quality and Intelligence, Cost effective, Scalable, Monitoring
communication with other systems, which are, in production process, Accurate decisions,
general, low in these maintenance techniques. In Digitalized, Production KPIs consideration. In
other hand, PM, TPM and even FBM,can be more addition, applying the results achieved will ease the
cost-effective (feature 7) than CBM and TQMain in task of developing a suitable Maintenance 4.0
special applications. But, it will not be probable needed to maintain the profitability expected by
that these maintenance techniques will be more adopting manufacturing to Industry 4.0. Applying
accurate in diagnosis, prediction and decisions, i.e. such sophisticated and advanced maintenance
feature 10. Also, additional improvement in the technique, i.e. Maintenance 4.0, may mean
ability in automation (feature 4) of these techniques increased maintenance cost. However, does not
will not influence appreciably the final result. matter how much maintenance budget will increase
Therefore, the uncertainty in the results as long as maintenance cost per high quality
achieved in Table 3 due to possible dramatic product is decreasing. Future work could include
changes in features‟ values due to the methodology developing weights for the features (criteria) and
being used is low. applying the results in three real industrial cases
which are now included as a demonstration
Table 3: Numerical values of MADM companies in H2020-FoF09, PreCoM (Predictive
Cognitive Maintenance Decision Support System).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank Vinnova,
E-maintenance Sweden AB, Vibrationsteknik and
Assalub for funding and supporting the project
during 2015-2016. The authors would like to
emphasis that this study is completed as a part of
PreCoM-H2020, FoF 09, 2017-202. The PreCoM
project has received funding from European
Union‟s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under grant agreement No 768575.

REFERENCE
[1]. Al-Najjar, B., 1997. Condition Based
Maintenance: Selection and Improvement of
a Cost effective Vibration Based Policy For
Rolling Element Bearing. (Doctoral Thesis)
Lund University, Sweden.
[2]. Al-Najjar, B., 2012. On establishing cost-
effective condition-based maintenance.
Journal of Quality in Maintenance
IX. CONCLUSION
Engineering, 18(4), pp.401–416.
In order to develop a proper maintenance
[3]. Al-Najjar, B., 2007. The lack of
approach for Industry 4.0, it is important to
maintenance and not maintenance which
describe the abilities of the selected maintenance
costs: A model to describe and quantify the
techniques for conducting the tasks demanded by
impact of vibration-based maintenance on
Maintenance 4.0 and their suitability for further
company‟s business. International Journal of
improvement towards Maintenance 4.0. Therefore,
Production Economics, 107(1), pp.260–273.
in this paper we discussed and analyzed
[4]. Al-Najjar, B. & Alsyouf, I., 2004.
thesuitabilityof most popular maintenance
Enhancing a company‟s profitability and
techniques, such as FBM, PM, CBM, TPMand
competitiveness using integrated vibration-
TQMain with respect to the features demanded by
based maintenance: A case study. European
Maintenance 4.0.
Journal of Operational Research, 157(3),
This paper characterizes Maintenance 4.0
pp.643–657.
by its tasks and features, which is necessary for
[5]. Al-Najjar, B. & Alsyouf, I., 2003. Selecting
researchers and practitioners in maintenance to

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203129|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

the most efficient maintenance approach 015-04 hannovermesse/presentation-e.pdf.

using fuzzy multiple criteria decision Industry4.0.
making. Int. J. Production Economics, 84, [18]. Hermann, M., Pentek, T. & Otto, B., 2016.
pp.85–100. Design Principles for Industrie 4.0
[6]. Al-Najjar, B. & Ingwald, A., 2002. Scenarios: A Literature Review. In 49th
Identification, analysis, elimination and Hawaii International Conference on System
prevention of recurrence of problems: Sciences (HICSS), IEEE, pp. 3928–3937.
methods and concepts. In Proceedings of [19]. Herrera,F.&Herrera-Viedma,E.,2000.
IFRIM. Växjö. Linguistic decision analysis: steps forsolving
[7]. Al‐Najjar, B., 2015. Maint CPS project decisionproblemsunderlinguisticinformation.
report, Linnaeus University. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 115(1), pp.67–82.
[8]. Baoqiang, X., Baowen, L. & Jie, L., 2014. [20]. Janic,M.&Reggiani,A., 2002. An application
The Implementing Pattern of Total Quality of the multiple criteria decision making
Maintenance and a Case Study. In Euro (MCDM) analysis to the selection of a new
Maintenance. Helsinki, Finland, pp. 195– hub airport. European Journal of Transport
198. and Infrastructure Research, 2(2), pp.113–
[9]. Chan, F.T.S. & Prakash, A., 2012. 141.
Maintenance policy selection in [21]. Kagermann, H., Wahlster, W. & Helbig, J.,
manufacturing firms using the fuzzy MCDM 2013. Recommendations for implementing
approach. , 50(23), pp.7044–7056. the strategic initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0,
[10]. Cheng, Z. et al., 2008. A framework for [22]. Labib,A.,2006.NextGeneration Maintenance
intelligent reliability centered maintenance Systems: Towards the Design of a Self-
analysis. Reliability Engineering & System maintenanceMachine.2006IEEEInternational
Safety, 93(6), pp.806–814. Conference on Industrial Informatics,
[11]. Coraddu, A. et al., 2016. Machine learning pp.213–217.
approaches for improving condition-based [23]. Lee, J. et al., 2015. Industrial Big Data
maintenance of naval propulsion plants. Proc Analytics and Cyber-physical Systems for
IMechE Part M: J Engineering for the Future Maintenance & Service Innovation.
Maritime Environment, 230(1), pp.136–153. Procedia CIRP, 38, pp.3–7.
[12]. Deloitte, 2015. Industry 4.0. Challenges and [24]. Lee, J., Bagheri, B. & Kao, H.-A., 2014.
solutions for the digital transformation and Recent Advances and Trends of Cyber-
use of exponential technologies, Physical Systems and Big Data Analytics in
[13]. Drath, R. & Horch, A., 2014. Industrie 4.0: Industrial Informatics. Int. Conference on
Hit or hype? [Industry Forum]. IEEE IndustrialInformatics(INDIN)2014,(Novemb
Industrial Electronics Magazine, 8(2), er 2015).
pp.56–58. [25]. Lee, J., Ghaffari, M. & Elmeligy, S., 2011.
[14]. Durbhaka, G.K. & Selvaraj, B., 2016. Self-maintenance and engineering immune
Predictive maintenance for wind turbine systems: Towards smarter machines and
diagnostics using vibration signal analysis manufacturing systems. Annual Reviews in
based on collaborative recommendation Control, 35(1), pp.111–122.
approach. 2016 International Conference on [26]. Maletic,D.etal.,2014.Therole of maintenance
Advances in Computing, Communications in improving company‟s competitiveness
and Informatics (ICACCI), pp.1839–1842. and profitability: A case study in a textile
[15]. Garrehy, P., 2015. Centralized vs. company.JournalofManufacturingTechnolog
Decentralized Manufacturing & Where y Management, 25(4), pp.441–456.
Cloud ERP Fits In: Part 2 | Rootstock [27]. Maliha Salem, B. et al., 2010. A rule based
Software.Availableat:http://www.rootstock.c system for reliability centered maintenance.
om/erp-blog/centralized-vs-decentralized- Proceedings of Special Session - 9th
manufacturing-where-cloud-erp-fits-in-part- Mexican International Conference on
2/ [Accessed January 16, 2017]. Artificial Intelligence: Advances in Artificial
[16]. Gerdes, M., 2013. Decision trees and genetic Intelligence and Applications, MICAI 2010,
algorithmsforconditionmonitoringforecastin pp.57–62.
g of aircraft air conditioning. Expert Systems [28]. Pintelon,L.&Parodiherz,A.,2008.Maintenanc
with Applications, 40(12), pp.5021–5026. e : An Evolutionary Perspective. In K. A. .
[17]. Helmrich, K., 2015. On the Way to Industrie Kobbacy & D. N. P. Murthy, eds. Complex
4.0 – The Digital Enterprise [PowerPoint system maintenance handbook. Springer,
slides].Retrievedfromhttp://www.siemens.co Berlin.
m/press/pool/de/events/2015/digitalfactory/2 [29]. Prajapati,A.,Bechtel, J. & Ganesan, S., 2012.

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203130|P a g e

Basim Al-Najjar Journal of Engineering Research and Application www.ijera.com ISSN :
2248-9622 Vol. 8, Issue 11 (Part -II) Nov 2018, pp 20-31

Condition based maintenance: a survey. [33]. Stock, T. & Seliger, G., 2016. Opportunities
JournalofQualityinMaintenanceEngineering, of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry
18(4), pp.384–400. 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 40(Icc), pp.536–541.
[30]. Qin, J., Liu, Y. & Grosvenor, R., 2016. A [34]. Triantaphyllou, E. & Shu, B., 1998. Multi-
Categorical Framework of Manufacturing criteriadecisionmaking:anoperationsresearch
for Industry 4.0 and Beyond. Procedia CIRP, approach. Encyclopedia of Electrical and
52, pp.173–178. Electronics Engineering, 15, pp.175–186.
[31]. Rastegari, A., 2015. Strategic Maintenance [35]. Wabner, M., 2018. MAINTENANCE AND
Development Focusing on Use of Condition SUPPORT Contributing a strategic approach
BasedMaintenanceinManufacturingIndustry. to EU research and innovation policy
(Licentiate thesis )Mälardalen University Roadmap, Available at: www.focusonfof.eu.
Press. [36]. Waeyenbergh, G. & Pintelon, L., 2002. A
[32]. Sherwin, D., 2000. A review of overall framework for maintenance concept
models for maintenance management. development. International Journal of
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Production Economics, 77(3), pp.299–313.
Engineering, 6(3), pp.138–164.

Al-Najjar, B., Algabroun, H., Jonsson, M." Maintenance 4.0 To Fulfil The Demands Of
Industry 4.0 And Factory Of The Future"International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) , vol. 8, no.11, 2018, pp 20-31

www.ijera.com DOI: 10.9790/9622-081102203131|P a g e