Article navigation
Purpose

Maintenance decisions for degrading bearings depend on whether an asset can complete the next planned operating interval. The study assesses mission-window survival probabilities and their suitability for maintenance decisions.

Design/methodology/approach

XJTU-SY provides the primary run-to-failure data, and PRONOSTIA provides external experimental validation. Threshold, linear, ensemble, history-aware and calibrated models are compared under bearing- and condition-disjoint splits using discrimination, calibration and decision-risk measures.

Findings

Advanced and calibrated variants improve selected cases but do not uniformly outperform random forest or root-mean-square thresholds; model rankings also vary by evaluation criterion.

Research limitations/implications

The validation uses experimental run-to-failure bearing datasets rather than industrial field deployment. PRONOSTIA provides external experimental validation, but horizon units are acquisition file indices and may not have the same physical-time meaning as XJTU-SY.

Practical implications

Calibrated probabilities can support continued operation, inspection or intervention after site-specific validation of horizons, thresholds and failure consequences.

Originality/value

The study unifies horizon-specific reliability targets, disjoint shift evaluation, probability calibration and maintenance-facing risk metrics rather than proposing a new predictor.

Licensed re-use rights only
You do not currently have access to this content.
Don't already have an account? Register

Purchased this content as a guest? Enter your email address to restore access.

Pay-Per-View Access
$41.00
Rental

or Create an Account

Close subscription notice
Close access options