ReliabilityEngineering3 0982)449-473

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLSt

A. Z. KELLER,A. R. R. KAMATH
Postgraduate School of Studies in Industrial Technology,
University of Bradford, Bradford, W. Yorks BD7 IDP, Great Britain
&

U. D. PERERA~
Alfred Herbert Limited, Coventry, Great Britain

(Received: 14 August, 1981)

ABSTRACT
A reliability and maintainability study of computer control (CNC) machine tools is
described. For this analysis field failure data collected over a period of three years on
approximately 35 CNC machine tools during their warranty period were analysed. In
order to apply quantitative reliability methods, a coding system was devised to code
failure data which were then collated into a data bank. The lognormal and the Weibull
distribution were found to be applicable to describe time between failures and the
repair times. The Duane reliability growth model arising from the introduction of
modifications to improve machine tool performance gave a good fit to the observed
reliability growth for a C N C system. For the hydraulic and mechanical systems, a
damped oscillation of the Duane growth model is observed.

l. INTRODUCTION

D u r i n g the last decade, the complexity o f the mechanical aspects of machine tools
has significantly increased; this has been accompanied by a corresponding
complexity o f electronics. In the early 1970s, Alfred Herbert Limited introduced a
variety of c o m p u t e r numerical control (CNC) turning machine tools. These were
continuously modified in the light o f experience gained in the field; subsequently,
updated models were developed and, more recently, microprocessor control,

? A version of this paper was presented at the Third National Reliability Engineering Conference--
Reliability '81,29 April-I May, 1981, Birmingham, Great Britain and is reproduced by kind permission
of the organisers.
:~ Present address: British Gas Corporation, Department of Engineering Development, Watson House,
Peterborough Road, London SW6 3HN, Great Britain.
449
Reliability Engineering0143-8174/82/0003-0449/$02.75 © Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1982
Printed in Great Britain
450 A . Z . KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

together with manual data input CNC systems were introduced. Because of its
considerable inherent flexibility, a CNC machine is capable of producing an output
(machining rate) of up to three to four times the output of manually operated
conventional machines. Because of the high output of these machines, breakdowns
have an increased significance, since the breakdown of a single CNC machine can
result in the production of an entire workshop being halted. Another concomitant of
the increasing complexity is that when a breakdown occurs repairs are more difficult
and expensive. Both these factors call for a regime that will have a degree of
reliability that is as high as possible. In the present competitive market,
improvements in the reliability of machine tools is now of paramount importance.
The recognition of this need led to the collation of field failure data of machine
tools and the introduction ofa computerised reliability data bank at the company in
1977. The present paper discusses the results of this study and in particular analyses
the field failure data collated during the warranty period (first year) of 35 machine
tools during 1977 80.

2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND SYSTEM OPERATION OF C N C SYSTEM

There is muchpublished literature on CNC systems 1 and on the machine analysed

in the present study, 2 which is a mini-computer-controlled three-axes turning
machine for bar and chuck work.
This mini-computer is used to control the machine from information input from
punched tape and operator control panel depending on the operating requirements.
Once the system program has been loaded into the memory, the machine been set
up, and the first component checked up, the computer will operate automatically,
entirely from the data on the part program-tape. Mechanical movements of the
machine are accurately monitored by the computer via various precision limit
switches and electronic measuring devices. This ensures that the computer is always
aware of the position of the slides and turrets.
The slide movements are imparted by hydraulic rams, one for each axis. The
stroke and feed rate is controlled by its servo valve as instructed by the tape. Its
accurate positioning is ensured by a closed loop electrical control which
continuously monitors and modifies the servo valve flow rate.
The input and output data is routed between the computer and machine via the
interface electronics. Although the computer forms the heart of the control system,
the interface cards decode the output data and operate the machine magnetics/
electrics. Each card has a specific function and is addressed individually by the
computer. The system block diagram is shown in Fig. 1. The CNC system also has a
number of fault diagnostic facilities; 3 these include built-in simple automatic
checks, use of diagnostic tapes and use of hardware equipment. This simplifies the
detection and correction of certain CNC system and machine tool failures.
RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF C N C MACHINE TOOLS 451

~ OPTO
I NAL
EXTRA
Fig. 1. System block diagram.
452 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

3. DATA COLLECTION AND COLLATION

In the present competitive market it is essential to collect and analyse field failure
data to assess the reliability of the product. Although this is a normal practice for
military related equipment, less importance has been given to commercially used
products.
The main objectives of the development of a field failure reliability data bank were
to satisfy the following:
(1) To feedback failure analysis data to designers to enable them to take
corrective action to prevent recurring failures.
(2) To measure and monitor reliability and maintainability parameters of
machine tools in a quantitative manner.
(3) To assist in forecasting the logistic and manpower requirements to support
the machine tools in the field.

3.1. Data collection

The data for the analysis were extracted from the service reports produced by
service engineers for the machines during their warranty period (one year). Although
initially a number of customers were contacted in an attempt to trace the machines'
performance beyond the warranty period, this did not prove successful due to
inadequate and incomplete maintenance records kept by customers.

3.2. Data organisation and coding

After consultation with various departments at Alfred Herbert concerned with
reliability and maintainability aspects, it was decided to establish a computerised
data bank to include the following information:
(1) Product code.
(2) Machine number.
(3) Batch number.
(4) Report number.
(5) Stage of machine (commissioning/warranty status).
(6) Date of repair.
(7) Failure codes.
(8) Failure effect.
(9) Hour meter reading (machine cycling).
(10) Repair time.
(11) Down time.
(12) Cost of spares.
(13) Cost of labour.
(14) Modification number (modifications carried out in the field).
(15) Engineer's identification number.
(16) Site of machine.
 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLS 453

52 2 30 20 0

W. axis
Measuring system T I T I
Accelerometer
Broken
Replaced
Fig. 2. An example of failure code

Numeric codes were adopted to codify the information: for example the failure
code is defined by an eight digit number which represents the main assembly, sub-
assembly, component, failure cause and repair action as illustrated in Fig. 2.
Figure 3 shows the block diagram on data generation and information flow.

3.3. Validity of field failure data

Even though the data recording procedure described in Section 3.2 takes into
account all the reported failures, it is however recognised that the operational
requirements such as surface finish, tolerance, etc., vary with the users, and hence
affect the number of failures reported. Similarly variations in the operating
conditions, e.g. dust, humidity, etc. were found to significantly affect the reliability
of the machines.

I SPARES ~ SERVICE ~ , ~ FIELD I

DEPT. DEPT. MACHINES

SERVICE
REPORTS

• DATACOLLECTION~ DESIGN
AND VETTING J IENGINEERING

DATA
BANK

SPECIAL l
,I | INFORMATIONFOR
REQUESTS I ANALYSIS~-DESIGN ENGINEERING
| AND MANAGEMENT
!
Fig. 3. Data generation and information flow diagram.
454 A . Z . KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

There are also indications to suggest that some of the faults occurring during the
warranty period were not reported, and that customers carried out their own repairs
to minimise down time.

3.4. Data retrieval and output

Failure data from the bank can be accessed for any specific machine, batch of
machines or a product in any of the following forms:
(1) History of machines (in sequence of date).
(2) In ascending order of failure code.
(3) Frequency of failure.

4. ANALYSIS OF FAILURE

The following types of analysis were carried out:

(1) Frequency analysis of subsystem failures.

(2) Failure cause analysis.
(3) Analysis of time between successive failures.
(4) Maintainability analysis.
(5) Reliability growth analysis.

4.1. Frequency analysis of subsystem failures and failure cause analysis

Figures 4, 5 and 6 show the frequency of failure modes for different subsystems. It
can be seen that the input cards and the computer account for the majority of the
CNC breakdowns. It can also be seen that the principal modes of failure for
mechanical systems are the turrets and the slides.
Figures 7, 8 and 9 show the frequency histograms of failure causes for different
subsystems.

4.2. Analysis of times between successive failures

Due to lack of availability of data, the time between successive failures was
analysed only at a subsystem level and not at a component level. These were CNC,
hydraulics and mechanical systems.
An initial analysis of data using frequency histograms and instantaneous hazard
rate plots 4 suggested that the failure pattern could be best described using the
Weibull 5 or lognormal distributions. 6 Since the data corresponded to machine
failures during the warranty period, still undergoing modifications, a high incipient
failure rate was expected.
The parameters of these distributions were estimated using both maximum
 ¢-.~.:E I~UE r 1~2,'
,D

II~ACE CARDS

(DO0~ UNIT
I'D 1~
'-tl ~.=
SWITCHES, FUSES, BUI2B
,~, ~,, ~., ; ' r:i ;:: :~ I< TAPE READ~ ,-I
<q=
DISPI~Y UNIT Z
o SLIDES I
# I-'
t L I(]ttT/I~RAME / E'II::.

I DRIVE/liVE BQX O
"',I
o "11
I (:iIU(::K ~ Y F~ E C.IUEr'l,2 ,'
I=! X
P> e"l

_J SWA.I%F Q:)h,lZEYCI:I "1'1

CHASINI:]
ICOOLE~ SEHVO '2
ril
=1
UNIT
e B
Bo 8t'-'
COOLANT SYSIE~

~- AUXILIARY SYST~
N"

LUBRICATIONSYST~

g. t,#*
456 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

,W
L~
M m ~ZC~ ~ 40 L~
u 0 Z 0 0 0 ~ ~ <Z
6~ ~ o ~
O
Z ~ ~

a
e

UZ O
ZO O
,z

Fig. 7. Failure cause analysis of C N C system Fig. 8. Failure cause analysis of hydraulic sys
failures. tern failures.

t~ L5 ~ ~ . . . . Z ,d , . . . .

tK, ul ~

5 O

Fig. 9. Failure cause analysis of mechanical system failures.

 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLS 457

likelihood (ML) 7 and least squares (LS) methods, and to test the goodness of fit
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test statistic 8 Dmax was used. Computer graphic packages
developed at the University of Bradford were used for the analysis of the data and
the estimation of the distribution parameters.
Table 1 gives a summary of the ordinal analysis of failure using the Weibull
distribution. Due to lack of sufficient data an ordinal analysis was not possible for
hydraulic systems. As can be seen from this table, the shape parameter estimates of
the Weibull distribution appear to be in the range of 0.8-1.07 indicating an
approximately constant hazard rate failure characteristic. This is consistent with the

TABLE 1
O R D I N A L ANALYSIS OF F A I L U R E S

Weibull distribution
Sample Shape Scale D ,~x
size MLE (h) MLE
LSE MLE LSE
LSE

CNC system 1st Failures 44 0.80 383.5 0.219

(0.96) (327.8) (0.266)
2nd Failures 26 0.87 232.8 0.169
(0.76) (274.6) (0.165)
3rd Failures 20 0.79 339.5 0.260
(0.65) (488.0) (0.147)
Mechanical systems I st Failures 39 1.08 228.2 0.173
(1.07) (250.5) (0.160)
2nd Failures 33 0.87 212-6 0.086
(0.86) (212.8) (0.085)
3rd Failures 27 0.89 208.5 0-174
(0.84) (237.1) (0.167)
Hydraulics

MLE = Maximum likelihood estimates.

LSE = Least squares estimates (values in parentheses).

fact that the data analysed corresponded to the warranty period of the machines
and, in general, one would not expect failures due to wear-out during this period.
The estimates of scale parameters of the Weibull distribution lie in the range of
233-383 h, for the CNC system and 208-228 h for mechanical systems. Since only up
to third order failures were observed during the warranty period, it was not possible
further to analyse the estimates to correlate the order of failures and the distribution
parameters. Hence it was decided to combine the data to obtain an ensemble
estimate of the distribution for each subsystem.
Table 2 gives a summary of the ensemble parameter estimates using the Weibull
and the lognormal distributions. The probability plots for the systems are shown in
458 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

TABLE 2
FAILURE TIME ANALYSIS

Sample Weibull distribution Lognormal distribution

size Shape Scale Theoretical D,,ax a I~ Theoretical Dma,~
MLE (h) mean MLE MLE MLE mean MLE
LSE MLE (h) LSE LSE LSE (h) LSE
LSE MLE MLE
LSE LSE

CNC ll3 0-829 304.3 336-4 0.186 1.385 5.11 430.5 0.154
system (0-873) (320.9) (343.6) (0.188) (1-627) (5.27) (728-4) (0.101)
Hydraulic 87 0.868 565.4 607.2 0.277 1.456 5.80 950-5 0.226
systems (0.920) (571.1) (593.7) (0.287) (1.698) (6.00) (1709.7) (0.155)
Mechanical 143 0-930 228.9 236-7 0.128 1.235 4.87 278.5 0.106
systems (0-917) (257.7) (268.4) (0.124) (1-470) (5.01) (442.9) (0.070)

a, # = distribution parameters of lognormal distribution.

MLE = maximum likelihood estimates.
LSE = least squares estimates (values in parentheses).

Figs 10-15. As can be seen the lognormal distribution appears to provide a

marginally better fit to the data than the Weibull distribution. Possible reasons for
this are:

(1) A number of modifications were carried out to eliminate recurring early

failures. These were significant for the servo system where a failure of a
component due to poor design can induce a number of failures of the system.
A design modification or change during the early stages of machine
operation eliminates subsequent incipient failures.
(2) Failures resulting from inexperienced service engineers.
(3) Inadequate final inspection prior to despatch of machines.

5. MAINTAINABILITY ANALYSIS

Maintainability 9 is a system characteristic describing the ease with which a

maintenance task may be accomplished. The maintenance task is an action or series
of actions required to restore a product to a satisfactory working condition. A
maintenance task can be scheduled, as a part of a preventative or planned
maintenance policy, or unscheduled, arising from machine breakdown or
degradation in performance.
In the following analysis, the corrective maintenance actions for machines during
their warrant period are analysed. Time taken to repair a machine will generally
depend upon the complexity of the equipment, experience of service personnel and
availability of spares, test equipment, etc.
 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLS 459

z-: c u r l • FRILURE

£~--Z~@_c2r'JIZz_~",J_:~__T_Et'J_E_~_~LL_~_E~ .r"*" 4- 4- +

i. E, ...1 o;÷
m

~ , LI ..... 7 1 - ÷

i
4-
2.~b
4-
5HRPE 5CRLE Dmm~.

1 Fd M.L.E .83 304.3 . [86

4- LE.SQ .87 32; .8 . t:B8
i I I I

m ~

=LOG(HOURS )

Fig. 10. Weibull probability p l o t ~ N C system failures.

.,-'5-25EI
. . . . . . . . . .E.r.4.c. . .S.I.E.i.T.E.r.I. . F R / L I J R E E ;
/

//,/./S*
,/ , + ~

O 7-=:2
.... •) ,

q E~, 5 5 8

G: ~:, ::73'

t~
LL

LO
>
,4 ~_?t"
b- O 1~3
E
_1

0,041 - +

_t:_o~3__N_oRM~_6__O_n~_A_N
_E_-r_E~_
S
+
L} E~I3 ~_xg~ ~ . . . . . . . . . . _N_~ ___ tL~_~~
+ . --- M.L.E 1.38 5.1 .154
... LE.50 t.6:3 5.~ .I~I
O, 083 T ~

L 0 G ( HOURS )

Fig. 11. Lognormal probability plot--CNC system failures.

460 A . Z . KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

r IZl ¢I. F'rm Z Ll_Iml E

32.~

iE,. E ~.~ ""

I i B .-'4-

. +

+
4 E,
+
: D

5HRPE ~CRLE Dm~-

I1. L . E I 87 5~;5 . 4 . 277

LE. SI3 • :)2 57 ] . I • 2;E:1~
I I

LC,,:~ , H,3U~S ,

Fig. 12. Weibull probability plot--hydraulic system failures.

7% . . . .H',. . [ I.~ :.F I. U.L I.C . . . S. i S. T.E f. l . . . F. R. I L. U. E .' E : - ,

.2=_,E1

-b
E~ ' , 7 5 4 ÷ +÷

# ~÷£ /*
E~ 4 2 1

Z
,1 ±TB

/+4+

('1 1~4

~7 PBB +
4,
÷

,1 D-iE'

L,_'I ,~ I,j,]_JE H id L ~UPnL1E TEF -

U OrE _~ISMFI ttE~i _ EJn,~.

tl. LiE L.-16 ~.. :~: .22E

... LE 5r3 [.7~ 6.~ .155
r r

r.,

L~?L~ I Iflrq I E ~ i

Fig. 13. Lognormal probability plot hydraulic system fitilures.

 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF C N C MACHINE TOOLS 461

,cui-I. F A I LI_IRE

E-=-'~e-U-E~CUO~--'--'~L_E~--~t-U~- ~ .--"5" .~d,-.~ +

27.E1

54.EI

34. tJ

2E~. B

1E.B 4.- 4;.:::; "

r. E, <.:: : -I-
4-
..-::": :: 4-
4. L
4-

2.P

5HRPE SCALE l]ml~

I . E 4-
H.LIE .93 228.9 , ice
L E . :-;Q i92 257.7 . t3_4
I I I

L':::":~ ,:: H O I J l ~ t ~ )

Fig. 14. Weibull probability plot--mechanical failures.

_e_s_t2_s_e U__CU_F~__Z_CA___F__R_a
L_UR_E_S
.93

// .- .+
.83

.S?

.47

.£.B

.13
t.-i//

• 05
. +/
. • %./J/ hgS_~98~8~_~8~SU~IES~
• El2 .g.I. G
. . .M
. .R
................. HEN Dm~×
..- ,.
--- N.L,E t.23 4.9 .186
/
/
• • • LE,SQ [ .47 5.8 .878
• E~B i i

m ~

LOG(HOURS)

Fig. 15. Lognormal probability plot--mechanical failures.

 TABLE 3 .~
REPAIR TIME ANALYSIS tO

Weibull distribution Lognormal distribution

Sample Observed Shape Scale Theoretical O max a # Theoretical Omax
size mean MLE (h ) mean MLE MLE MLE mean MLE
(h) LSE MLE (h) LSE LSE LSE (h) LSE
LSE MLE MLE
LSE LSE
>
CNC system 103 8.58 1.062 8-82 8.61 0.0928 0.967 1.70 8.71 0.067
(1 '143) (9.09) (8"66) (0.1072) (1.009) (1 '68) (8.96) (0.069) N
Hydraulic systems 55 10.19 0.924 11.88 12.33 0.1564 0.999 1.96 11.73 0"113
(1 '088) (12.69) (12.29) (0.1877) (1.124) (1.96) (13.29) (0-132)
Mechanical systems 129 8.82 1.045 9-00 8.85 0.1255 0.936 1.72 8.63 0.096 t-
(1.156) (9.53) (9.05) (0.1506) (1-015) (1.71) (9.29) (0.096)
>
~, a = distribution parameters of lognormal distribution.
MLE = maximum likelihood estimates.
LSE = least squares estimates (values in parentheses).

>
TABLE 4
D O W N TIME ANALYSIS
-]
Weibull distribution Lognormal distribution
Sample Observed Shape Scale Theoretical O max ¢7 la Theoretical Omax
size mean MLE (h ) mean MLE MLE MLE mean MLE
(h) LSE MLE (h) LSE LSE LSE (h) LSE
LSE MLE MLE rr~
LSE LSE

CNC system 94 22.93 I. 116 25-03 24-04 0" 1242 1-0077 2.74 25.74 0.072
(1.168) (25.59) (24.24) (0.1357) (1.0835) (2.72) (27.41) (0.087)
Hydraulic systems 50 25.12 1.353 27.59 25.29 0.1579 0"7967 2"92 25.47 0.121
(1-275) (27.25) (25.27) (0"1392) (0"8801) (2.91) (26.98) (0.104)
Mechanical systems 114 21.54 1.080 22"36 21.72 0.0874 0.9728 2.63 22-17 0.053
(1-191) (22.39) (21.10) (0.0997) (1.0078) (2.62) (22"80) (0.048)

#, a = distribution parameters of lognormal distribution.

MLE = maximum likelihood estimates.
LSE - least squares estimates (values in parentheses).
 RELIABILITYANALYSISOF C N C MACmNE TOOLS 463

5.1. R e p a i r time a n d down time analysis

Repair time is the active time taken to restore the machines to a satisfactory
working condition. Down time is the total time taken to restore a failure. This
includes waiting time for a service engineer and time taken for repair which m a y or
may not include waiting for spares.
The Weibull and the lognormal distributions were used to analyse the repair and
down times for each system. A summary of the estimated parameters and the
theoretical distribution means for repair time and down time are given in Tables 3
and 4, respectively. This is consistent with the finding by Stipho) ° The probability
plots for these distributions are shown in Figs 16-27. As can be seen from Tables 3
and 4 the active repair time constitutes only ,about one third of the mean down
time.

5.2. A v a i l a b i l i t y analysis
The limiting or asymptotic availability of a system10 is defined as the ratio of the
mean time to failure divided by the sum of mean time to failure and the mean down
time. Table 5 gives the summary of availability analysis assuming both Weibull and
lognormal distribution for failure time distribution. It can be seen that the machine

TABLE 5
AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS

Mean time between failures Mean Availability

(MTBF) down time
(h) (h)
Weibull a Lognormal ° Lognormal ° Using Weibull Using lognormal
distribution distribution distribution MTBF MTBF
CNC system 336.4 430.5 25.74 0-929 0.943
Hydraulic
systems 607-2 950.5 25.47 0.960 0.974
Mechanical
systems 236-7 278-5 22.17 0.914 0.926
Machine 0.815 0.850
° Maximum likelihood estimates.

can be expected to work satisfactorily only for 82-85 ~o of its operational time. One
of the possible areas for improving this availability would be in the reduction of
down time of the machines. Since one cannot expect a substantial reduction in active
repair time without significant redesign it is seen that the availability of machines in
current use can only be improved in the short term by improving spares provisioning
policies and the deployment of service personnel. In the longer term the adequacy of
preventative maintenance regimes could usefully be examined.
464 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

R I L l II~E

Z ~'S~_ ~ Q_C= r] ,--_ ~ +i E Z E U _ -mE

- ;:j ___1 ~ _ S : t ~ E_ -:s'~ +

81.~-

57.B + + ~ 5 i t ~ . ? r ~ , ~: " ~ ' ~ ' ~ t * + ~ ' ~ 4 ~ 4 ' ~ : ~ + +

E:Z, . E~

2 E'. E~
...- ~ -
=
II.EI
..... ~ j ÷
I~.EI

--('i ÷
-.C

E.D
~MRPE 5CRLE Bml:~
M.L.E 1.86 8.8 .893
I.D LE.SQ i.t4 9.1 [07
I I
IJ1

LC:,,:-~ , H O U R S ,

Fig. 16. Weibull probability p l o t - - C N C system repair times.

.7 .5 .- .2 .5 .E .I . . . .!-NC E;',STEII
...... . . . . . . . . .R
.E.F ' R I R TZHE

• 9 B
÷
.-+
A
H 92

H
II 7~
'C)
fie
t]- 53
bJ
->

I--
t]Z
ZI
iD
_-t
L,;_)G_r3,:~Er2OL_e_AeA_t.jFZ-E~-'-==
4-
i" _~_Ig_M_n . . . . . . . . . U~L~____%_~.±
--- PI. L . E .97 I.? .867
•.. LE.Sr.,~ t .t~l 1.7 .oF5,:3
8D I
@ @ @ ,El

L 0 G ( HOUR5 )

Fig. 17. Lognormal probability p l o t ~ N C system repair times•

 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF C N C MACHINE TOOLS 465

N EUM. FMILURE
.. f

95.B

8B,B

59.B

14.~

..s .
_WE__I§_U 66 _ _~_~__~M_E__T_E~__5
5HRPE 5CRLE llmmx
N.L.E .97' 11,9 .LSE;
4- LE.SQ 1.0S 12.7 . L88
I I I l i I

LOG (HOURS)

Fig. 18. Weibull probability plot--hydraulic repair time.

./ 4-
.92

.gB
+ / '';'i'+

.74

+,
.5B
Y
.2B

• J +

,1B • i:i .........

L 9 ~ _ _N_ _RrjB6. _ ~ _RR_0H _.g_T_.g_RS
.133 _g_La~_n . . . . . . . . . . ~_~_"___t2_".:'_~':
--- M.L.E t.O8 2,8 .I13
• ,. LE,~Q L.L~ 2"1~1 ,132
.61 i i I I I I

LOG (HOURS)

Fig. 19. Lognormal probability plot--hydraulic repair time.

466 A . Z . KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

~: CLIrl. F-F~ILIJRE

lat. D

5E.. I~

3~.FJ

1 ~1 , El
...-- - _p
18,B . ..---

../J" • "

a.E~
4-
2.E~
SNIPE SCALE nmL~
].El M.L.E i ,e4 9.8 . L2S
+.
LE.SO, I . LG , 9.5 ;L5] I
I I
13l

LOG (HOURS)

Fig. 20. Weibull probability plot--mechanical system repair times.

75"25B MFICHINE REPATR TIME

OB ..........................

99 /'/ +
x'.~:
..~i~ ¸

H 83
/
H

fi- 77
re
©
[E
fl_
5E1
t.d
_->

F- 23
O2
_J
..;..-
Z 07 ,:~,
D ./.
L) 6_o5_ LL0_RM_R6__P_aR _A_M[Sg_R ~
•./~+
~!GmM R .......... M_c~___-°"J-~>±
--- M.L. r .94 1.7 .~g6

., . LE,50 L.eZ i .7 .~5~

oB "/;" - l i I b l

L0G (HOIJRS)

Fig. 21. Lognormal probability plot--mechanical system repair times.

 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF C N C MACHINE TOOLS 467

•:: ,Zl_tM , FRILI-III£1!:

.....--1- +

5HRPE 5CRLE n m i ~
...... :::1"'" H.L. E 1.12 2S.~ .124
1. B .J'_.-6-" LF. SQ 1.12 25,6 .l$~
r I I I 1 I
~ g

LOG; (HOURS)
Fig. 22. Weibull probability p l o t ~ N C system down times.

|. QB .7~-"250
. . . . . . . . . . . .CNC
. . . . . . . .SYST£MS
....... DOHN TIHEB

/
.gB
- k ~. - /. .
4~

k-
H .92

m
.75
0
nt
n
.~D
W
>

.25
_J

"7 • 68

.21P

.OB
~1 m CD m m (~

LOG ¢I-(OJRS )
Fig. 23. Lognormal probability plot~-CNC system down times.
468 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

...:-

Z -5c.Z ~ @_ U Z ___@_R
L,26 i ~ -~_ ~r:, _ w _ I ] : - ~ _ :-:~r:c -°-
_~e(,

6: ~ u . 13

e; E l . IZI
~ 4- ~,~'~
~BIB 4- 4-"1" :.::.:.'.~-'~
-1- ..::g "--
7.- 5 . B

:::~-~
I,~.B .. :: ..... +

_=I.B ~HRPE ~CRLE nml-

MIL.E 1.3S 37.E; .LS8

LE.S~ 1 .27 ~7.3 . L39
l I I I I I

LOG ,: H O U I ~ S )

Fig. 24. Weibull probability plot--hydraulic system down times.

.7 .5 ." . . .2.5.E.I. . . . H'r

. . . .D. ~. .: F. I.I ._.I L. I.C. ' z J DO~N El'ME

+."

• :32
4.."

A
H :31
÷
H
Fq . . + t +
~T- ? B
" t Me
. - . ÷++
[L
EL
~, Me
5B
++ , "
LJ
+ ;.
3B
+ :>-
ql ~.: ..-
#
l[~ .~,-
I
. +
L,_3,_i_L~'::_'E'rJ H_-L_E @E @rj E_ZE_E~--
9-.
oP ~ ZI~MR flEi4 Eb,,~ •

----- H.L.E .Se3 2.r3 .12l

... LE,SG .B6 ~.9 .I04
~i,2. -- r I I I I

IN
ul
4 ~

L 0 ~g ( HOI_IF;:"~ )

Fig. 25. Lognormal probability plot--hydraulic system down times.

 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLS 469

-'-. CUi"I . F R I L U R [

Z ~__-~__~o__~__c~__~ _N~___~O__~N__!_[~__[ ..-L>~

s~.~ ,,.' :#- +
. ,-°

5B.D

~4.~J

19.B

18.8

5.B /-" ." +

~'*¢" " -4-

~,E~
~HRPE ZCRLK ZmL:~

M.L.E 1.08 22.4 .887

t.~
.4- LE. SQ 1.t9 22.4 .t~8
I I 1 I I I

LOG ( HOUI~S )

Fig. 26. Weibull probability plot--mechanical system down times.

E 5 , : ~_~ 9 _ M A_C_H:ZUE:____DOIL'I__N_ I ]__i'JES_

_f::
A-

.:~B .,$$~-

.gE'

.7B

.50

.24
.///-
.EI_FI

: ::<:t--
8P ~!9~9 .......... ~___9~
+ ,:: 3 " > --- M.L.E .97 2.6 .853

.SB " i i i i i i
I

~ N m

LOG (HOURS)

Fig. 27. Lognormal probability plot--mechanical system down times.

470 A . Z . KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

6. RELIABILITY GROWTH ANALYSIS

Reliability growth analysis is used extensively, particularly in product development

programs.ll Reliability growth modelling has been applied to monitor reliability
improvement and to forecast logistics and manpower requirement to support
products and life cycle costing.
Duane lz has shown that when a continuous attempt is being made to improve the
reliability of a product, the successive values of the cumulative mean time between
failures (MTBF) plotted against operating time on log-log paper lie generally on a
straight line. The slope determines the rate of MTBF growth and can be used to
estimate the instantaneous MTBF at any time during the programme.
During the period of the present study significant improvements in reliability
together with a corresponding reduction in warranty costs were observed. The
cumulative failure and operating time data for the subsystems (CNC, hydraulic and
mechanical) in chronological order of installation of the machines were collated.
These results were used to produce the Duane plots shown in Figs 28, 29 and
30.
It is seen that the Duane plot provides a reasonably good fit to the CNC system
failure data. However, for the hydraulic and mechanical systems, damped
oscillation characteristics can be observed. The reasons for this are not entirely clear
and since this is the first time this behaviour has been observed, this oscillatory
behaviour would merit further investigation.

TABLE 6
SUMMARY OF DUANE RELIABILITYGROWTH ANALYSIS

Description Weibull intensity function

Shape Scale Slope
CNC system 0.70 45.8 0.30
Hydraulic system 0-98 459.1 0.02
Mechanical system 1-05 250.7 -0-05

A summary of the growth rates for the different subsystems is given in Table 6. It
can be observed that the MTBF improvement for the CNC system is approximately
130 ~o during the warranty period with the current MTBF approximately equal to
400h. It would be interesting to learn how this growth continues outside the
warranty period. However, due to the lack of data, as previously discussed, it is not
possible to examine post-warranty failure behaviour at the present time. Because of
the oscillatory nature of the Duane plots for the other two systems, no clear
conclusions can at present be drawn with regard to reliability growth.
 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF CNC MACHINE TOOLS 471

- Z5/__a_5__m__c_Nc__my~ _T_E_M_E_n_[LU_~n~_~

35D

S ~D

258

~d
20~

I " 4
IS~

..-- +

1213
i i i i i i

LOG( CUtlULRTIVE HOURS)

Fig. 28. Duane plot--CNC system failures.

HYD~RULIC ~YSTEH
8~B

?OB

"4- .~.
5~B

÷ 4-
c u ~ . ' r mBF ,.-~:~_
+ .i.+
5OB

i
I"- i ~ i i i

E)
N r~

LOG( CUMULATIVE HOURS)

Fig. 29. Duane plot--hydraulic system failures.

472 A. Z. KELLER, A. R. R. KAMATH, U. D. PERERA

T ~IEI:I~Rt.iII-RL ~,~TE[I

41210

35B

rlD

,25B

..........
-_ __ ----_ CUI'IUI.ATXVE t'ITBF 4.+
----_ ~ +
.... --__ -__ ~-+ ~ +

~fflD * CURREMTN'rBF ~-. . . . . . . . . ~ - - - 5 2 2 - ~ ' ~ " ~ +~ : . . . . . .

i i i i i

LI:l,~.i CUHIJLI~TT",,'E H~-iURSZi

Fig. 30. Duane plot--mechanical system failures.

7. CONCLUSIONS

(1) The Weibull and lognormal distributions provide suitable vehicles for the
analysis of the failure characteristics of CNC machines.
(2) The lognormal distribution provides the best fit to describe repair time
distributions.
(3) The availability of CNC machines studied is in the range of 82 ~o to 85 ~o.
(4) About two thirds of the total system down time is due to non-active repair
times.
(5) The Duane plot provides a convenient means to monitor the reliability
growth for the CNC system.
(6) ]A new damped oscillatory phenomenon of the Duane growth curve is
observed for the hydraulic and mechanical systems.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors wish to acknowledge Alfred Herbert Ltd for supporting this study.

REFERENCES

I. Chipping in a way towards total control capacity, Metal Working Prod. (April) (1979), pp. 148-75.
2. Herbert Batchmatic Machine Manuals, Alfred Herbert Ltd., Coventry.
 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF C N C MACHINE TOOLS 473

3. Diagnostics simplify CNC maintenance. Machine Tool Rev., 63(368) (Nov./Dec.) (1975), pp. 158-61.
4. SHOORMAN, M. L. Probabilistie reliability: An engineering approach, McGraw-Hill, New York,
1968.
5. WEIBULL, W. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability, J. Appl. Mech., 18 (1951),
pp. 293-7.
6. AITCmSON,J. and BROWN, J. The lognormal distribution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1951.
7. EDWARDS,A. F. W. Likelihood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1972.
8. MXSSEY, F. J. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for goodness of fit, Am. Stat. Assoc. J. (1951),
pp. 69-78.
9. IgEso~, W. G., Reliability handbook, McGraw-Hill, London, 1966.
10. STII,HO, N. A. Reliability and availability studies of chlorine production plant, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Bradford, 1979.
11. BALABAN,H. S. Reliability growth models, J. Environ. Sci. (Jan./Feb) (1978), pp. 11-18.
12. DUANE, J. T. Learning curve approach to reliability monitoring, IEEE Trans. on Aerospace, 2,
(1964), pp. 563-6.