The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0265-671X.htm

Disruptive
RELIABILITY PAPER Maintenance
Disruptive Maintenance Engineering
4.0
Engineering 4.0
Miguel Angel Navas
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Spanish National Distance Education University, Madrid, Spain and Received 29 September 2019
Revised 3 May 2020
Department of Maintenance Engineering, Metro de Madrid, Madrid, Spain, and Accepted 23 May 2020

Carlos Sancho and Jose Carpio

Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Spanish National Distance Education University, Madrid, Spain

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a new disruptive maintenance model based on new
technologies.
Design/methodology/approach – The approach is carrying out through the impact of the Industry 4.0,
Internet of things, big data, virtual reality and additive manufacturing on maintenance.
Findings – The findings are that new technologies are an evolutionary challenge that is immediately affecting
maintenance engineering. It presents a unique opportunity to make a disruptive evolution of maintenance.
Research limitations/implications – The correct development of Maintenance 4.0 relates to the correct
implementation of Industry 4.0.
Practical implications – Maintenance 4.0 will greatly improve the main operating indicators: safety,
reliability, availability and cost.
Social implications – Maintenance 4.0 will contribute to a circular and sustainable economy.
Originality/value – For the first time, a complete new Maintenance Engineering 4.0 model is proposed. The
application of the new technologies appears in each specific maintenance process of the product life cycle.
Keywords Maintenance engineering, Internet of things, Industry 4.0, Big data, Virtual reality, Additive
manufacturing, Digital twin, Safety, Reliability, Availability, Costs, Life cycle
Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction
In less than a decade, there has been development and implementation of technologies in the
new systems and equipment that are manufacturing and installing, that must change the
strategies and design pillars of maintenance engineering.
First, it is necessary to emphasize the continuous reduction of the cost of supervision,
remote control and diagnostic systems embedded in commercial systems and installations.
At present, these systems have integrated into industrial products as standard products, and
their unit price is less than $200, including TCP/IP (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet
Protocol) connection and integrated Web server. It is the internet of Things (IoT), and short-
term global growth surveys and prospects are exponential; see survey Atzori et al. (2010) and
Al-Fuqaha et al. (2015).
The implementation of broadband communication technology makes these systems and
installations easy to connect and of low cost, thus facilitating remote operation
(Bandyopadhyay and Sen, 2011; Dujovne et al., 2014). Opportunities for the development
of new design, manufacturing and operation models are now available; see Cui (2016).
On these and other technologies, the term Industry 4.0 has been adopted, identified as the International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management
fourth industrial revolution that culminates in the implementation of smart factory; see © Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-671X
Gilchrist (2016). Industry 4.0 integrates the automation and digitalization technologies of all DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-09-2019-0304
IJQRM manufacturing processes and manufacturing support, maintenance, logistics and os forth, as
well as real-time data processing and adaptive and predictive intelligent software, which
allows greater flexibility and customization of production, an improvement of the supply
chain, as well as virtual process simulation production costs of saving energy and raw
material costs (Schmidt et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2016). Industry 4.0 already shows a profusion
of published articles (Brettel et al., 2014; Hermann et al., 2016), which predicts an upcoming
implementation in the productive sectors. For example, the prospects for the development
and implementation in communications sector are taken by Wollschlaeger et al. (2017).
Such is the volume of information of the systems and equipment of an Industry 4.0 –
states, alarms, operating parameters and so forth – that it must be processed in real time, and
once stored, only big data techniques can be applied in order to obtain relevant information
for the improvement of engineering processes and procedures of maintenance. It is vitally
important that the communications and information technology infrastructure take into
account the huge volume of data that can be captured, classified, managed and processed in a
reasonable time.
The application of big data techniques or Big Data Analytics (BDA) in the current
information society covers all fields of knowledge and technical disciplines (Zikopoulos and
Eaton, 2011; Chen et al., 2012; Gantz and Reinsel, 2012; McAfee et al., 2012; Swan, 2013;
Kitchin, 2014; Chen and Zhang, 2014; Gandomi and Haider, 2015; O’Donovan et al., 2015;
Oneto et al., 2017). Having millions of live data is no longer a competitive advantage; all
companies have them, and what will differentiate the leading companies from the others in
their sector in the coming years is to put in value and use the strategic hidden information that
is in the data.
Complementary technologies such as virtual reality and augmented reality are added and
must also be taken into account in the redesign of maintenance processes (De Sa and
Zachmann, 1999; Lee et al., 2013; Henderson and Feiner, 2009; Gavish et al., 2015). These
techniques allow the creation of digital twins of physical elements with extremely high
precision and detail.
Finally, additive manufacturing already allows the production of small lots of spare parts,
even a single prototype spare part, at a contained cost, which impacts the supply chain of
spare parts for maintenance (Horn and Harrysson, 2012; Kenney, 2013; Gibson et al., 2104;
Gardan, 2016).
Maintenance engineering is usually treated as minor engineering. It does not have
adequate itineraries and training content in the university programs that engineers study,
does not enjoy the academic prestige of other disciplines and normally is relegated as a non-
strategic department. This is a grave error if it is taken into account that in many companies
they have production or operation assets with life cycles greater than 25 years, and in these
systems and equipment the maintenance costs accumulated during their operation can
become equivalent to the cost of the initial investment.
The robotized many industrial processes transfer the costs of labour to maintenance costs,
and this is an unstoppable and exponential transfer that companies must manage properly;
see Figure 1.
Historically, there have been six major sectors in which maintenance engineering takes on
special relevance, since maintenance costs in some of these companies can amount to 25% of
total operational costs:
(1) Agri-food, in the agricultural machinery, conservation, processing and packaging.
(2) Mining and processing of raw materials, in the maintenance of heavy machinery and
blast furnaces.
(3) Industrial manufacturing, in the maintenance of workshops and means of production.
 Robotic Processes Labor Costs Disruptive
Maintenance
Engineering
4.0

Maintenance Costs

Figure 1.
The current transfer of
business costs

(4) Chemical Industry, in the maintenance of refining and transformation plants.

(5) Electrical industry, in the maintenance of generators and distribution network.
(6) Transportation, in the maintenance of the fleets of airplanes, trains, ships, trucks and
so forth.
These sectors are being joined by the construction and building sector, since the proliferation
of new intelligent buildings establish higher budgets for the maintenance of installed systems
and equipment – home automation, energy managers and so forth.
Thus, it is urgent to lay out the strategic basis of the new maintenance engineering that
takes advantage of the technological innovations already available, and that in many cases
will involve a disruption with respect to current practices, affecting the existing procedural
foundations. Therefore, this event is a revolution that must be faced in this way – question
everything.

2. Maintenance engineering
The current maintenance engineering is based on a series of technologies and organizational
techniques that in some countries have been labeled under the name of maintenology, for
example; see Japan Society of Maintenology (JSM). This technology is designed to optimize
the service life of corporate assets and ensure their safety with the highest reliability,
availability and adjusted costs.
The classification of maintenology can be done from different perspectives (Pintelon and
Gelders, 1992; Campbell and Jardine, 2001; Wireman, 2005; Campbell and Reyes-Picknell,
2015). Table 1 is classification according to the processes in which it impacts within the
product lifecycle management (PLM).
In the aeronautical field, the terminology maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) is
equivalent of maintenology (Lee et al., 2008; Vieira and Loures, 2016). Many publications use
other terms, and this dispersion does not facilitate the understanding of the basic aspects of
maintenance engineering.
The historical evolution of the type of maintenance strategy to adopt has its beginnings
with the first industrial revolution. From the end of the 19th century until the 1940s,
maintenance was limited to breakdown repair, cleaning and lubrication. Between 1940 and
1980, preventive maintenance plans were defined and implemented in order to increase the
availability and reliability of assets as well as increase their life cycle. From 1980 until today,
many techniques have been developed to improve the results of the maintenance indicators
and, in particular, the costs. The following stand out by their extensive application: total
productive maintenance (TPM), reliability centered maintenance (RCM), condition-based
maintenance (CBM) and predictive maintenance.
IJQRM PLM phase Process Maintenology

Design Level establishment Reliability, availability and maintainability prediction methods

Design Function establishment Monitoring, remote control and self-diagnosis techniques
Manufacturing Tests Reliability test methods
Operation Inventory and Computerized maintenance management software (CMMS)
management
Operation Contracts Methods of technical-economic analysis
Operation Maintenance typologies Safety, preventive, corrective, RCM, TPM, CBM and predictive
techniques
Operation Staff organization Human resources assignment methods
Operation Parts logistics Consumption prediction and supply chain techniques
Table 1. Operation Service indicators Methods of calculation of service indicators
Classification of Removal Reinvestment decision Viability analysis of partial substitution
maintenology Removal Substitution decision Analysis of amortization and costs

Linked to the concept of Industry 4.0, it is recommended to use the synonymous concept
“Maintenance 4.0” in the field of maintenance engineering; see Figure 2. The term has already
been used and presented, for example, by Kans et al. (2016) and is applied to the railway
sector.

3. The product design phase for Maintenance 4.0

Many future successes in integrating of the new technologies into maintenance processes are
integrated to product design phase, and the design specifications of these products require
include hardware and software components dedicated to maintenance tasks.
Summary of the basic specifications of the product to provide Maintenance 4.0 is
presented in Figure 3.
(1) Hardware ergonomic design should minimize downtime for corrective and preventive
maintenance, disassembly / assembly of components, use of adjustment elements and
so forth.
(2) Sensors of physical and operational variables that allow real-time monitoring of the
values reached and implement predictive maintenance techniques in real time.

Maintenance 1.0 Maintenance 2.0 Maintenance 3.0 Maintenance 4.0

Corrective Maintenance

Preventive Maintenance

TPM, RCM, CBM

Corrective Maintenance Predictive Maintenance

Preventive Maintenance IoT, Big Data

Corrective Maintenance
TPM, RCM, CBM Augmented Reality

Corrective Maintenance Preventive Maintenance

Figure 2. Predictive Maintenance Additive Manufacturing
The evolution of
maintenance
typologies
1940 1940-1980 1980-2020 2020
 Disruptive
Maintenance
Engineering
4.0

Figure 3.
Product design for
Maintenance 4.0

(3) Exclusive TCP/IP communications port for maintenance process management;

states, alarms, predictive variables and so forth.
(4) Self-test and functional test software developed for maintenance tasks.
(5) Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) embedded and preferably
developed in web server configuration to facilitate access from anywhere in the
World Wide Web (WWW).
These design specifications, to a greater or lesser degree, have already been adopted by a
relevant part of the industry and manufacturers, but the endemic problem of the lack of
standardization prevails, since the protection of the regional market continues to exist, in
contrast to the advantages of adopting open and non-proprietary developments.

4. The product operation phase with Maintenance 4.0

Maintenance managers are currently facing extremely high levels of operation of the
equipment:
(1) Safety must tend to infinity. Not a single incident is acceptable.
(2) Availability must be 100%. No other value is enough.
(3) Reliability must tend to infinity. Every failure is a flop.
(4) The costs must be the minimum. The competition is extreme.
To obtain the best results in the maintenance indicators of the industrial facilities, transport
fleets, building facilities and so forth, it is necessary to adopt disruptive strategies in every
one of the maintenance technologies to apply and integrate the new associated technologies
to maintenance to Industry 4.0.
4.1 The new maintenance control center (MCC)
The MCC must be technically and physically connected to the Operation Control Center
(OCC). The information technology platforms of both centers must be shared, and the
IJQRM management of the MCC and the OCC must be carried out in an integrated manner; see
Figure 4.
In this way, multiple synergies of knowledge will occur between the operating technicians
and the maintenance technicians. The organizational and physical separation in the
companies between the operation and the maintenance continues to generate
dysfunctionalities that prevent the improvement of the results of activity, since the
personnel that operate the assets have a deep knowledge of their behavior and of the usual
symptoms that precede the failures, and this knowledge is not used by the maintenance staff,
unless all resources are shared. Similarly, asset maintenance personnel with technical
knowledge can help resolve real-time operational events by providing technical support to
operators.
SCADA must be as similar as possible to actual facilities and should be developed as
digital twins of facilities. The application of the digital twin is a fundamental new technology
for Maintenance 4.0 and Industry 4.0 (Glaessgen and Stargel, 2012; Magargle et al., 2017; Qi
and Tao, 2018).
With a SCADA over a digital twin, maintenance technicians have the opportunity to
observe the state behavior, variables, alarms and so forth of real-time systems on a realistic
digital representation, without the need for physical access to the installation.

4.2 The integration of equipment in MCC and WWW

The dispersion of communication’s protocols for the exchange of information between an
equipment and the MCC is of concern. To date, industrial-type equipment usually has a
Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) and the exchange of information with the MCC is
carried out on a read/write memory map, such as the Modbus protocol group. On the other
hand, a large part of the information technology equipment communicates using messaging
protocols, such as Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) with management
information base (MIB) or Java Message Service (JMS) developments.
Different complex integration models and concepts are being developed, such as cyber-
physical systems (CPS; see in Lee et al. (2015)), which proposes a five-level architecture called
5C, which includes not only the physical and logical levels of connection of the machines but
also those of data processing, analysis and decision-making.
It is very important that the industry addresses as soon as possible the standardization of
the integration of equipment in the MCC, and it is essential that an open and cross-platform
architecture be adopted, away from proprietary and closed developments, which are the ones
that, to date, the majority of manufacturers are using.
The integration of the equipment into the MCC must be carried out through a dedicated
TCP/IP port, on which standardized protocols for information exchange are implemented to
simplify and reduce the cost of integration.

Figure 4.
Integration of the MCC
and the OCC over the
digital twin of the
installation
 Likewise, and in a complementary way to the MCC, the equipment must allow its remote Disruptive
management from any point of the WWW. To do this, they must inexorably include an Maintenance
application that operates locally, for monitoring, remote control and maintenance tasks in
Web Server State, so that any WWW client with the access authorization granted to it can
Engineering
access this management software as an alternative to the MCC. 4.0
The possibility of managing the maintenance of an equipment, both from the MCC and
from anywhere in the WWW (see Figure 5) provides greater versatility and robustness than
traditional architectures, which allow the advantages of centralized management to be
implemented; prioritization of incidents, service levels of the facilities and the advantages of
decentralized management; attention by the specialist technician from any location and at
any time and so forth.
The requirements of cyber security in the design, both of the standardized protocols on
TCP/IP for integration in the MCC and in the local application on the computer in Web Server
configuration for access from any point of the WWW, must be appropriate to the risk level of
each installation.

4.3 The Maintenance strategy 4.0

Corrective maintenance is a flop, and preventive maintenance is very expensive. New
technologies must be used to always implement predictive maintenance plans as a first
option. Some authors refer to predictive maintenance as CBM.
It is therefore essential that the equipment have state sensors and operation variables that
allow its monitoring in real time. The machines have already started talking, and
maintenance technicians must learn to listen to them.

Figure 5.
Equipment integration
in MCC and WWW
IJQRM The real difficulty is not in the physical acquisition of a variable of state of an equipment,
nor in its digital transformation, nor in its transmission to the MCC, nor in its representation
in a SCADA. The real difficulty is establishing the level that this state variable should have to
trigger a maintenance intervention that anticipates the failure by identifying reliable patterns
of recurring equipment behavior.
Chen et al. (2014) propose a predictive maintenance system based on alarms with big data
analysis. Yuanyuan and Jiang (2015) propose a predictive maintenance model for equipment
based on the big data analysis.
Predictive maintenance applications are reviewed with attached big data analysis:
(1) Bahga and Madisetti (2012), for wind turbines.
(2) Fumeo et al. (2015), for train axle bearings.
(3) Baaziz and Quoniam (2014), in the petroleum industry.
(4) Lee and Tso (2016), in railway systems.
(5) Canizo et al. (2017), for wind turbines.
(6) Helsen et al. (2017), in wind farm.
In Figure 6, the data stream is represented in real time from the equipment until this
information becomes a value added with failure prediction and performing maintenance
operation that anticipates the failure.

Figure 6.
Predictive
maintenance based on
big data analysis
 The equipment maintenance strategy must be a personalized predictive maintenance, Disruptive
based on an adaptive time model. It is essential that the human resources team that analyzes Maintenance
the data and proposes the predictive maintenance plan be multidisciplinary – operation
experts, maintenance experts and experts in big data analysis.
Engineering
The predictions of potential failure of an equipment must meet at least two essential 4.0
attributes in their characterizations:
(1) That the interval between the Potential Failure and the Functional Failure (P-F
Interval) is long enough, so that a maintenance intervention can be programmed and
carried out. In continuous processes of manufacturing or processing plants, the
minimum recommended interval is 1 or 2 h. Depending on the location and
accessibility of the equipment, this minimum interval may exceed 24 h.
(2) The degree of accuracy of prediction between a Potential Failure and a Functional
Failure is above 75%, with desirable values and greater acceptance. Implementing
preventive maintenance plans with lower acceptance values, entails the consumption
of additional resources and, above all, the distrust in the strategy, when requesting
maintenance interventions that are later unnecessary.
The improvement in the prediction of potential failures depends largely on the amount of data
available. For this reason, it is essential to have the largest number of identical systems in the
same operating environment. The accumulation of events and data greatly improves the
detection of behavior patterns (Yin and Kaynak, 2015; Elragal and Klischewski, 2017).
Therefore, the maintenance strategy must be based on the following (see Figure 7):
(1) Whenever possible, a predictive maintenance plan will be developed, which
anticipates the functional failure.
(2) Preventive maintenance should be limited to cleaning, lubrication and detecting
hidden failures. Obviously, legal or regulatory maintenance must also be carried out
in the prescribed cycles, if the equipment is subject to industrial safety regulations.
(3) Corrective maintenance should be treated as a flop, and the functional failure
occurred to be the main source of information to prevent it from being reproduced,
through an adequate analysis of the mode and cause of the failure.
Attached are references of advanced maintenance proposals applied to different fields of
activity:
(1) N

un~ez et al. (2014), Li et al. (2017); railway equipment.

Figure 7.
Priority in the selection
of the Maintenance
strategy 4.0
IJQRM (2) Ning et al. (2014); boat equipment.
(3) Munirathinam and Ramadoss (2014); electronic equipment.
(4) Lee et al. (2014), Yan et al. (2017); machines.
(5) Li et al. (2015); product life cycle.
(6) Yau and Chuang (2015); bridges.
(7) Alarc
on (2016); buildings.
(8) Shi et al. (2016); electrical networks.
(9) Volovoi (2016); complex repairable systems.
(10) Wan et al. (2017), Zhang et al. (2017); factories and workshops.

4.4 Maintenance indicators and service levels

Maintenance indicators or maintenance Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) have developed
in recent decades (Weber and Thomas, 2005; Parida, 2007; Muchiri et al., 2011; Pacaiova
et al., 2013).
There are four basic maintenance indicators whose measurement and control are an
obligation by the maintenance managers: reliability, availability, safety and costs (see
Figure 8).
It is essential to develop tools for calculating and publishing these indicators in real time. It
is not permissive to wait a few hours. Those responsible for maintenance should be aware
that these data are vital not only for the decision-making of their own processes but also for
the rest of the company’s departments: operation, logistics, financial, customer service and
so forth.
In Maintenance 4.0 environment, tomorrow is too late, so you have to abandon the
complex methods of processing, consolidation and calculation of data for the publication of
maintenance indicators, even assuming some degree of error in the values in real time.
The orientation of current reliability analysis is not very efficient. Companies, and in
particular maintenance departments, employ huge human and technical resources in this
field. Hundreds of complex statistical models have been developed for decades (Rigdon and
Basu, 2000; Guo et al., 2000; Rausand and Hoyland, 2004; Pe~ na, 2006) to try to explain the
behavior of equipment reliability and machines, but with limited practical results (see Navas
et al. (2017)).
The complex nature of equipment and machine failures make it difficult to have reliability
models that can be accepted and that conform to real operational behavior. These reliability

Figure 8.
The four pillar
indicators of
maintenance
analyses can be classified as industrial forensic techniques, and many resources are used to Disruptive
try to explain why a machine has failed, but, in many cases, there is no certain answer. Maintenance
Everything suggests that with the implementation of Industry 4.0, reliability models will
be based on a data-oriented approach to failures, that is, an a priori model is not required; see,
Engineering
for example, Liang (2011). 4.0
For reliability analysis oriented to the operation data, it is necessary to use the processing
power of the big data techniques in order to analyze at the time of the failure, the values of the
variables and states of the equipment in operation, with the aim to detect potential
relationships, correlations, dependencies, seasonality and so forth; see Modarres et al. (2016).
On this line, the articles of Meeker and Hong (2014), Tamura et al. (2014), Tamura et al.
(2015), Ma et al. (2016) and Tamura and Yamada (2016) are published. The idea is stressed
that each failure is a maintenance miss and that all efforts must be directed toward its
prevention rather than its repair.
In relation to costs, globalization and global competition pressures, maintenance
managers should adjust their budgets in order to contribute to the competitiveness of
companies. Organizations that adopt a rapid transformation toward Maintenance 4.0 will be
in a privileged position, since their costs will be much more contained than their competitors,
since maintenance will be customized to each equipment as a counterpoint to the current
maintenance plans.
Finally, regarding maintaining the service level (Maintenance 4.0), the maximum value
must always be considered. The equipment should tend asymptotically to be perfect in the
operation. Society and organizations require the following levels of service:
(1) Availability: 100% (without using mathematical subterfuges)
(2) Reliability: ∞
(3) Safety: ∞
(4) Costs: 0
With these maximum values as an objective for service indicators, maintenance managers
must implement measurement and publication systems in real time, be agile in the analysis
and decision-making and implement continuous improvement processes (see Figure 9).

4.5 The organization of maintenance staff

Employee organization is one of the most complex functions that maintenance managers
must perform. A service of corrective maintenance must be balanced to reduce system

Figure 9.
Cycle of continuous
improvement of service
indicators in real time
IJQRM downtime, for which it is necessary to have trained personnel available every day and at all
hours of the year.
Likewise, and due to this circumstance, unproductive work shifts may occur since
corrective maintenance work may not saturate the available hours. It is therefore necessary to
plan the preventive and predictive maintenance work in these time slots in order to saturate
the days and obtain maximum efficiency of the staff.
The emergence of virtual reality and augmented reality technologies, with the creation of
digital twins, allows maintenance managers to implement new strategies for improving the
results in the organization of maintenance personnel (see Figure 10):
(1) The expert staff (engineers and technologists) will concentrate on the MCC, covering
all the hours and days of the year, having as its main mission the analysis of the
failures (occurred or potential) and their consequences, all in real time, with help to
diagnose simulations that can be done in the digital twin. Once the diagnosis has been
made, they will attempt to solve the failure remotely (reset, redundancy activation,
etc.), and only in the negative case will they decide which personnel is the most
appropriate for the installation failure to be addressed, and which or what are the
tasks to be executed and customized for that mode of failure.
(2) The selected operative staff will move to the installation, and in real-time and iterative
connection, with the expert personnel of the MCC, will address the repair work with
the help of virtual reality and augmented reality applications that guide them at each
step of the process, the repair being supervised by the expert staff from the MCC.
Preventive and predictive maintenance will also be carried out by operative staff with

Figure 10.
The new organization
of maintenance staff
 the help of virtual reality and augmented reality applications developed for this Disruptive
purpose, in the slots that do not produce failures in the facilities. Maintenance
With this strategy, the maintenance experts of a worldwide installation or vehicle can be Engineering
centralized in a single MCC, with a cascading organization, which is a significant cost-savings 4.0
for expert training of maintenance templates.

4.6 The logistics of spare parts

In order to obtain the best results in the service indicators in the maintenance of the facilities,
it is essential to have a developed strategy for the management of maintenance spare parts,
since any stock breakage entails stopping the installation for long periods of time. To do this,
it must have detailed inventories of the spare parts of each installation and record and analyze
the consumptions in order to ensure their coverage adequately.
The application of big data techniques to the logistics of spare parts can provide greater
knowledge in the detection of complex consumption patterns in order to adjust the
purchasing strategy to the estimated consumption through these algorithms (Waller and
Fawcett, 2013; Hazen et al., 2014).
Additive manufacturing allows producing spare parts for maintenance in small lots and at
increasingly competitive costs. Soon, all maintenance departments will have a service for this
purpose. The importance and impact that additive manufacturing will have on the solution
for supplying obsolescent and outside the commercial circuit spare parts is highlighted, since
the same can be manufactured from a sample in a very short time, which has an impact on
greater availability and lower costs, as well as a potential increase in the useful life of the
facilities.

5. The product removal phase with Maintenance 4.0

The combined application in maintenance of new technologies is likely to lead to an increase
in the life cycle of the facility. Increases in the reliability and availability of the facilities and
their maintenance over time, as well as the solutions for manufacturing obsolete parts, will
postpone end of life cycle of the assets. On the other hand, an expected reduction in
maintenance costs will lead to a greater distance on the most efficient date to address
reinvestment for the change of facilities (see Figure 11).
The application of Maintenance 4.0 will facilitate the development and operation of
products, vehicles and facilities with a longer service life, while maintaining an appropriate

Key Indicators Manitenance Costs

End of Life Cycle End of Life Cycle – 4.0

Figure 11.
The end of life cycle
with Maintenance 4.0
time
IJQRM level of service. Longer-service life directly means reducing the consumption of raw
materials, fuel, emissions and so forth necessary for the manufacture, storage, transportation
and installation of new assets, which has a major impact on the development of social and
environmentally responsible products.

6. Discussions
The future success of Maintenance 4.0 is associated with the design of products with
specifications that include standardized components dedicated to maintenance of sensors,
communications ports and so forth, and the development of IoT and Industry 4.0.
The MCC should be integrated in OCC and the information technology platforms of both
centers must be shared. It is necessary that SCADA be performed as a digital twin with
augmented reality of the equipment including the representation of variables, alarms and
states in real time.
The IoT materializes with the integration of the equipment in the MCC and must be done
through a dedicated TCP/IP port, on which standard protocols for the exchange of
maintenance information are implemented. Likewise, the equipment must have an
application that operates locally, for monitoring, control and maintenance remote tasks in
Web Server configuration, so that any WWW client with the access authorization granted to
it can access. This management software, as an alternative to the MCC, provides greater
versatility and robustness than traditional integration architectures.
The maintenance strategy, whenever technically possible, will be developed on a
predictive maintenance plan that anticipates the potential functional failures of each
equipment, with the detection of behavioral patterns through the application of big data
techniques. Preventive maintenance is very expensive, and corrective maintenance is a flop.
Maintenance KPIs must be published in real time; tomorrow is too late. The service levels
in Maintenance 4.0 must always be set at their maximum values; zero failures. Maintenance
experts should focus on MCC, perform predictive diagnostic work on equipment, resolve
incidents remotely and assist operators when physical intervention is required.
Spare parts logistics should use big data technology to improve consumption forecasts
and take advantage of additive manufacturing. Maintenance 4.0 will contribute to the
development and operation of equipment with a longer useful life, maintaining adequate
service levels and contributing to a circular and sustainable economy.

7. Conclusions
(1) The new technologies IoT, big data, augmented reality and additive manufacturing
represent a disruptive leap in the conception of the new Maintenance 4.0.
(2) A plan for the analysis, development, implementation and control of results of these
new technologies must be designed, adapted and adjusted to the particularities of
maintenance of each activity and sector.
(3) The technical complexity of these technologies requires the incorporation human
resources of the maintenance departments of specialized professionals in these new
fields of knowledge.
(4) These changes are both an opportunity and a threat, and maintenance organizations
that are not able to adapt can drag the entire company to its demise.
(5) The immediate implementation of Maintenance 4.0 is not an option; it is already an
obligation for a maintenance manager.
References Disruptive
Alarc
on, J. (2016), “Mantenimiento y Big Data Analytics, el nuevo activo de la industria”, Maintenance
Mantenimiento: Ingenier
ıa Industrial y de Edificios, No. 298, pp. 6-9.
Engineering
Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aledhari, M. and Ayyash, M. (2015), “Internet of things: a 4.0
survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications”, IEEE Communications Surveys
and Tutorials, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 2347-2376.
Atzori, L., Iera, A. and Morabito, G. (2010), “The internet of things: a survey”, Computer Networks,
Vol. 54 No. 15, pp. 2787-2805.
Baaziz, A. and Quoniam, L. (2014), “How to use big data technologies to optimize operations in
upstream petroleum industry”, 21st World Petroleum Congress, Moscow.
Bahga, A. and Madisetti, V.K. (2012), “Analyzing massive machine maintenance data in a computing
cloud”, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, Vol. 23 No. 10, pp. 1831-1843.
Bandyopadhyay, D. and Sen, J. (2011), “Internet of things: applications and challenges in technology
and standardization”, Wireless Personal Communications, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 49-69.
Brettel, M., Friederichsen, N., Keller, M. and Rosenberg, M. (2014), “How virtualization,
decentralization and network building change the manufacturing landscape: an Industry 4.0
Perspective”, International Journal of Mechanical, Industrial Science and Engineering, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 37-44.
Campbell, J.D. and Jardine, A.K. (2001), Maintenance Excellence: Optimizing Equipment Life-Cycle
Decisions, CRC Press, New York.
Campbell, J.D. and Reyes-Picknell, J.V. (2015), Uptime: Strategies for Excellence in Maintenance
Management, CRC Press, New York.
Canizo, M., Onieva, E., Conde, A., Charramendieta, S. and Trujillo, S. (2017), “Real-time predictive
maintenance for wind turbines using Big Data frameworks”, IEEE International Conference on
Prognostics and Health Management (ICPHM), Dallas, TX, pp. 70-77.
Chen, C.P. and Zhang, C.Y. (2014), “Data-intensive applications, challenges, techniques and
technologies: a survey on Big Data”, Information Sciences, Vol. 275, pp. 314-347.
Chen, H., Chiang, R.H. and Storey, V.C. (2012), “Business intelligence and analytics: from big data to
big impact”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 1165-1188.
Chen, H., Chen, B., Li, P., Guo, X., Xu, A., Xi, W. and Duan, G. (2014), “Alarm information processing
and faulty equipment location at the patrol and maintenance center based on big data”, IEEE
International Conference on Power System Technology, Chengdu, pp. 1457-1461.
Cui, X. (2016), “The internet of things”, Ethical Ripples of Creativity and Innovation, Palgrave
Macmillan, London, pp. 61-68.
De Sa, A.G. and Zachmann, G. (1999), “Virtual reality as a tool for verification of assembly and
maintenance processes”, Computers and Graphics, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 389-403.
Dujovne, D., Watteyne, T., Vilajosana, X. and Thubert, P. (2014), “6TiSCH: deterministic IP-enabled
industrial internet (of things)”, IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 36-41.
Elragal, A. and Klischewski, R. (2017), “Theory-driven or process-driven prediction? Epistemological
challenges of big data analytics”, Journal of Big Data, Vol. 4 No. 1, p. 19.
Fumeo, E., Oneto, L. and Anguita, D. (2015), “Condition based maintenance in railway transportation
systems based on big data streaming analysis”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 53, pp. 437-446.
Gandomi, A. and Haider, M. (2015), “Beyond the hype: big data concepts, methods, and analytics”,
International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 137-144.
Gantz, J. and Reinsel, D. (2012), “The digital universe in 2020: big data, bigger digital shadows, and
biggest growth in the far east”, IDC iView: IDC Analyze the Future, Vol. 2007 No. 2012, pp. 1-16.
Gardan, J. (2016), “Additive manufacturing technologies: state of the art and trends”, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 54 No. 10, pp. 3118-3132.
IJQRM Gavish, N., Guti
errez, T., Webel, S., Rodr
ıguez, J., Peveri, M., Bockholt, U. and Tecchia, F. (2015),
“Evaluating virtual reality and augmented reality training for industrial maintenance and
assembly tasks”, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 778-798.
Gibson, I., Rosen, D.W. and Stucker, B. (2014), Additive Manufacturing Technologies, Vol. 17, Springer,
New York.
Gilchrist, A. (2016), Industry 4.0: The Industrial Internet of Things, Apress, California.
Glaessgen, E. and Stargel, D. (2012), “The digital twin paradigm for future NASA and US Air Force
vehicles”, 53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials
Conference 20th AIAA/ASME/AHS Adaptive Structures Conference 14th AIAA, Hawaii,
p. 1818.
Guo, R., Asher, H. and Love, E. (2000), “Generalized models of repairable systems: a survey via
stochastic processes formalism”, ORiON, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 87-128.
Hazen, B.T., Boone, C.A., Ezell, J.D. and Jones-Farmer, L.A. (2014), “Data quality for data science,
predictive analytics, and big data in supply chain management: an introduction to the problem
and suggestions for research and applications”, International Journal of Production Economics,
Vol. 154, pp. 72-80.
Helsen, J., Peeters, C., Doro, P., Ververs, E. and Jordaens, P.J. (2017), “Wind farm operation and
maintenance optimization using big data”, IEEE Third International Conference on Big Data
Computing Service and Applications (BigDataService), San Francisco, CA, pp. 179-184.
Henderson, S.J. and Feiner, S. (2009), “Evaluating the benefits of augmented reality for task
localization in maintenance of an armored personnel carrier turret. In Mixed and Augmented
Reality”, 8th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, Orlando, FL,
pp. 135-144.
Hermann, M., Pentek, T. and Otto, B. (2016), “Design principles for industrie 4.0 scenarios”, 49th IEEE
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, pp. 3928-3937.
Horn, T.J. and Harrysson, O.L. (2012), “Overview of current additive manufacturing technologies and
selected applications”, Science Progress, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 255-282.
Kans, M., Galar, D. and Thaduri, A. (2016), “Maintenance 4.0 in railway transportation industry”,
Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Engineering Asset Management (WCEAM 2015),
Springer, Cham, pp. 317-331.
Kenney, M.E. (2013), “Cost reduction through the use of additive manufacturing (3D printing) and
collaborative product lifecycle management technologies to enhance the navy’s maintenance
programs”, (No. NPS-LM-13-087), Naval Postgraduate School Monterey CA Graduate School of
Operational and Information Sciences.
Kitchin, R. (2014), The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Data Infrastructures and Their
Consequences, Sage, London.
Lee, T. and Tso, M. (2016), “A universal sensor data platform modelled for realtime asset condition
surveillance and big data analytics for railway systems: developing a “Smart Railway”
mastermind for the betterment of reliability, availability, maintainbility and safety of railway
systems and passenger service”, IEEE Sensors, Orlando, FL, pp. 1-3.
Lee, S.G., Ma, Y.S., Thimm, G.L. and Verstraeten, J. (2008), “Product lifecycle management in aviation
maintenance, repair and overhaul”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 59 Nos 2/3, pp. 296-303.
Lee, J., Lapira, E., Bagheri, B. and Kao, H.A. (2013), “Recent advances and trends in predictive
manufacturing systems in big data environment”, Manufacturing Letters, Vol. 1 No. 1,
pp. 38-41.
Lee, J., Kao, H.A. and Yang, S. (2014), “Service innovation and smart analytics for industry 4.0 and big
data environment”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 16, pp. 3-8.
Lee, J., Ardakani, H.D., Yang, S. and Bagheri, B. (2015), “Industrial big data analytics and cyber-
physical systems for future maintenance & service innovation”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 38, pp. 3-7.
Li, J., Tao, F., Cheng, Y. and Zhao, L. (2015), “Big data in product lifecycle management”, International Disruptive
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 81 Nos 1/4, pp. 667-684.
Maintenance
Li, F., Dong, Z. and Wen, K. (2017), “Research on metro risk assessment and maintenance
management based on big data”, IEEE First International Conference on Electronics
Engineering
Instrumentation and Information Systems (EIIS), Harbin, pp. 1-5. 4.0
Liang, Y. (2011) “Analyzing and forecasting the reliability for repairable systems using the time series
decomposition method”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 28
No. 3, pp. 317-327.
Ma, H., Kong, X., Zhong, Y., Yang, C., Li, Z. and Fu, Y. (2016), “Challenges and opportunities of
complex equipment operational reliability technology in industrial big data age”, 11th IEEE
International Conference on Reliability, Maintainability and Safety (ICRMS),
Hangzhou, pp. 1-8.
Magargle, R., Johnson, L., Mandloi, P., Davoudabadi, P., Kesarkar, O., Krishnaswamy, S., . . . and
Pitchaikani, A. (2017), “A simulation-based digital twin for model-driven health monitoring and
predictive maintenance of an automotive braking system”, Proceedings of the 12th International
Modelica Conference, Prague, Link€oping University Electronic Press, No. 132, pp. 35-46.
McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T.H., Patil, D.J. and Barton, D. (2012), “Big data: the
management revolution”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 90 No. 10, pp. 60-68.
Meeker, W.Q. and Hong, Y. (2014), “Reliability meets big data: opportunities and challenges”, Quality
Engineering, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 102-116.
Modarres, M., Kaminskiy, M.P. and Krivtsov, V. (2016), Reliability Engineering and Risk Analysis: A
Practical Guide, CRC press, New York.
Muchiri, P., Pintelon, L., Gelders, L. and Martin, H. (2011), “Development of maintenance function
performance measurement framework and indicators”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 131 No. 1, pp. 295-302.
Munirathinam, S. and Ramadoss, B. (2014), “Big data predictive analtyics for proactive semiconductor
equipment maintenance”, IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Washington,
DC, pp. 893-902.
Navas, M.A., Sancho, C. and Carpio, J. (2017), “Reliability analysis in railway repairable systems”,
International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 34 No. 8, pp. 1373-1398.
Ning, D., Chen, P., Yuan, G., Xu, J. and Xu, L. (2014), “Research on warship communication operation
and maintenance management based on big data”, IEEE International Conference on Cloud
Computing and Big Data, Sydney, pp. 126-129.
N

un~ez, A., Hendriks, J., Li, Z., De Schutter, B. and Dollevoet, R. (2014), “Facilitating maintenance
decisions on the Dutch railways using big data: the ABA case study”, IEEE International
Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Washington, DC, pp. 48-53.
O’Donovan, P., Leahy, K., Bruton, K. and O’Sullivan, D.T. (2015), “Big data in manufacturing: a
systematic mapping study”, Journal of Big Data, Vol. 2 No. 1, p. 20.
Oneto, L., Fumeo, E., Clerico, G., Canepa, R., Papa, F., Dambra, C., . . . and Anguita, D. (2017), “Train
delay prediction systems: a big data analytics perspective”, Big Data Research, Vol. 11,
pp. 54-64.
Pacaiova, H., Nagyova, A., Namesanska, J. and Grencik, J. (2013), Systematic Approach in Maintenance
Management Improvement, Information Technology Solutions MPMM 2011, Lule a, p. 141.
Parida, A. (2007), “Study and analysis of maintenance performance indicators (MPIs) for LKAB: a case
study”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 325-337.
na, E.A. (2006), “Dynamic modeling and statistical analysis of event times”, Statistical Science,
Pe~
Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 487-500.
Pintelon, L.M. and Gelders, L.F. (1992), “Maintenance management decision making”, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 301-317.
IJQRM Qi, Q. and Tao, F. (2018), “Digital twin and big data towards smart manufacturing and industry 4.0:
360 degree comparison”, IEEE Access, Vol. 6, pp. 3585-3593.
Rausand, M. and Hoyland, A. (2004), System Reliability Theory: Models, Statistical Methods, and
Applications, Wiley, New York.
Rigdon, S.E. and Basu, A.P. (2000), Statistical Methods for the Reliability of Repairable Systems, Wiley,
New York.
Schmidt, R., M€ohring, M., H€arting, R.C., Reichstein, C., Neumaier, P. and Jozinovi
c, P. (2015), “Industry
4.0-potentials for creating smart products: empirical research results”, International Conference
on Business Information Systems, Poznan, pp. 16-27.
Shi, Z., Zeng, Y. and Sun, L.Q. (2016), “Operation and maintenance analysis for power communication
networks based on big data”, IEEE China International Conference on Electricity Distribution
(CICED), Xi’an, pp. 1-4.
Swan, M. (2013), “The quantified self: fundamental disruption in big data science and biological
discovery”, Big Data, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 85-99.
Tamura, Y. and Yamada, S. (2016), “Reliability analysis based on deep learning for fault big data on
bug tracking system”, 5th IEEE International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies
and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions) (ICRITO), Noida, pp. 31-36.
Tamura, Y., Miyaoka, K. and Yamada, S. (2014), “Reliability analysis based on three-dimensional
stochastic differential equation for big data on cloud computing”, IEEE International
Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Selangor Darul Ehsan,
pp. 863-867.
Tamura, Y., Nobukawa, Y. and Yamada, S. (2015), “A method of reliability assessment based on
hazard rate by clustering approach for cloud computing with big data”, IEEE International
Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore,
pp. 732-736.
Vieira, D.R. and Loures, P.L. (2016), “Maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) fundamentals and
strategies: an aeronautical industry overview”, International Journal of Computer Application,
Vol. 135 No. 12, pp. 21-29.
Volovoi, V. (2016), “Simulation of maintenance processes in the big data era”, IEEE Winter Simulation
Conference, Washington, DC, pp. 1872-1883.
Waller, M.A. and Fawcett, S.E. (2013), “Data science, predictive analytics, and big data: a revolution
that will transform supply chain design and management”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 34
No. 2, pp. 77-84.
Wan, J., Tang, S., Li, D., Wang, S., Liu, C., Abbas, H. and Vasilakos, A.V. (2017), “A manufacturing big
data solution for active preventive maintenance”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics,
Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 2039-2047.
Wang, S., Wan, J., Zhang, D., Li, D. and Zhang, C. (2016), “Towards smart factory for industry 4.0: a
self-organized multi-agent system with big data based feedback and coordination”, Computer
Networks, Vol. 101, pp. 158-168.
Weber, A. and Thomas, R. (2005), Key Performance Indicators. Measuring and Managing the
Maintenance Function, Ivara Corporation, Burlington, Ontario.
Wireman, T. (2005), Developing Performance Indicators for Managing Maintenance, Industrial Press,
New York.
Wollschlaeger, M., Sauter, T. and Jasperneite, J. (2017), “The future of industrial communication:
automation networks in the era of the internet of things and industry 4.0”, IEEE Industrial
Electronics Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 17-27.
Yan, J., Meng, Y., Lu, L. and Li, L. (2017), “Industrial big data in an industry 4.0 environment:
challenges, schemes, and applications for predictive maintenance”, IEEE Access, Vol. 5,
pp. 23484-23491.
Yau, N.J. and Chuang, Y.H. (2015), “Analyzing Taiwan Bridge Management System for decision Disruptive
making in bridge maintenance: a big data approach”, 10th IEEE International Joint Conference
on Software Technologies (ICSOFT), Colmar, Alsace, Vol. 1, pp. 1-6. Maintenance
Yin, S. and Kaynak, O. (2015), “Big data for modern industry: challenges and trends [point of view]”,
Engineering
Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 103 No. 2, pp. 143-146. 4.0
Yuanyuan, L. and Jiang, S. (2015), “Research on equipment predictive maintenance strategy based on
big data technology”, IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation, Big Data
and Smart City, Halong Bay, pp. 641-644.
Zhang, Y., Ren, S., Liu, Y. and Si, S. (2017), “A big data analytics architecture for cleaner
manufacturing and maintenance processes of complex products”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 142, pp. 626-641.
Zikopoulos, P. and Eaton, C. (2011), Understanding Big Data: Analytics for Enterprise Class Hadoop
and Streaming Data, McGraw-Hill Osborne Media, New York.

About the authors

Miguel Angel Navas received the Telecommunications Engineer degree, from the Technical University
of Madrid, Spain, the Industrial Administration Engineer degree from the European University Madrid,
Spain, and PhD degree in electrical and electronics engineering from Spanish National Distance
Education University. He is certified as Maintenance Manager Expert by the Spanish Association of
Maintenance according to EFNMS criteria. He has an extensive professional career at Madrid’s Metro
(metropolitan railway companies in Spain), for over 20 years, holding various management positions in
the field of maintenance engineering. Miguel Angel Navas is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: navasma@telefonica.net
Carlos Sancho received the Industrial Engineer degree from the Technical University of Madrid,
Spain, and the PhD degree in industrial engineering from the Spanish National Distance Education
University. On the teaching side, from 2009, he is associate professor, Department of Electrical
Engineering, Electronics and Control of Industrial Engineering from Spanish National Distance
Education University. For more than 20 years, he has been working in Madrid’s Metro, holding different
technical and management position. He participates in numerous projects of innovation and
investigation within national Spanish R&D programs and he is recorded as the inventor of five
industrial patents.
Jose Carpio received the Industrial Engineer and PhD degrees in electrical engineering from the
Technical University of Madrid, Spain. He is currently a professor in the Department of Electrical and
Computer Engineering at the Spanish National Distance Education University, Madrid. In 1992, he
joined the Department of Operations Research at Stanford University, Stanford, CA, as a visiting
researcher for a 15-month stay. His research interests lie in power systems, use and integration of
renewable energy and electromagnetic compatibility. Dr. Carpio is a member of a number of
international associations, including CIGRE, European EMTP-ATP Users Group and so forth.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com