applied

sciences
Article
Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance: A Novel Method
for Supporting Maintenance Management
Renan Favarão da Silva * , Arthur Henrique de Andrade Melani , Miguel Angelo de Carvalho Michalski
and Gilberto Francisco Martha de Souza *

Department of Mechatronics and Mechanical Systems Engineering, University of São Paulo (USP), 2231 Prof.
Mello Moraes St., São Paulo 05508-900, Brazil; melani@[Link] (A.H.d.A.M.); michalski@[Link] (M.A.d.C.M.)
* Correspondence: renanfavarao@[Link] (R.F.d.S.); gfmsouza@[Link] (G.F.M.d.S.)

Abstract: Proper maintenance planning is critical for maintenance management to contribute to

increasing availability, ensuring quality requirements, and controlling the safety and environmental
risks associated with physical assets. As supporting tools for developing maintenance strategies,
Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) and Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM) methods are currently
used in several organizations. Nevertheless, these strategies are often approached separately al-
though they are complementary. In this context, this paper proposes a novel method that effectively
integrates RCM and RBM by adapting the traditional RCM method to incorporate risk management
into maintenance planning decision-making to support maintenance management. The proposed
Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance (RRCM) method allows organizations to determine main-
tenance plans that ensure the reliability of the physical assets while considering and prioritizing the
risks associated with their potential functional failures. The proposed method was demonstrated
through a case study considering the operational context of a hydroelectric power plant. The results
show the ability of RRCM to assist in the development and implementation of maintenance plans
oriented to reliability, risk, and cost.

Keywords: reliability-centered maintenance; RCM; risk-based maintenance; RBM; maintenance

planning; RRCM
Citation: da Silva, R.F.; Melani,
A.H.d.A.; Michalski, M.A.d.C.;
de Souza, G.F.M. Reliability and Risk
Centered Maintenance: A Novel 1. Introduction
Method for Supporting Maintenance Proper maintenance management is crucial to ensure competitiveness and profitability
Management. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, in all industry sectors [1]. With the increase in the complexity and size of the physical asset
10605. [Link] portfolio covered by maintenance management, there is pressure for better maintenance
app131910605 performance as it was recognized as strategic for physical asset management [2]. In other
Academic Editor: Jose Machado words, the continuous pursuit of productivity and less waste as a competitive factor brought
greater importance to maintenance management in organizations [3].
Received: 17 July 2023 Maintenance progress over time is typically represented across generations [4–6]. Each
Revised: 6 September 2023
generation is influenced by the economic and technological contexts of its period which
Accepted: 19 September 2023
influenced the development of different strategies and methods to support maintenance
Published: 23 September 2023
management. With the rise of physical asset management, formalized mainly with the
introduction of the international ISO 55000 series for asset management in 2014, a new
milestone was established for maintenance whose management is a strategic process in
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
organizations in a sustainable perspective [7,8].
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. Maintenance management is confronted with increasing availability, ensuring quality
This article is an open access article requirements, and controlling the safety and environmental risks associated with physical
distributed under the terms and assets. Thus, the development of appropriate failure management policies is essential but
conditions of the Creative Commons also a challenge for maintenance planning [9]. As failure management is a coordinated
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// activity of an organization that deals with the recognition, prevention, and reaction to
[Link]/licenses/by/ failures [10], maintenance management shall be supported with strategies and methods to
4.0/). properly define its policies.

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605. [Link] [Link]

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 2 of 23

The Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) method was developed within civil

aviation as a logical discipline for the development of scheduled maintenance programs
to ensure the reliability capabilities of the physical asset at a minimum cost [11]. Hence,
it defines the maintenance plans economically to restore and preserve the operational
ability of equipment [12]. For that, the item under review is individually analyzed to
identify all its functions, functional failures, potential failure modes, failure effects, and
failure consequences, and select the maintenance tasks [6]. Since its first publication in
the late 1970s, RCM has been applied in almost every industry sector and industrialized
country [13].
With the increasing awareness of environmental impacts and ensuring the health and
safety of personnel in industrial processes driven by the occurrence of major accidents in the
mid-80s, a Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM) strategy has emerged. According to Khan and
Haddara [14], this strategy aims at reducing the overall risk of failure of operational facilities
by assigning focused maintenance efforts in high and medium-risk areas while the efforts
are minimized in low-risk areas, reducing the overall scope and cost of the maintenance
plan. Therefore, the RBM method is designed to study all failure modes, determine the
associated risks, and develop a maintenance plan that minimizes the occurrence of high-risk
failure modes [4].
Although RCM and RBM can be complementary, these methods are not generally
addressed together in the literature. A search conducted in the Web of Science Core
Collection in August 2023 showed only 23 documents associating the terms “RCM” or
“Reliability-Centered Maintenance” with “RBM” or “Risk-Based Maintenance” in their
titles, abstracts, or keywords. However, none of these documents integrate or combine the
methods, instead, they approach or discuss them separately [15–18].
Faced with a current scenario in which equipment and processes are increasingly
complex and the concern for the safety of workers and the environment is higher, reliability
and risk should guide maintenance planning together. As derived from different mainte-
nance strategies, RCM and RBM methods provide different focus and features to conduct
maintenance planning. Accordingly, discussing the integration of RCM and RBM into a
single method is extremely relevant to this field of research.
Accordingly, this paper proposes a novel method that integrates RCM and RBM strate-
gies to support maintenance management. The proposed Reliability and Risk Centered
Maintenance (RRCM) method adapts the traditional RCM method to incorporate risk man-
agement into maintenance planning decision-making. Thus, it allows the organization to
determine cost-effective maintenance plans that ensure the reliability of its physical assets
while considering and prioritizing the risks associated with their potential functional fail-
ures. The proposed method application is demonstrated through a case study considering
the operational context of a hydroelectric power plant.
The remaining of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides an overview
of the RCM and RBM methods within maintenance management. Section 3 presents the
proposed RRCM method. Section 4 presents a case study with the application of the
proposed method considering the context of a hydroelectric power plant. Finally, Section 5
presents the authors’ conclusions and recommendations for future work.

2. RCM and RBM Methods as Support for Maintenance

Maintenance management is responsible for defining its maintenance strategies fol-
lowing its main objectives such as ensuring the reliability of a physical asset to perform
its function as required at optimum costs, considering the safety aspects and the impacts
on the environment, and upholding the quality of the product or service provided by the
organization [19]. However, this is far from simple and has been challenging managers as
well as driving the evolution of maintenance over the years. In response, RCM and RBM
were methods developed to support the thriving in maintenance management.
As a process used to determine the maintenance requirements of any physical asset
in its operating context [6], RCM is a traditional method that has supported maintenance
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 27

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 As a process used to determine the maintenance requirements of any physical 3asset of 23
in its operating context [6], RCM is a traditional method that has supported maintenance
planning for over 40 years. Currently, it is covered by different technical standards and
guidelines [13,20–22] that lead organizations toward success in their application as well
planning for over 40 years. Currently, it is covered by different technical standards and
as corroborate the importance of the methodology. Nevertheless, the RCM does not ap-
guidelines [13,20–22] that lead organizations toward success in their application as well as
pear to have
corroborate theevolved significantly
importance since its conception
of the methodology. despite
Nevertheless, increasing
the RCM maintenance
does not appear to
challenges.
have evolved significantly since its conception despite increasing maintenance challenges.
To better
To better understand
understand the
the subject,
subject, aa literature
literature review
review was
was carried
carried out
out in
in August
August 2023
2023
on the Web of Science Core Collection and IEEE Xplore, two of the most relevant
on the Web of Science Core Collection and IEEE Xplore, two of the most relevant scientific scientific
production databases.
production databases. Documents
Documents with with both the terms
both the terms “RCM”
“RCM” or or “Reliability-Centered
“Reliability-Centered
Maintenance” and “maintenance” in their title, abstract, or keywords
Maintenance” and “maintenance” in their title, abstract, or keywords were were searched
searched inin the
the
database. Furthermore, the document type and search period fields were not
database. Furthermore, the document type and search period fields were not restricted to restricted to
identifying all types of publications throughout the database coverage time.
identifying all types of publications throughout the database coverage time. This search This search
protocol returned
protocol returned aa total
total of
of 1124
1124 distinct
distinct documents,
documents, aggregated
aggregated from
from both
both databases,
databases, asas
shown in
shown in the
the publication
publication trend
trend inin Figure
Figure 1. 1.

Figure 1. The number of documents published over the years on RCM and RBM.
Figure 1. The number of documents published over the years on RCM and RBM.
The first document identified dates from 1978 and it relates to the origin of the RCM
with The first document
the report developed identified
by Nowlan dates
and from
Heap 1978 and it relatesbytothe
commissioned theU.S.
origin of the RCM
Department of
with the[11].
Defense report developed
Beyond by Nowlan
the aviation sector,and
in theHeap commissioned
late 1980s, by the [Link]
the first documents Department the
of Defense
use of RCM [11]. Beyond
for the effectivethedetermination
aviation sector, in the late 1980s,
of maintenance plansthe first impact
as they documents advo-
preventing
cated the use of
unscheduled RCM for is
downtime thea effective determination
major concern in complex of maintenance
facilities such plans as they impact
as nuclear power
preventing
plants unscheduled
[23,24]. downtime ison
Although publications a major
the RCM concern
began in complex
to be more facilities
presentsuch as late
in the nuclear
90s,
power plants [23,24]. Although publications on the RCM began
followed by an increasing trend, the number of published documents is still considerably to be more present in the
late 90s,
low. followed the
In addition, by an increasing
literature has trend, the number
not shown of published
any tendency documents
to modify is still con-
the methodology
siderably
since low. In addition,
the standards emerged theinliterature
the earlyhas not focusing
2000s, shown any tendency
mostly on the to application
modify the meth-
of the
RCM
odologyto different
since theindustry
standards sectors
emerged through
in thecase
earlystudies
2000s, [25–28].
focusing mostly on the applica-
In the
tion of parallel
RCMwith the diffusion
to different of RCM,
industry the through
sectors risk-based casestrategy
studiesthrough
[25–28]. the RBM method
had its
In first publication
parallel with the in the late 1990s
diffusion [29,30].the
of RCM, Since then, it has
risk-based progressively
strategy through expanded
the RBM
into the field of maintenance. Recently, RBM has gained greater interest
method had its first publication in the late 1990s [29,30]. Since then, it has progressively and, in the last five
years,
expandedhas accounted forof
into the field around two-thirds
maintenance. of the published
Recently, RBM has gained RCM documents. Thisand,
greater interest can bein
evidenced
the last fiveby the result
years, of the literature
has accounted review,
for around which also
two-thirds of the searched
published for RCM
the terms “RBM”
documents.
or “Risk-Based
This Maintenance”
can be evidenced and “maintenance”
by the result of the literature in review,
their title, abstract,
which or keywords
also searched on
for the
the Web of Science Core Collection and IEEE Xplore in a second
terms “RBM” or “Risk-Based Maintenance” and “maintenance” in their title, abstract, or search protocol in August
2023. This search
keywords on theprotocol
Web of returned
Science Corea totalCollection
of 347 distinct
and documents,
IEEE Xplorecondensedin a secondfrom both
search
databases, as shown in Figure 1.
Different risk-based approaches from the 1990s already indicated a trend to use risk as
a criterion to plan maintenance tasks [31]. By reducing the likelihood and/or consequence
of equipment failure, maintenance acts as a risk control measure [29]. The RBM as a method
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 4 of 23

for risk-based inspection and maintenance was proposed by Khan and Haddara in 2003 [14]
composed of three main steps: risk estimation, risk evaluation, and maintenance planning.
Therefore, it aims to reduce the overall risk in the operating facility by using the risk level
as a criterion to plan maintenance tasks [32].
While the two strategies have supported maintenance management over the last years,
they are often approached separately. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no method
has been proposed to integrate RCM with RBM to consider reliability and risk in a novel
single methodology for decision-making on cost-effective maintenance plans. For instance,
RCM was extended to consider a broader risk perspective with the use of an uncertainty
analysis incorporated into the traditional RCM method [33]. Moreover, RCM, Risk-Based
Inspection (RBI), and Safety Instrumented Function Process (SIFpro) were merged into a
new methodology that still treats RCM and RBI individually, sharing a common step of
preparation [34]. Nonetheless, these two works offer more of an expansion upon RCM by
incorporating elements related to risk analysis, rather than outright merging RCM and
RBM into a single method.
For better comprehension, the main features of the RCM and RBM methods [13,14]
as well as those considered for the proposed Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance
(RRCM) were analyzed and summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Comparison of main features of RCM, RBM, and RRCM methods.

RCM RBM RRCM

Select the item X X X
Determine the functions and performance
X X
standards
Determine functional failures/failure
Item study X X X
scenarios
Determine the associated failure modes X X
Determine the failure effects for each failure X X
Determine the failure consequence category
X
(FCC) for the functional failures
Perform hazard quantification/impact
X X
assessment
Perform a probabilistic assessment X X
Risk estimation
and evaluation Estimate/classify the risk X X
Set up acceptance risk criteria X
Compare the assessed risk with acceptance
X
criteria
Select the failure management policy based
X
on FCC
Select the failure management policy based
X
on the failure mode risk classification
Maintenance
Apply a decision tree diagram as support for
planning X X
cost-effective decisions
Determine maintenance tasks and interval X X
Determine maintenance plans to reduce risk
X
to items that exceed the acceptance criteria
Re-estimate/reclassify the risk X X
Periodic review Review the input information and decisions
X X
made
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 27

Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605

Review the input information and decisions 5Xof 23
X
made

As can be seen in Table 1, the RCM establishes a more detailed study of the item
As can be seen in Table 1, the RCM establishes a more detailed study of the item
under analysis when compared to the RBM. As it is oriented to reliability, it needs a deep
under analysis when compared to the RBM. As it is oriented to reliability, it needs a deep
understanding of the item’s functions and functional failures, to later determine what
understanding of the item’s functions and functional failures, to later determine what shall
shall be carried out to ensure that the item continues to do what its users want it to do in
be carried out to ensure that the item continues to do what its users want it to do in its
its operational context. On the other hand, RBM provides a more detailed estimation and
operational context. On the other hand, RBM provides a more detailed estimation and
assessment of risks associated with functional failures when compared to RCM. The risk
assessment of risks associated with functional failures when compared to RCM. The risk
allows identifying which items do not meet the acceptable risk and shall be prioritized by
allows identifying which items do not meet the acceptable risk and shall be prioritized by
maintenance management.
maintenance management.
Although the
Although the RBM
RBMindicates
indicatesthat
thatititisisnecessary
necessarytotodetermine
determine the
the maintenance
maintenance plans
plans to
to reduce the risk to items that exceed the acceptance criteria, it does not provide
reduce the risk to items that exceed the acceptance criteria, it does not provide further guid- further
guidance.
ance. Asthe
As for forRCM,
the RCM, the selection
the selection of theoffault
the fault management
management policypolicy
guidesguides the defini-
the definition of
tion of cost-effective maintenance tasks for the item under analysis,
cost-effective maintenance tasks for the item under analysis, which is usually supportedwhich is usually sup-
by
ported bytree
decision decision tree diagrams.
diagrams. Finally,beit noted
Finally, it should shouldthat
be noted that theRRCM
the proposed proposedwasRRCM was
conceived
conceived
to integratetoboth
integrate
RCM both RCMstrategies
and RBM and RBMinto strategies
a novelinto
anda single
novel and single
method method
that allowsthat
the
allows the definition of maintenance plans oriented to reliability, risk, and
definition of maintenance plans oriented to reliability, risk, and cost. Therefore, it combinescost. Therefore,
it combines
their their main
main features features
to take to takeofadvantage
advantage both RCMof both
and RBMRCM and RBM
strengths, strengths,
as will as will
be presented
be presented in detail in
in detail in the next section. the next section.

3. The Proposed RRCM Method

The proposed RRCM method is composed of a set of activities that support to define
and periodically
periodicallyupdate
updatethe
themaintenance
maintenance plans of of
plans an an
engineering system.
engineering Figure
system. 2 presents
Figure 2 pre-
asents
method that depicts
a method such activities.
that depicts such activities.

Figure 2.
Figure 2. The
The activities comprised in
activities comprised in the
the proposed
proposed RRCM
RRCM method.
method.

Figure 2,
As can be seen in Figure 2, the
the RRCM
RRCM method
method comprises
comprises three
three main
main processes:
processes: the
Maintenance Plan Definition and Implementation,
Implementation, the Risk Review, and the the Assessment
of Maintenance
Maintenance Plans’
Plans’Effectiveness.
[Link]
Thefirst
firstone,
one,which
which will
will bebe described
described in in more
more de-
detail
tail in Section
in Section 3.1,3.1, is the
is the main
main process
process andis isresponsible
and responsiblefor
fordetermining
determiningthe
the best
best set
set of
maintenance tasks for each failure mode based on the failure mode risk classification and
recommended failure management policy.
The second process, Risk Review, is responsible for periodically reassessing the risk
level of each failure mode to verify if there has been any significant change that would
imply a change in failure management policies. Periodic reviews allow the organizations
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 6 of 23

to update the input data used for risk categorization as well as review the method and
decisions made to be better aligned with the organization’s context.
Finally, the third process, the Assessment of Maintenance Plans’ Effectiveness, aims
to assess whether the maintenance plans defined and implemented in the process present
the expected results. This assessment can be supported by predetermining several main-
tenance performance indicators, such as benchmarks for unscheduled downtime, mean
time between failures, maintenance costs, and others. Thus, it is possible to verify whether
the implementation of the maintenance plans derived from the determined maintenance
policies has achieved the maintenance objectives and, eventually, update them.
It is worth mentioning that both proposed periodic reviews through the second and
third process of the RRCM intends to ensure that the method is a living application. In
other words, the RRCM does not end with the implementation of maintenance plans as the
organization needs to periodically review the risks of failure modes and the effectiveness
of the defined maintenance plans.

3.1. Maintenance Plan Definition and Implementation

The first RRCM process, the Maintenance Plan Definition and Implementation, com-
prises ten steps, as shown in Figure 2. Steps 1 to 5, briefly described below, comprise a
series of activities that are also covered in a traditional RCM [13].
The first step consists of the simple selection of all items, e.g., physical assets, that
will be studied and that will have their maintenance plans determined by the method
individually. Due to the increasing complexity and number of items in modern engineering
systems, some techniques can support this definition to be carried out in an organized
and structured way, such as the Functional Tree or a Block Definition Diagram. In general,
organizing assets into systems and subsystems and presenting them in a tree-like structure
can help to define the items that will be analyzed. It is worth noting, therefore, that the
RRCM does not require or define a specific technique for selecting items and is capable of
being executed even with the one that is eventually used by any organization.
The second step is the definition of the functions performed by each of the previously
selected items. The functions of a given physical asset represent what its owner wants it
to do, including issues of protection, control, appearance, structural integrity, and other
secondary aspects. After determining the functions of an item, it is possible to define the
functional failures for each function in the third step. Then, in step four, the effects that each
identified functional failure can have on the system, people, and the environment need
to be defined. Finally, in step five, the failure modes that can cause each listed functional
failure also need to be identified.
From the sixth step, the RRCM starts to distance itself from the traditional RCM. Here,
the risk associated with the eventual occurrence of each failure mode shall be evaluated,
which will be used in the next step to determine a recommended maintenance policy. There
are several techniques used for risk assessment, which in general quantify both the severity
of the impact and the probability of occurrence of the uncertain event (in this case, the
failure mode) and classify it in a risk category. Such quantification and classification shall
be designed following the organizational objectives and context.
Although the RRCM does not require the use of a specific technique for risk classi-
fication of the failure modes, it requires that it be classified into five possible risk levels:
very high, high, medium, low, and very low. By postulating that risk assessment should be
limited to these five categories, the proposed method can properly prioritize failure man-
agement policies according to each Failure Mode Risk Level (FMRL) to ensure reliability
while considering the costs.
Once the risk level of each failure mode has been determined, the seventh step of the
RRCM method determines a tailored failure management policy for each of them. Each
failure management policy comprises guidelines for each type of maintenance task that can
be used for failure mode control and mitigation. There are proposed seven possible failure
management policies:
 Once the risk level of each failure mode has been determined, the seventh step of the
RRCM method determines a tailored failure management policy for each of them. Each
failure management policy comprises guidelines for each type of maintenance task that
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 7 of 23
can be used for failure mode control and mitigation. There are proposed seven possible
failure management policies:
• On-condition: it recommends the continuous monitoring of the physical asset condi-
• On-condition: it recommends the continuous monitoring of the physical asset condi-
tion, for instance through online measurements or periodic inspection routes. In this
tion, for instance through online measurements or periodic inspection routes. In this
policy, maintenance tasks are scheduled and performed only when there are signs of
policy, maintenance tasks are scheduled and performed only when there are signs of
degradation that
degradation that indicate
indicatethe thefuture
futureoccurrence
occurrenceof ofthe
thefailure
failuremode;
mode;
•• Scheduled restoration or replacement: it recommends preventivemaintenance
Scheduled restoration or replacement: it recommends preventive maintenanceasasit
comprises a set of pre-scheduled periodic maintenance
it comprises a set of pre-scheduled periodic maintenance tasks of replacement tasks of replacement or res-
or
toration of the item, regardless of its condition, to avoid the occurrence
restoration of the item, regardless of its condition, to avoid the occurrence of the failure of the failure
mode;
mode;
•• Combination of
Combination of tasks:
tasks: itit recommends
recommends aa combination
combination of of on-condition
on-condition and and scheduled
scheduled
restoration or replacement
restoration or replacement tasks; tasks;
•• Failurefinding:
Failure finding: itit recommends
recommends aa set set of
of periodic
periodic maintenance
maintenance taskstasks that
that seek
seek to
to verify
verify
the occurrence
the occurrence of of aa hidden
hidden failure
failure mode,
mode, i.e.,
i.e., aa failure
failure mode
mode not not perceptible
perceptible to to the
the
system operators;
system operators;
•• Noscheduled
No scheduledtask; task;run
runtoto failure:
failure: it recommends
it recommends thatthat maintenance
maintenance taskstasks
onlyonly inter-
intervene
vene in the physical asset when the failure mode occurs, i.e.,
in the physical asset when the failure mode occurs, i.e., when the item does not performwhen the item does not
perform at least one
at least one of its functions; of its functions;
•• No scheduled
No scheduledtask; task;redesign
redesignmay maybe bedesirable:
desirable: itit includes
includes aa consideration
consideration to to be
be made
made
by the
by themaintenance
maintenanceteam teamaboutabouta apossible
possibleupdate
updateoror modification
modification in in
thethe physical
physical as-
asset.
Itset.
is aIt one-time
is a one-timetask task to allow
to allow otherother
typestypes of policies
of policies to betoused
be used
or toor to reduce
reduce the
the risk
risk associated
associated with with the occurrence
the occurrence of theoffailure
the failure
mode; mode;
•• Redesign is
Redesign is mandatory:
mandatory: it indicates
indicates that
that none
none of of the
the previous
previous failure
failure management
management
policies can
policies can effectively
effectively reducereduce thethe risk
risk associated
associated with with the
the failure
failure mode,
mode, requiring,
therefore,that
therefore, thatan anasset
assetredesign
redesignisiscarried
carriedoutouttotomakemakethethe risk
risk acceptable
acceptable according
according to
organizational
to organizational objectives.
objectives.
To
Todetermine
determinethe appropriate
the appropriatefailure management
failure management policy for each
policy for ofeach
the failure
of the modes,
failure
five decision
modes, diagramsdiagrams
five decision are used to support
are used tothesupport
decision-making based on their
the decision-making correspond-
based on their
ing FMRL as input,
corresponding FMRLasaspresented in Figuresin3–7.
input, as presented For 3–7.
Figures instance, if a given
For instance, if afailure mode
given failure
was
mode was classified as a very high FMRL in step 6, the questions presented in Figurebe3
classified as a very high FMRL in step 6, the questions presented in Figure 3 shall
properly answeredanswered
shall be properly to determine which ofwhich
to determine the possible seven failure
of the possible sevenmanagement policies
failure management
is the most appropriate.
policies is the most appropriate.

3. Diagram
Figure 3.
Figure Diagram for
for determining
determining failure
failure management
managementpolicy
policyfor
foraavery
veryhigh
highFMRL.
FMRL.
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13,
2023, 13,
Sci. 2023, x
x FOR
FOR PEER
13, 10605 PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 8
88 of 27
of 23
of 27

Figure 4. Diagram
Figure 4.
Figure 4. Diagram for
for determining
determining failure
determining failure management
failure management policy
management policy for
policy for aaa high
for high FMRL.
high FMRL.
FMRL.

Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Figure Diagram for
5. Diagram for determining
determining failure
determining failure management
failure management policy
management policy for
for aaa medium
policy for medium FMRL.
medium FMRL.
FMRL.
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13,
Sci. 2023,
2023, 13,10605
13, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 999 of
of 23
27
27

Figure
Figure 6. Diagram
Figure 6.
6. Diagram for
Diagram for determining
for determining failure
determining failure management
failure management policy
management policy for
policy for aaa low
for lowFMRL.
low FMRL.
FMRL.

Figure 7.
Figure
Figure 7. Diagram
7. Diagram for
for determining
determining failure
failure management
failure management policy
management policy for
policy foraaavery
for very low
very lowFMRL.
low FMRL.
FMRL.

It
It is
It is worth
is worth noting
worth noting that
noting that in
that in the
in the previous
the previous decision
previous decision diagrams,
decision diagrams, the
diagrams, the on-condition
the on-condition tasks,
on-condition tasks,
scheduled
scheduled restoration
restoration or
or replacement,
replacement, and
and failure-finding
failure-finding policies
policies are
are
scheduled restoration or replacement, and failure-finding policies are always confronted always
always confronted
confronted
as
as to
as to their
to their applicability,
their applicability, technical
applicability, technical feasibility,
technical feasibility,and
feasibility, andeffectiveness.
and effectiveness. For
effectiveness. For that,
For that, Figure
that, Figure 888 provides
Figure provides
provides
support
support to
to properly
properly interpret
interpret these
these three
three criteria
criteria according
according to
to each
each policy.
policy.
support to properly interpret these three criteria according to each policy. This represents This
This represents
represents
an
an advancement
an advancement of
advancement of the
of the proposed
the proposed method
proposed method when
method when compared
when compared to
compared to traditional
to traditional RCM
traditional RCM standards
RCM standards
standards
that lack
that lack
that further
lack further discussion
further discussion
discussion andand guidance
and guidance
guidance on on these
on these criteria,
these criteria, which
criteria, which can
which can lead
lead to
can lead to dubious
to dubious
dubious
interpretations
interpretations and
and implementation
implementation
interpretations and implementation barriers. barriers.
barriers.
Once the fault management policies have been determined, step 8 requires the deter-
mination of the maintenance tasks corresponding to them. These tasks will integrate the
maintenance plans that may also include the necessary manpower, spare parts, and tools,
the associated costs, and their periodicity. The derived maintenance plans shall then be
validated through a management review, in step 9, which will verify if they meet the cost
and labor requirements, and if it has the potential to address the risks associated with the
failure modes analyzed. Once approved, the maintenance plans can be implemented as in
step 10. However, if they are not approved, step 7 shall be revisited to make adjustments to
the previously determined plans based on the feedback provided by management.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 27
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 10 of 23

Figure 8. Guidelines for verifying the applicability, technical feasibility, and effectiveness of a
Figure 8. Guidelines for verifying the applicability, technical feasibility, and effectiveness of a
maintenance task.
maintenance task.
4. Case Study
Once the fault management policies have been determined, step 8 requires the deter-
To demonstrate an application of the proposed RRCM method, a Brazilian hydroelec-
mination of the maintenance tasks corresponding to them. These tasks will integrate the
tric power plant with four generating units and an installed capacity of approximately
maintenance plans that may also include the necessary manpower, spare parts, and tools,
200 MW was considered. Three items from one of the generating units were selected:
the associated costs, and their periodicity. The derived maintenance plans shall then be
2.1. water intake gates, 2.2. water intake grids, and 6.7. turbine guide bearing. As they
validated through a management review, in step 9, which will verify if they meet the cost
are systems of different complexities, their selection contributed to demonstrating the
and labor requirements, and if it has the potential to address the risks associated with the
 4. Case Study
To demonstrate an application of the proposed RRCM method, a Brazilian hydroe-
lectric power plant with four generating units and an installed capacity of approximately
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 200 MW was considered. Three items from one of the generating units were selected: 11 of2.1.
23
water intake gates, 2.2. water intake grids, and 6.7. turbine guide bearing. As they are sys-
tems of different complexities, their selection contributed to demonstrating the applica-
tion and results
application of the RRCM
and results for different
of the RRCM [Link].
for different A total A
oftotal
17 potential failure failure
of 17 potential modes
were analyzed.
modes Figure Figure
were analyzed. 9 presents the developed
9 presents hierarchical
the developed functional
hierarchical tree of tree
functional the gener-
of the
ating unit with
generating unit the
withitems that were
the items analyzed
that were highlighted
analyzed in gray.
highlighted in gray.

Figure 9. Case
Figure 9. Case study
study functional
functional tree
tree with
with analyzed
analyzed items
items highlighted.
highlighted.

As
As presented
presented in in the
the Maintenance
Maintenance Plan Plan Definition
Definition and and Implementation
Implementation process,
process, the
the
first
first five steps are related to the item study and are similar to those applied in a traditional
five steps are related to the item study and are similar to those applied in a traditional
RCM
RCM analysis:
analysis: 1.
1. select
select the
the item;
item; 2.
2. define
define its
its functions;
functions; 3. 3. define
define the
the functional
functional failures
failures for
for
each
each function; 4. define their functional failure effects; and 5. define the failure modes
function; 4. define their functional failure effects; and 5. define the failure modes for
for
each
each functional
functionalfailure.
[Link] Theresults
resultsofofthese
thesefive
fivesteps
stepsforfor
the selected
the items
selected itemsareare
presented
presentedin
Table 2.
in Table 2.
Table 2. Study of the selected items.
Table 2. Study of the selected items.

Item Functions Functional Failures Functional Failure

Item Functions Functional Failures Functional Failure Effects
Failure
Failure Modes
Modes
Effects
Gate locked in a closed po-
Do not allow the wa- Water does not flow Gate locked in a closed
2.1. Allow water intake when Dointake
not allow Waterthe
the water through does not flow sition
ter to flow turbine position
Water the generating unit is in intake to flow through the turbine Inoperative drive system
Allow water intake when Inoperative drive system
intake gates operation Allow a low-intake Turbine water flow is lower Gate locked in an interme-
the generating unit is in Gate locked in an
operation water flow than rated diary position
Allow a low-intake water Turbine water flow is intermediary position
2.1. flow lower than rated Low pressure in the
Water
hydraulic drive system
intake gates
Residual water flow in Lack of watertightness in
Ensure the water intake Do not ensure water
the intake system with the water intake system
watertightness intake watertightness
the unit inoperative when closed
Auto-close command not
Automatically close in Do not automatically Water continues to flow executed
case of generating unit close when necessary through the turbine Gate locked in an open
overspeed
position
 Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 12 of 23

Table 2. Cont.

Functional Failure
Item Functions Functional Failures Failure Modes
Effects
Do not protect systems Loss of protection of the
Protect the water intake Deformed or ruptured
from debris carried by intake components and
components and turbine water intake grids
2.2. the river turbine
Water Do not allow the water Water does not flow Water intake grids are
intake grids Allow water intake when intake to flow through the turbine completely clogged
the generating unit is in
operation Allow a lower intake Turbine water flow is Water intake grids are
water flow lower than rated partially clogged
Excessive clearance in the
bearing housing
Insufficient lubrication
Constrain the radial Do not restrict the radial Inadequate viscosity of
displacement of the displacement of the Excessive shaft vibration oil
turbine shaft turbine shaft Overheated lubricating
6.7.
oil
Turbine guide
bearing Damaged bearing
components
Do not ensure the proper
Ensure the hydrogenator Improper bearing
hydrogenator shaft Excessive shaft vibration
shaft alignment elements positioning
alignment
Do not prevent oil Oil leakage to the plant’s Cracks in the bearing
Prevent oil leakage
leakage facilities and the river housing

These fundamental five steps are followed by the classification of the risk of each
failure mode according to the five possible Failure Mode Risk Level (FMRL) categories:
very high, high, medium, low, and very low. As the RRCM does not indicate or restrict
how the analysis to categorize each FMRL should be performed, it allows for the utilization
of supporting tools that are better suited to the characteristics and context of each system
being analyzed. In this case study, a risk matrix was chosen to be used and each FMRL
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 27is
obtained from the relationship between the Functional Failure Impact (FFI) and the Failure
Mode Probability (FMP) given by the risk matrix presented in Figure 10.

Figure10.
Figure Riskmatrix
[Link] matrixfor
forFMRL
FMRLclassification.
classification.

The FFI value is obtained from Equation (1), in which the Environmental Impact
(EnI), the Personnel and Facilities Impact (PFI), and the Power Generation and Availability
Impact (PGAI) of the functional failure are considered.
FFI = max ሺEnI, PFI, PGAIሻ (1)
For better comprehension, Tables 3–5 show the classification of each impact type
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 13 of 23

The FFI value is obtained from Equation (1), in which the Environmental Impact (EnI),
the Personnel and Facilities Impact (PFI), and the Power Generation and Availability Impact
(PGAI) of the functional failure are considered.

FFI = max (EnI, PFI, PGAI) (1)

For better comprehension, Tables 3–5 show the classification of each impact type
(namely, EnI, PFI, and PGAI) resulting from functional failures. Additionally, Table 6
presents the criteria for classifying the FMP in the context of this specific case study.

Table 3. Environmental Impact (EnI) rating.

Level Description Functional Failure Impacts on the Environment

1 Very Low Not enough to cause significant environmental impacts
2 Low May cause minor environmental impacts
3 Medium May cause medium environmental impacts
4 High May cause severe or major environmental impacts
5 Very High May cause catastrophic environmental impacts

Table 4. Personnel and Facilities Impact (PFI) rating.

Level Description Functional Failure Impacts on Personnel and Facilities’ Safety

1 Very Low Not enough to cause injury to staff or damage to facilities
2 Low May cause minor injuries to personnel or minor damage to facilities
3 Medium May cause major injury to personnel or serious damage to facilities
4 High May cause severe injury to personnel or critical damage to facilities
5 Very High May cause fatalities or catastrophic damage to facilities

Table 5. Power Generation and Availability Impact (PGAI) rating.

Level Description Functional Failure Impacts on Generating Unit Power Generation and Availability
1 Very Low The failure does not impact the availability or generation capacity of the generating unit
2 Low Failure does not cause unavailability but affects the operating condition of the generating unit
3 Medium Failure does not cause unavailability but affects the power generation of the generating unit
4 High Failure does not cause unavailability but severely affects the power generation of the generating unit
5 Very High Failure causes the unavailability of the generating unit

Table 6. Failure Mode Probability (FMP) rating.

Level Description Failure Mode Probability

1 Very Low Failure rate is very low (up to 1 failure every 60 months)
2 Low Failure rate is low (1 failure between 36 and 48 months)
3 Medium Failure rate is moderate (1 failure between 12 and 24 months)
4 High Failure rate is high (1 failure between 3 and 6 months)
5 Very High Failure rate is very high (1 or more failures every month)

The classification and rating presented in Tables 3–5 were obtained from a consensus
with those responsible for the hydroelectric power plant. In turn, the classification depicted
in Table 6 was derived from the analysis of the failure history of the selected items of the
plant under examination in this case study.
In this case example, Table 7 presents the FMRL classification for the respective failure
modes. It serves as an extension of Table 2, which included ratings for EnI, PFI, and PGAI
to evaluate the FFI for the functional failure effects and ratings for FMP to evaluate each
failure mode. By combining the FFI and FMP assessments using the risk matrix presented
in Figure 10, the FMRL is determined. In addition, it should be noted that each failure
mode is assigned a unique ID to facilitate its tracking in subsequent steps of the RRCM
method.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 14 of 23

Table 7. Failure Mode Risk Level (FMRL) classification.

Item Functions Functional Failures Functional Failure EnI PFI PGAI FFI Failure Failure Mode FMP FMRL
Effects Mode ID

FM.2.1.A Gate locked in a closed 1

Do not allow the water Water does not flow position High
1 1 5 5
intake to flow through the turbine
Allow water intake FM.2.1.B Inoperative drive system 1 High
when the generating Gate locked in an
unit is in operation FM.2.1.C 1 Medium
intermediary position
Allow a low-intake Turbine water flow is 1 1 4 4
water flow lower than rated Low pressure in the
2.1. Water FM.2.1.D 2 High
intake gates hydraulic drive system
Residual water flow in Lack of watertightness in
Ensure the water intake Do not ensure water the intake system with 1 2 1 2 FM.2.1.E 2 Low
intake watertightness the water intake system
watertightness
the unit inoperative when closed

FM.2.1.F Auto-close command not 1 High

Automatically close in executed
case of generating unit Do not automatically Water continues to flow 1 5 1 5
close when necessary through the turbine Gate locked in an open
overspeed FM.2.1.G 1 High
position
Do not protect systems Loss of protection of the
Protect the water intake Deformed or ruptured
from debris carried by intake components and 1 4 4 4 FM.2.2.A 2 High
components and turbine water intake grids
the river turbine
2.2. Water Water intake grids are
intake grids Do not allow the water Water does not flow 1 5 5 5 FM.2.2.B 2 High
Allow water intake intake to flow through the turbine
when the generating completely clogged
unit is in operation Allow a lower intake Turbine water flow is Water intake grids are
1 2 3 3 FM.2.2.C 4 High
water flow lower than rated partially clogged

FM.6.7.A Excessive clearance in the 1 Medium

bearing housing
FM.6.7.B Insufficient lubrication 2 High
Constrain the radial Do not restrict the radial
displacement of the displacement of the Excessive shaft 1 2 4 4 FM.6.7.C Inadequate viscosity of oil 3 High
vibration
turbine shaft turbine shaft FM.6.7.D Overheated lubricating oil 2 High
6.7. Turbine
guide FM.6.7.E Damaged bearing 1 Medium
components
bearing
Ensure the Do not ensure the Improper bearing
hydrogenator shaft proper hydrogenator Excessive shaft 1 1 3 3 FM.6.7.F 1 Low
vibration elements positioning
alignment shaft alignment

Do not prevent oil Oil leakage to the Cracks in the bearing

Prevent oil leakage plant’s facilities and the 4 2 2 4 FM.6.7.G 1 Medium
leakage river housing
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 15 of 23

As can be noticed in Table 7, each functional failure may have one or more failure
modes associated with it. However, the assessment of the impact of a functional failure is
not dependent on them. In other words, each Functional Failure Impact (FFI) is associated
with the consequences estimated when the functional failure occurs. On the other hand,
as different failure modes have different probabilities of occurrence, they are directly
associated with the FMP.
After establishing FMRLs for all defined failure modes, the subsequent steps 7 and
8 of the RRCM were executed. From the risk classification obtained, it is possible to
determine the appropriate failure mode management policy and then the maintenance
tasks to compose the maintenance plans. The definition of failure mode management
policies follows the decision diagrams for each risk level presented in Figures 3–7 as well
as the guidelines for verifying the applicability, technical feasibility, and effectiveness of a
maintenance task presented in Figure 8. The results obtained for the failure modes listed in
Table 7 are presented in Table 8.
To enhance the understanding of the proposed method and its practical implementa-
tion, the reasoning utilized to determine the maintenance management policy for failure
mode FM.6.7.G, cracks in the bearing housing, are provided. Firstly, the FFI score assigned
to the functional failure associated with this particular failure mode (FFI = 4) is mainly
related to its impact on the environment. If the turbine guide bearing housing loses its
function of restricting the lubricating oil to the inside of the bearing, in this case, due to
the development of cracks in the bearing housing, oil leaks may occur. In milder cases, the
main consequence is the accumulation of oil puddles in the plant’s facilities. However, due
to the position of the turbine guide bearing in the generating unit and its proximity to the
water flow, in some cases, the oil may not accumulate in the installations and leak directly
into the river, which becomes a serious environmental problem.
On the other hand, the probability of the development of cracks in the bearing housing
of the generating units of the plant considered is very low, with no case being reported
in its almost five decades of operation. In this way, the score associated with FMP is the
lowest possible value (FMP = 1). Consequently, from the FFI and FMP scores, the risk level
associated with the failure mode is medium.
From the medium FMRL diagram (Figure 5), the initial question to address is if there
is an on-condition task that is applicable, effective, and technically feasible to be performed.
In this instance, it would not be possible to continuously monitor the development of cracks
in the bearing housing, resulting in a negative response to the first question. Consequently,
the second question delineated by the decision diagram is whether there is a scheduled,
applicable, effective, and technically feasible restoration or replacement task. However, the
answer is negative as periodic replacement of the bearing housing proves economically
unfeasible.
Thus, the third question outlined in the diagram would be whether the loss of function
caused by the failure mode itself would be evident to the operational team under regular
operating conditions. Given that cracks in a bearing housing are not easily identifiable
through inspection routes typically conducted in hydroelectric power plants, the answer to
this final question is also negative. Identifying cracks in such cases usually requires the im-
plementation of specialized non-destructive techniques executed by trained professionals.
Moreover, the primary evidence of the existence of cracks in a bearing housing, in this case,
the observation of oil leakage, is not always noticeable, especially when the oil flows into
the river water flow.
Accordingly, the subsequent question specified in the decision diagram examines
whether there is a failure-finding task that is applicable, technically feasible, and effective to
be performed. As stated earlier, techniques such as ultrasound or penetrant liquid testing,
performed periodically by outsourced teams specializing in non-destructive testing, fulfill
these criteria. Consequently, the answer to this fourth question is affirmative, thereby
suggesting the most suitable failure mode management policy to be employed for this
particular failure mode is failure finding.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 16 of 23

Table 8. Failure mode management policies and maintenance tasks.

Failure Failure Mode

Failure Mode FMRL Maintenance Task Task Frequency
Mode ID Management Policy
Scheduled restoration or Align the gate guides and free them from obstacles. Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.1.A Gate locked in a closed position High
replacement Lubricate moving components downtime plan
Inspect the hydraulic system, retighten gaskets and
Scheduled restoration or Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.1.B Inoperative drive system High connections, and replace components such as bearings
replacement downtime plan
and seals
Gate locked in an intermediary Scheduled restoration or Align the gate guides and free them from obstacles. Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.1.C Medium
position replacement Lubricate moving components downtime plan
Inspect the condition of the hydraulic system and
Low pressure in the hydraulic Scheduled restoration or
FM.2.1.D High correct leaks. Check the drive oil level and top up if Follow the inspection route plan
drive system replacement
necessary
Lack of watertightness in the No scheduled task. Redesign
FM.2.1.E Low - -
water intake system when closed may be desirable
Auto-close command not Scheduled restoration or Periodically replace the drive components of the Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.1.F High
executed replacement automatic gate-closing system downtime plan
Scheduled restoration or Align the gate guides and free them from obstacles. Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.1.G Gate locked in an open position High
replacement Lubricate moving components downtime plan
Check the structural condition of the water intake grids
Deformed or ruptured water Scheduled restoration or Follow the unit maintenance
FM.2.2.A High from visual inspections. Carry out repairs when
intake grids replacement downtime plan
necessary
Continuously monitor the water pressure upstream and
Water intake grids are completely downstream of the grids and clean them with a
FM.2.2.B High On-condition task Continuous
clogged hydraulic grate cleaner whenever the pressure
difference is significant
Continuously monitor the water pressure upstream and
Water intake grids are partially downstream of the grids and clean them with a
FM.2.2.C High On-condition task Continuous
clogged hydraulic grate cleaner whenever the pressure
difference is significant
Excessive clearance in the Scheduled restoration or Check the bearing housing fastening elements and Follow the unit maintenance
FM.6.7.A Medium
bearing housing replacement retighten or replace them when necessary downtime plan
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 17 of 23

Table 8. Cont.

Failure Failure Mode

Failure Mode FMRL Maintenance Task Task Frequency
Mode ID Management Policy
Continuously monitoring oil flows and levels
FM.6.7.B Insufficient lubrication High On-condition task Continuous
throughout the bearing lubrication system
Analyze the quality of the oil and replace it in case of
FM.6.7.C Inadequate viscosity of oil High On-condition task Follow the oil analysis plan
contamination
Continuously monitoring the inlet and outlet
FM.6.7.D Overheated lubricating oil High On-condition task temperatures of the oil in the bearings and heat Continuous
exchangers
Continuously monitor turbine shaft vibration. If
FM.6.7.E Damaged bearing components Medium On-condition task excessive vibration not associated with other failure Continuous
modes is observed, check the bearing conditions
Improper bearing elements Scheduled restoration or Check the condition of the bearings periodically and Follow the unit maintenance
FM.6.7.F Low
positioning replacement reposition their elements when necessary downtime plan
Check the conditions of the bearing housing and carry
FM.6.7.G Cracks in the bearing housing Medium Failure finding -
out non-destructive tests to verify the presence of cracks
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 18 of 23

The same reasoning was developed for each failure mode under consideration. For
each case, starting from the FMRL established for the specific failure mode, the correspond-
ing decision diagram was navigated based on the responses provided to each question.
Through this process, the failure management policies were determined, subsequently
leading to the determination of the maintenance tasks as shown in Table 8.
Once these results are approved through a management review and implemented, the
Maintenance Plan Definition and Implementation process reaches its conclusion. However,
as RRCM is a dynamic methodology, the other two processes outlined in the method should
be conducted periodically. The Risk Review entails periodic reviews of the FMRL for the
defined failure modes based on updated failure history, FFI ratings, impact scales, and
decisions. Similarly, the Assessment of Maintenance Plans’ Effectiveness can be derived
from specific maintenance performance indicators aligning with the overall maintenance
management performance evaluation process. The frequency of these processes should
be tailored to the needs and expectations of the RRCM within the context of maintenance
management and the organization.

RRCM Application Discussion

The demonstration of the RRCM method in this case study contributed to highlighting
its distinct features and evidence of how it expands upon the capabilities of individual RCM
and RBM methods. In essence, the proposed RRCM method integrates the key aspects
from both methods into a singular and innovative methodology that supports maintenance
management to economically determine maintenance plans while considering reliability
and risk. Consequently, the outcomes derived from this RRCM application, as presented in
Tables 2, 7 and 8, could not have been achieved through the implementation of either RCM
or RBM separately.
For better comprehension, Table 9 presents a comparison of the applications of tradi-
tional RCM [13] and RBM [14] methods, as demonstrated by case studies from the literature
review, with the proposed RRCM. All the applications were analyzed considering aspects
such as item study, risk estimation and evaluation, maintenance planning, and periodic
review, as presented in Table 1.
While the traditional RCM method shares similarities with the proposed RRCM in
terms of conducting item studies, it lacks the inclusion of activities for risk estimation and
evaluation, which are incorporated for the selection of appropriate failure management
policy for each failure mode in RRCM. It is worth mentioning that some recent applications
of RCM may include a risk estimation and evaluation activity that derives a metric for
failure mode prioritization [35,36]. However, it is not usually considered for the selection
of the failure management policies, concentrating on the use of the failure consequences for
that purpose. Accordingly, the proposed FMRL classification of RRCM, which addresses
risk estimation and evaluation and drives the determination of the appropriate failure man-
agement policies and, consequently, the maintenance tasks, offers a more comprehensive
perspective compared to the FCC classification of RCM [13].
The quantification of hazards and the probabilistic assessment to classify the risk
associated with the failure mode is typically exclusive to the RBM method [39–43]. Thus,
compared to traditional RCM, RRCM provides a risk assessment that is considered for
the selection of appropriate failure management policies. Additionally, the proposed
RRCM method advances the field by providing enhanced support during the maintenance
planning decision-making, offering more detailed decision diagrams and guidelines to
verify the applicability, technical feasibility, and effectiveness of a potential maintenance
task.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 19 of 23

Table 9. Comparison of RCM, RBM, and RRCM applications.

Authors Method Item Study Risk Estimation and Evaluation Maintenance Planning Periodic Review
Although the paper presents the The paper does not specifically
The paper presents a study of the The paper presents a decision tree
RPN for prioritization of the failure mention periodic review procedures
items, including their functions, to support the selection of an
Yang et al. (2020) [35] RCM modes, it is not associated with the review procedures such as
failure modes, failure causes, and appropriate failure management
failure management policy reviewing input information and
Risk Priority Number (RPN). policy for each failure mode.
selection. decisions made.
Although the paper presents the The paper does not specifically
The paper presents a study of the The paper presents a decision tree
fault level for prioritization of the mention periodic review procedures
items, including their functions, to support the selection of an
Fang et al. (2019) [36] RCM failure mode, it is not associated review procedures such as
failure modes, failure causes, and appropriate failure management
with the failure management policy reviewing input information and
fault levels. policy for each failure mode.
selection. decisions made.
The paper does not specifically
The paper presents a study of the The paper presents a decision tree
The paper does not present any type mention periodic review procedures
Umpawanwong and items, including their functions, to support the selection of an
RCM of risk estimation or evaluation for review procedures such as
Chutima (2015) [25] functional failures, failure modes, appropriate failure management
the identified failure modes. reviewing input information and
and FCC. policy for each failure mode.
decisions made.
The proposed RRCM includes a The paper does not specifically
The paper presents a decision tree
broad study of the items, including The paper does not present any type mention periodic review procedures
Tavares et al. (2012) to support the selection of an
RCM their functions, functional failures, of risk estimation or evaluation for review procedures such as
[37] appropriate failure management
failure modes, failure effects, and the identified failure modes. reviewing input information and
policy for each failure mode.
FCC. decisions made.
The paper does not specifically
The paper presents a study of the The paper presents a decision tree
The paper does not present any type mention periodic review procedures
Deshpande and items, including their functions, to support the selection of an
RCM of risk estimation or evaluation for review procedures such as
Modak (2002) [38] functional failures, and failure appropriate failure management
the identified failure modes. reviewing input information and
modes. policy for each failure mode.
decisions made.
The paper provides a systematic The paper presents risk estimation The paper presents a decision tree The paper does not specifically
Lopez and Kolios study of the items, including the and evaluation for each failure to support the selection of an mention periodic review procedures
RBM
(2022) [39] identification of failure modes, mode based on risk assessment appropriate failure management for re-estimating or re-classifying
effects, and causes. through a risk matrix. policy for each failure mode. risk.
The paper presents risk estimation The paper does not present a The paper does not specifically
Masud, The paper provides a study of the
and evaluation for each failure support tool to select an appropriate mention periodic review procedures
Chattopadhyay, and RBM items, including the identification of
mode based on risk assessment failure management policy for each for re-estimating or re-classifying
Gunawan (2019) [40] fault events and consequences.
through a risk matrix. failure mode. risk.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 20 of 23

Table 9. Cont.

Authors Method Item Study Risk Estimation and Evaluation Maintenance Planning Periodic Review
The paper presents risk estimation The paper does not present a The paper does not specifically
The paper provides a study of the
and evaluation for each failure support tool to select an appropriate mention periodic review procedures
Hu et al. (2009) [41] RBM items, including the identification of
mode based on probabilistic risk failure management policy for each for re-estimating or re-classifying
fault events and consequences.
assessment. failure mode. risk.
The paper presents risk estimation The paper does not present a
The paper provides a study of the The paper presents an iterative
Dong, Gu, and Chen and evaluation for each failure support tool to select an appropriate
RBM items, including the identification of method that re-evaluates risk after
(2008) [42] mode based on probabilistic risk failure management policy for each
fault events and consequences. developing a maintenance plan.
assessment. failure mode.
The paper presents risk estimation The paper does not present a
The paper provides a study of the The paper presents an iterative
Khan and Haddara and evaluation for each failure support tool to select an appropriate
RBM items, including the identification of method that re-evaluates risk after
(2004) [43] mode based on probabilistic risk failure management policy for each
fault events and consequences. developing a maintenance plan.
assessment. failure mode.
The proposed RRCM includes The proposed RRCM includes the
The proposed RRCM includes a The proposed RRCM incorporates
different decision trees to support Risk Review and Assessment of
broad study of the items, including the FMRL for the classification of
the selection of an appropriate Maintenance Plans’ Effectiveness as
Proposed method RRCM their functions, functional failures, the risk associated with each
failure management policy necessary processes, which
failure modes, failure effects, and identified failure mode based on
according to the FMRL of each periodically reassess the risks and
FCC. risk assessment.
failure mode. outcomes of the method.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 21 of 23

Finally, although the RBM method provides in-depth risk estimation and evaluation
of items and their failure scenarios, it lacks a comprehensive examination of the functions,
failure modes, and functional failure effects of these items. As a consequence, the RBM does
not provide sufficient guidance for maintenance planning decision-making and usually is
not supported by guidelines or decision diagrams for the selection of failure management
policies [40–43]. Such limitation is addressed through the implementation of the proposed
RRCM method that not only specifies a broad item study as in the RCM method [13,25,37]
but also enhances it with more detailed diagrams and guidance that ensures reliability and
incorporates risk and cost considerations in maintenance planning.

5. Conclusions
Traditional maintenance strategies based on reliability (RCM) or risk (RBM) should no
longer be seen separately in the face of a current scenario in which equipment and processes
are increasingly complex and the concern for the safety of workers and the environment is
higher. In this context, this paper proposed a novel method that integrates RCM and RBM
methods to support maintenance management.
The proposed Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance (RRCM) combined the
study of the system and the cost-effectiveness reasoning of the RCM with risk estimation
and evaluation of RBM to determine maintenance plans oriented to reliability, risk, and
cost. The case study results showed the RRCM method can assist organizations in the
development and implementation of maintenance plans for physical assets through a
detailed and dynamic method. Furthermore, the features of the RRCM method expand
the capabilities of the RCM or RBM as they incorporate tasks that are not present when
applied individually.
Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that two of the main perceived limitations of
RRCM are consistent with those found in both RCM and RBM. Firstly, the proposed method
depends on the availability of in-depth technical knowledge and data regarding the items
under analysis. For instance, insufficient and inaccurate information input for RRCM
may impact the proper identification of the item’s functions, functional failure effects, and
potential failure modes and classification of the FMRL. Secondly, although RRCM shows
promise, it requires proper planning and a significant amount of time to effectively derive
the maintenance plans.
As an additional limitation of RRCM, although the decision diagrams support the
decision-making in the selection of the appropriate failure management policy based on
the FMRL, they may involve subjective judgments and introduce epistemic bias during the
reasoning process.
Finally, it is expected that the findings of this paper will contribute to maintenance
professionals and researchers by introducing a novel method to determine maintenance
plans considering reliability, risk, and cost-effectiveness at once. As opportunities for
future work, the authors suggest further exploration of the processes of Risk Review and
Assessment of Maintenance Plans’ Effectiveness as they are critical for the continuous
improvement of the maintenance plans to support maintenance management.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M. and G.F.M.d.S.; methodol-

ogy, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M. and G.F.M.d.S.; formal analysis, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M.;
investigation, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M. and G.F.M.d.S.; resources, G.F.M.d.S.; data curation,
R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M.; writing—original draft preparation, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M.
and G.F.M.d.S.; writing—review and editing, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M., M.A.d.C.M. and G.F.M.d.S.; vali-
dation, R.F.d.S., A.H.d.A.M. and M.A.d.C.M.; supervision, G.F.M.d.S.; funding acquisition, G.F.M.d.S.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors are thankful for the financial support of FDTE (Fundação para o Desenvolvi-
mento Tecnológico da Engenharia), FUSP (Fundação de Apoio à Universidade de São Paulo), and
EDP Brasil for the development of the present research as part of an ANEEL R&D Project. Prof.
Gilberto de Souza also wishes to acknowledge the support of the Brazilian National Council for
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 22 of 23

Scientific and Technological Development/Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e

Tecnológico (CNPq) by grant 303986/2022-0.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author, G.F.M.d.S., upon reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Braglia, M.; Castellano, D.; Gallo, M. A Novel Operational Approach to Equipment Maintenance: TPM and RCM Jointly at Work.
J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 2019, 25, 612–634. [CrossRef]
2. Da Silva, R.F.; de Souza, G.F.M. Modeling a Maintenance Management Framework for Asset Management Based on ISO 55000
Series Guidelines. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 2022, 28, 915–937. [CrossRef]
3. Reis, T.A.S.; Campos, F.C. Industry 4.0 Influences on Maintenance Operation: A Bibliometric Analysis. IFAC-Pap. 2020, 53,
10633–10638. [CrossRef]
4. Arunraj, N.S.; Maiti, J. Risk-Based Maintenance—Techniques and Applications. J. Hazard. Mater. 2007, 142, 653–661. [CrossRef]
5. GFMAN. The Maintenance Framework, 1st ed.; GFMAN: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2016; ISBN 978-0-9870602-5-9.
6. Moubray, J. Reliability-Centred Maintenance; Butterworth-Heinemann: Woburn, MA, USA, 1997.
7. De Souza, G.F.M.; Caminada Netto, A.; Melani, A.H.A.; Michalski, M.A.d.C.; da Silva, R.F. Reliability Analysis and Asset Management
of Engineering Systems, 1st ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; ISBN 9780128235218.
8. Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek, M.; Gola, A. Maintenance 4.0 Technologies for Sustainable Manufacturing—An Overview. IFAC-Pap.
2019, 52, 91–96. [CrossRef]
9. Da Silva, R.F.; de Andrade Melani, A.H.; Carvalho Michalski, M.A.d.; Martha de Souza, G.F. Applying Cluster Analysis to
Support Failure Management Policy Selection in Asset Management: A Hydropower Plant Case Study. In Proceedings of the 31st
European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2021), Angers, France, 19–23 September 2021; Research Publishing Services:
Singapore, 2021; pp. 1838–1844.
10. Schneider, M.; Lucke, D.; Adolf, T. A Cyber-Physical Failure Management System for Smart Factories. Procedia CIRP 2019, 81,
300–305. [CrossRef]
11. Nowlan, F.S.; Heap, H.F. Reliability-Centered Maintenance; US Department of Commerce: Springfield, IL, USA, 1978.
12. Enjavimadar, M.; Rastegar, M. Optimal Reliability-Centered Maintenance Strategy Based on the Failure Modes and Effect Analysis
in Power Distribution Systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2022, 203, 107647. [CrossRef]
13. SAE JA1011; Evaluation Criteria for Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Processes, 2nd Ed. SAE International: Warrendale,
PA, USA, 2009.
14. Khan, F.I.; Haddara, M.M. Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM): A Quantitative Approach for Maintenance/Inspection Scheduling
and Planning. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2003, 16, 561–573. [CrossRef]
15. Shahin, A.; Aminsabouri, N.; Kianfar, K. Developing a Decision Making Grid for Determining Proactive Maintenance Tactics. J.
Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2018, 29, 1296–1315. [CrossRef]
16. Melani, A.H.A.; Kashiwagi, F.N.; Rosa, T.G.; Souza, G.F.M.; Rigoni, E.; Salles, G.M.O. Plant Prioritization for Updating Main-
tenance Policies: A Power Sector Case Study. In Proceedings of the 2022 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium
(RAMS), Tucson, AZ, USA, 24–27 January 2022; pp. 1–6.
17. Mat Esa, M.A.; Muhammad, M. Adoption of Prescriptive Analytics for Naval Vessels Risk-Based Maintenance: A Conceptual
Framework. Ocean Eng. 2023, 278, 114409. [CrossRef]
18. Abbas, M.; Shafiee, M. An Overview of Maintenance Management Strategies for Corroded Steel Structures in Extreme Marine
Environments. Mar. Struct. 2020, 71, 102718. [CrossRef]
19. BSI BS EN 13306:2010; Maintenance—Maintenance Terminology. BSI: Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
20. BSI BS EN 60300-3-11:2009; Dependability Management—Reliability Centred Maintenance. BSI: Brussels, Belgium, 2009.
21. NASA. RCM Guide—Reliability-Centered Maintenance Guide for Facilities and Collateral Equipment, 1st ed.; NASA: Washington, DC,
USA, 2008.
22. American Bureau of Shipping. Guidance Notes on Reliability-Centered Maintenance; ABS: Houston, TX, USA, 2004.
23. Smith, A.M.; Vasudevan, R.V.; Matteson, T.D.; Gaertner, J.P. Enhancing Plant Preventive Maintenance via RCM. In Proceedings of
the World Abstracts on Microelectronics and Reliability, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 28–30 January 1986; p. 785.
24. Henry, C.; Anderson, R. Application of Reliability-Centered Maintenance to Nuclear-Power Plants. Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc. 1985, 50,
394.
25. Umpawanwong, P.; Chutima, P. Application of Reliability Centered Maintenance Concept to Petrochemical Industry. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management Science (ITMS 2015), Tianjin, China,
27–28 March 2015; pp. 445–448.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 10605 23 of 23

26. Huang, L.; Yang, X.; Jiang, H.; Mo, C. Discussion on Application of Reliability-Centered Maintenance to Reliability Improvement
in New Nuclear Power Plants. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and
Safety Engineering (QR2MSE), Chengdu, China, 15–18 July 2013; pp. 707–711.
27. Melani, A.H.A.; Murad, C.A.; Caminada Netto, A.; de Souza, G.F.M.; Nabeta, S.I. Criticality-Based Maintenance of a Coal-Fired
Power Plant. Energy 2018, 147, 767–781. [CrossRef]
28. Ciani, L.; Guidi, G.; Patrizi, G.; Galar, D. Condition-Based Maintenance of HVAC on a High-Speed Train for Fault Detection.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1418. [CrossRef]
29. Child, M.T. Risk Based Maintenance. Trans. Inst. Mar. Eng. Ser. C 1997, 109, 101–109.
30. Farquharson, J.; Montgomery, R.; Walker, D.; Dungan, K.; Brown, D.; Begley, J. Using a Risk-Based Maintenance Approach
to Develop Planned Maintenance Guidelines for Fire Protection Systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference and
Workshop on Reliability and Risk Management, San Antonio Riverwalk, TX, USA, 15–18 September 1998; pp. 591–604.
31. Krishnasamy, L.; Khan, F.; Haddara, M. Development of a Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM) Strategy for a Power-Generating Plant.
J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2005, 18, 69–81. [CrossRef]
32. Wang, Y.; Cheng, G.; Hu, H.; Wu, W. Development of a Risk-Based Maintenance Strategy Using FMEA for a Continuous Catalytic
Reforming Plant. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2012, 25, 958–965. [CrossRef]
33. Selvik, J.T.; Aven, T. A Framework for Reliability and Risk Centered Maintenance. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2011, 96, 324–331.
[CrossRef]
34. Pexa, M.; Hladík, T.; Aleš, Z.; Legát, V.; Havlů, V.; Müller, M.; Valášek, P. Reliability and Risk Treatment Centered Maintenance. J.
Mech. Sci. Technol. 2014, 28, 3963–3970. [CrossRef]
35. Yang, Y.-J.; Zhang, X.-Y.; Zhao, Z.-J.; Wang, G.-H.; He, Y.-J.; Wu, Y.-L.; Li, J. Applying Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) to
Sampling Subsystem in Continuous Emission Monitoring System. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 55054–55062. [CrossRef]
36. Fang, F.; Zhao, Z.-J.; Huang, C.; Zhang, X.-Y.; Wang, H.-T.; Yang, Y.-J. Application of Reliability-Centered Maintenance in Metro
Door System. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 186167–186174. [CrossRef]
37. Tavares, H.; Leite, H.; Pinto, A.; Vidal, P.; Santos, J. Applying Reliability Centered Maintenance to a Digital Protective Relay.
In Proceedings of the 2012 3rd IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe), Berlin, Germany, 14–17
October 2012; pp. 1–5.
38. Deshpande, V.; Modak, J. Application of RCM for Safety Considerations in a Steel Plant. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2002, 78, 325–334.
[CrossRef]
39. Lopez, J.C.; Kolios, A. Risk-Based Maintenance Strategy Selection for Wind Turbine Composite Blades. Energy Rep. 2022, 8,
5541–5561. [CrossRef]
40. Masud, M.F.; Chattopadhyay, G.; Gunawan, I. Development of a Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM) Strategy for Sewerage Pump-
ing Station Network. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering
Management (IEEM), Macao, China, 15–19 December 2019; pp. 455–458.
41. Hu, H.; Cheng, G.; Li, Y.; Tang, Y. Risk-Based Maintenance Strategy and Its Applications in a Petrochemical Reforming Reaction
System. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2009, 22, 392–397. [CrossRef]
42. Dong, Y.L.; Gu, Y.J.; Chen, K.L. Risk Based Maintenance Decision on Power Station High Press Feed Water System. In Proceedings
of the 2008 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore, 8–11 December
2008; pp. 2148–2152.
43. Khan, F.; Haddara, M.R. Risk-Based Maintenance of Ethylene Oxide Production Facilities. J. Hazard. Mater. 2004, 108, 147–159.
[CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.