A Novel method for online prognostics performance evaluation

Prognostics performance assessment technologies are necessary for building and qualifying a real and mature prognostics and health management (PHM) system. The further refinements in concepts and definitions for prognostics performance are made in this paper. The limitations for the application of offline prognostics performance evaluation are discussed. Two novel metrics: Relative Accuracy (RA) and Relative Precision (RP) are proposed for online prognostics performance evaluation according to the random uncertainty existing in both the prediction values and the actual values. A novel method for impartially evaluating the prognostics performance is presented. It synthesizes the evaluations of the predictions at different times before and close to the End-of-Useful-Predictions time tEOUP to achieve the evaluation of the minimum effective prediction horizon (MEPH) prognostics performance. A BP neural network prognostics method for hydraulic pump is evaluated for the demonstration intents. The results show the online evaluation method can work well without the failure data of the product.

[1]  Stephen J. Engel,et al.  Prognostics, the real issues involved with predicting life remaining , 2000, 2000 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8484).

[2]  Rui Kang,et al.  Benefits analysis of prognostics in systems , 2010, 2010 Prognostics and System Health Management Conference.

[3]  J.W. Hines,et al.  Prognostic algorithm categorization with PHM Challenge application , 2008, 2008 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.

[4]  Jie Gu,et al.  Prognostics implementation of electronics under vibration loading , 2007, Microelectron. Reliab..

[5]  M.G. Pecht,et al.  Prognostics and health management of electronics , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Components and Packaging Technologies.

[6]  Xie Jin-song,et al.  Research and application of the prognostic and health management system , 2007 .

[7]  K. Goebel,et al.  Prognostic information fusion for constant load systems , 2005, 2005 7th International Conference on Information Fusion.

[8]  P. Nilkitsaranont,et al.  Gas path prognostic analysis for an industrial gas turbine , 2008 .

[9]  K. Goebel,et al.  Metrics for evaluating performance of prognostic techniques , 2008, 2008 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.

[10]  Seth S. Kessler,et al.  A Structural Health Monitoring Software Tool for Optimization, Diagnostics and Prognostics , 2011 .

[11]  George Vachtsevanos,et al.  Methodologies for uncertainty management in prognostics , 2009, 2009 IEEE Aerospace conference.

[12]  William Hardman.  Mechanical and propulsion systems prognostics: U.S. Navy strategy and demonstration , 2004 .

[13]  Kang Rui.  Case study of prognostic and health management methodology for electronics , 2007 .

[14]  Sankalita Saha,et al.  Evaluating algorithm performance metrics tailored for prognostics , 2009, 2009 IEEE Aerospace conference.

[15]  T. Yoneyama,et al.  Prognostics performance metrics and their relation to requirements, design, verification and cost-benefit , 2008, 2008 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.

[16]  Takashi Yoneyama,et al.  Improvements on the offline performance evaluation of fault prognostics methods , 2011, 2011 Aerospace Conference.

[17]  M. Glade,et al.  Life cycle cost impact of using prognostic health management (PHM) for helicopter avionics , 2007, Microelectron. Reliab..

[18]  M.J. Roemer,et al.  Validation and verification of prognostic and health management technologies , 2005, 2005 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[19]  Sankalita Saha,et al.  Evaluating prognostics performance for algorithms incorporating uncertainty estimates , 2010, 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference.