Analysis of Time-to-Failure Data with Weibull Model in Product Life Cycle Management

1 1 1 2 3
Lian-Yin Zhai , Wen-Feng Lu , Ying Liu , Xiang Li , and George Vachtsevanos
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117576
2
Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology, 71 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 638075
3
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, North Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30332

Abstract
In remanufacturing practices, understanding and communicating the failure risk and reliability of a critical part, component
or subsystem plays a crucial role as it has a significant impact on the lifecycle management of the product and thus
determines the success of the remanufacturing process. In this respect, statistical time-to-failure analysis provides a very
powerful and versatile analytical tool for reliability analysis and risk assessment. Among various statistical tools available,
Weibull model which uses time series data on records of failure incidents of a product for the fitting of a parametric
distribution, is a powerful approach to characterizing the time-to-failure probability function of the product. It is able to
provide valuable information for optimized lifecycle management and remanufacturing process. This paper demonstrates
successful applications of Weibull model for time-to-failure analysis using case studies in remanufacturing practices and
proposes a statistical approach to assess the reliability of critical parts and components for remanufacturing in the
product’s lifecycle management. It is envisaged that the research results are able to benefit remanufacturing practices in
many ways such as reducing warranty loss by minimizing probability of failure of remanufactured critical parts and
components.

Keywords:
Weibull Distribution; Life Cycle Engineering; Remanufacturing; Time-to-Failure Analysis

1 INTRODUCTION Weibull distribution named after the Swedish professor Waloddi

Management of products and materials at the End of Life (EOL) is
being recognized as an integral part of the product life cycle
engineering. Among various EOL management strategies,
remanufacturing as a sustainable manufacturing process has
received more attention in recent years. In remanufacturing
practices, understanding and communicating the failure risk and
reliability of a critical part, component or subsystem plays a crucial
role as it has a significant impact on the lifecycle management of the
product and also determines the success of the remanufacturing
process. In such a context, it is envisaged that many of the life cycle
engineering techniques will have a significant impact on
remanufacturing practices such as reliability and remanufacturability
analysis of valuable parts and components, remaining useful life
prediction and warranty cost of remanufactured products etc.
In life cycle engineering as well as in remanufacturing industry,
estimation of product mean life is an important task as it provides
valuable information for effective life cycle management, in
particular, the core management and inventories in remanufacturing.
Usually a product’s mean life is determined by analyzing its time-to-
failure data from a wide range of the same category of products
operated under the same conditions of use [1]. Another important
issue in life cycle engineering and remanufacturing is the
quantitative analysis of product or component reliabilities, based on
which the product or the component’s expected useful life can be
estimated. Understanding the probability of product or component
failures at different stages of its life can be very useful to make
optimized decisions in life cycle management and remanufacturing
practices.
Among various techniques developed for life cycle engineering, a
very useful general method for analyzing product life data is the
Weibull (1887-1979), who demonstrated the appropriateness of this
distribution for modeling a wide variety of different data sets [2].
Weibull analysis can make predictions about a product's life,
analyze the reliability of the product, statistically establish warranty
policies or proactively manage inventories, and many other common
industrial applications in remanufacturing practices. Weibull analysis
has been also extensively utilized in maintenance procedures
because it provides a powerful tool for reliability assessment that
can be used to classify failures and to model failure behavior [1, 3].
Weibull analysis can be used to determine the optimum
replacement/repair interval for components, subject to wear-out
failure.
This paper attempts to use Weibull analysis to facilitate decision-
making process in remanufacturing practices particularly in reliability
analysis and remaining useful life estimation etc. [4, 5]. The rest of
the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the
fundamentals of Weibull analysis as well as its advantages in life
data analysis. Section 3 presents a case study with complete life
data and results are discussed. Finally, discussion and conclusion
are summarized in Section 4.
2 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS AND WEIBULL DISTRIBUTION
2.1 Weibull Model for Reliability Analysis
In life cycle management, one of the simplest approaches to
predicting failure is based on statistical reliability models of past
failures [6]. Reliability is defined as the probability that a product will
continue to perform its intended function without failure for a
specified period of time under stated conditions [7, 8]. Usually,
reliability predictions are used to estimate future failure based on
past failure records by applying a probability distribution such as the

20th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Singapore, 2013

700
exponential distribution. However, one of the principal shortcomings
of using the exponential distribution is that it imposes a “Markov”
assumption, meaning that the future prediction of a failure is
independent of the history of the unit given the current measurement
[9]. In this respect, Weibull distribution for prediction provides an
alternative reliability method as it relaxes the assumption of constant
failure rates as well as the Markov assumption [10]. In fact, the most
common distribution function in EOL management is Weibull
distribution due to its ability to fit a greater variety of data and life
characteristics by changing its shape parameter [11]. Today, Weibull
analysis is the leading method in the world for fitting and analyzing
life data. In most cases of application, Weibull distribution is able to
provide the best fit of life data. This is due in part to the broad range
of distribution shapes that are included in the Weibull family. Many
other distributions are included in the Weibull family either exactly or
approximately, including the normal, the exponential, the Rayleigh,
and sometimes the Poisson and the Binomial [3].
Compared with classic statistical methods, Weibull analysis uses
failure reference and mean-time-to-failure (MTTF) to forecast
failures whereas statistical pattern analysis uses test data to identify
a statistical pattern such as trend lines [12]. Another most salient
feature to be noted for Weibull analysis is its ability to provide
reasonably accurate failure analysis and failure forecasts with
extremely small samples of life data, where most of other
distributions fail to give meaningful result (usually when the sample
size is smaller than 20) [3]. This feature of Weibull analysis makes it
very valuable in remanufacturing decision-making practices because
it is a common case that the life data of very big and especially very
expensive parts/components collected in remanufacturing process
are either incomplete or small in size.
2.2 Basics of Weibull Distribution
In general, a typical Weibull probability distribution function (PDF) is
defined by:
 1 t
 Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and regression methods. MLE involves
t   
 
f (t )    e (1)
  
where t 0 represents time,   0 is the shape or slope
parameter and  0 is the scale parameter of the distribution.
Equation (1) is usually referred to as the 2-parameter Weibull
distribution. Among the two parameters, the slope of the Weibull
distribution, β, is very important as it determines which member of
the family of Weibull failure distributions best fits or describes the
data. It also indicates the class of failures in the “bathtub curve”
failure modes as shown in Figure 1. The Weibull shape parameter β
indicates whether the failure rate is increasing, constant or
decreasing. If β<1 it indicates that the product has a decreasing
failure rate. This scenario is typical of "infant mortality" and indicates
that the product is failing during its "burn-in" period. If β=1 it
indicates a constant failure rate. Frequently, components that have
survived burn-in will subsequently exhibit a constant failure rate. If
β>1 it indicates an increasing failure rate. This is typical for products
that are wearing out. To summarize:
• β < 1 indicates infant mortality;
• β = 1 means random failures (i.e. independent of time);
• β > 1 indicates wear-out failures.
L.-Y. Zhai et al.
The information about the β value is extremely useful for reliability
centred maintenance planning and product life cycle management.
This is because it can provide a clue to the physics of the failures
and tell the analyst whether or not scheduled inspections and
overhauls are needed. For instance, if β is less than or equal to one,
overhauls are not cost effective. With β greater than one, the
overhaul period or scheduled inspection interval can be read directly
from the plot at an acceptable or allowable probability of failures. For
wear-out failure modes, if the cost of an unplanned failure is much
greater than the cost of a planned replacement, there will be an
optimum replacement interval for minimum cost.
Failure β<1:infant β=1:random β>1:wear-out
rate mortality failures failures
Time
Figure 1: The “bathtub curve” failure modes.
On the other hand, the scale parameter, or spread, η, sometimes
also called the characteristic life, represents the typical time-to-
failure in Weibull analysis. It is related to the Mean-Time-to-Failure
(MTTF). In Weibull analysis, η is defined as the time at which 63.2%
of the products will have failed [13].
There are basically two fitting methods for parameter estimation in
widespread use in reliability analysis, namely the Maximum
developing a likelihood function based on the available data and
finding the values of the parameter estimates that maximize the
likelihood function. Regression method generally works best with
data sets with smaller sample sizes that contain only complete data
(i.e., data in which all of the units under consideration have been run
or tested to failure). This failure-only data is best analyzed with rank
regression on time, as it is preferable to regress in the direction of
uncertainty. In Weibull analysis, Median Rank Regression (MRR)
method which uses median ranking for regression fitting is often
deployed to find out the shape and scale parameters for complete
life data [3].
The probability of failure at time t, also referred to as the Weibull
distribution or the Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF), can be
derived from Equation (1) and expressed as:

t
  
F t   1  e  
(2)
Thus, the Weibull reliability at time t, which is 1 - F(t) = R(t), is
defined as:

t
 
Rt   1  F (t )  e  
(3)
Analysis of Time-to-Failure Data with Weibull Model in Product Life Cycle Management 701

This can be written as: Assume that our objectives in this case study include:
t 

  
1) Determine the Weibull parameters and derive the Weibull
1
e   (4) distribution model for the data given;
1  F (t ) 2) Estimate the average life of the component (i.e. the MTTF or
mean life);
Taking two times the natural logarithms of both sides gives an
3) Estimate the time by which 5% of the components will fail, or
equation of a straight line:
the time by which there is a 5% probability that the
 1  component will fail;
ln ln    ln t   ln (5)
4) Estimate the reliability of the components after a given
 1  F (t )  number of hours of operation;
Equation (5) represents a straight line in the form of “y = ax + b” on 5) Estimate the warranty time for the component if the
log/log(Y) versus log(X), where the slope of the straight line in the manufacturer does not want failures during the warranty
plot is β, namely the shape parameter of Weibull distribution. period to exceed 5%.
Through the above transformation, the life data samples can be In the following sections, Weibull analysis will be conducted to
fitted in the Weibull model and the two Weibull parameters can be address the above objectives.
estimated.
3.2 Determination of Weibull Parameters and Distribution
The mean of the Weibull PDF, T , which is the MTTF in Weibull Model
analysis, is given by: In this case study, the 2-parameter Weibull analysis is deployed to
1  analyze the life data characteristics of the diesel engine component.
T      1 (6) First of all, the parameters are estimated based on the 2-parameter
  Weibull analysis, in which the standard ranking method and median
where Γ is the gamma function. rank regression are used to fit the given data in Table 1. As
discussed earlier in Section 2.2, regression method should be
It is noted that when β=1, MTTF is equal to η. In fact, as a rough selected to fit the data when the data sample is small and contains
approximation, in practices of Weibull analysis where β is equal to complete life data. The fitting plot is shown in Figure 2 and the two
or slightly larger than 1, the characteristic life can be approximated Weibull distribution parameters are calculated as follows: β = 4.40
as MTTF. However, for β that is much larger than 1, MTTF should and η = 69079.89 (hours).
be calculated using Equation (6). This will be further discussed in
the example elaborated in the next section.

3 WEIBULL ANALYSIS OF LIFE DATA: AN EXAMPLE

3.1 Background
In the life cycle management of a certain type of heavy-duty
diesel engine, it is required to quantify the life characteristics of a
critical component in order to understand its reliability and
remanufacturability. The engine manufacturer has provided a past Point A
record of 10 failure cases of the said component under normal use
conditions. The complete life data, i.e. the failure time of each
sample is shown in Table 1.

No. Failure time (hours)

1 38456
2 48334
3 50806
4 51521
5 61544
Figure 2: Weibull probability plot.
6 66667
7 72605 After the two parameters of β and η are determined, the Weibull
8 75521 PDF expressed by Equation (1) can be obtained as shown below:
4.4
9 80785 3.4  t 
4.4  t   69079.89 
10 84894 f (t )    e
69079.89  69079.89 
Table 1: Life data of a critical component in a diesel engine. After simplification the Weibull PDF is plotted as shown in Figure 3.
702 L.-Y. Zhai et al.

3.5 Estimation of Reliability

It is known that reliability analysis is a very important issue in life
cycle engineering. In this case study, the Weibull reliability function
can be calculated based on Equation (3) and its plot is shown in
Figure 4. Figure 4 can be easily used to answer the estimate of
reliability of the component after a certain number of hours of
operation. For example, for Point B shown on the plot in Figure 4,
the x and y coordinates are x = 32090.306 hours and y = 0.966
respectively, which can be interpreted in the following way: the
reliability of the component after 32090.306 hours of operation is
96.6%.

Point B

Figure 3: Weibull probability density function.

3.3 Estimation of Average Life or MTTF

As discussed earlier, the MTTF or mean life is a very important
indicator of the life data characteristics in life cycle engineering.
MTTF can be either approximated by the value of η in cases where
β is slightly larger but close to 1, or calculated using the Equation (6)
if β is much larger than 1 or a more accurate value is required. In
this case study, β = 4.40 and therefore Equation (6) is used to
calculate the exact MTTF instead. The MTTF calculated is 62952.73
hours and it is much smaller than the value of characteristic life η,
which is 69079.89 hours.
Figure 4: Weibull reliability plot.
3.4 Estimation of Time for Any Failure Probability
3.6 Estimation of Warranty Time for Allowable Failure
As shown in Figure 2, in the Weibull probability fitting plot of the Probability
case study, the x-axis represents time using a logarithm scale and
This is in fact the reverse interpretation of the coordinates of x and y
the probability of failure is displayed on the y-axis using a double log
in Figure 4. For example, if the manufacturer does not want failures
reciprocal scale. Such a Weibull probability plot is able to tell very
during the warranty period to exceed 3.4% (i.e., the required
important information about the characteristics of the failures. From
reliability is 96.6%), then the maximum warranty time promised to
the plot, we can obtain the probability of failure at a given time or
customers should not exceed 32090.306 hours, as shown by Point
vice versa. For example, it may be of interest to determine the time
B in Figure 4.
at which 1% of the population will have failed. For more serious or
catastrophic failures, a lower risk may be required, for instance, Six- In life cycle engineering, failure rate is another important indicator of
sigma quality program goals often equate to 3.4 parts per million life data characteristics. Failure rate is usually defined as the
(PPM) allowable failure proportion. Such important information can frequency with which a product or component fails and it is often
be easily obtained from the Weibull probability plot. In this case expressed in failures per unit of time (e.g., per hour in this case
study, for the red dot (Point A) shown on the plot in Figure 2, the x study). The failure rate of a product usually depends on time, with
and y coordinates are x = 35221.228 hours and y = 5.053 the rate varying over the life cycle of the product, as shown in the
respectively, which can be interpreted in the following way: the “bathtub curve” failure modes in Figure 1. The failure rate of the
failure probability of the component at the time of 35221.228 hours case study is calculated and shown in Figure 5. The increasing
is 5.053%, or the average time by which 5.053% of the components failure rate shown in the figure confirms that the life data in Table 1
will fail is 35221.228 hours. follow a wear-out failure mode.
Analysis of Time-to-Failure Data with Weibull Model in Product Life Cycle Management
Figure 5: Failure rate versus time
4 SUMMARY
Weibull distribution is among the most popular in the field of life
cycle engineering and reliability analysis because it is able to
accommodate various types of failure data by manipulation of its
parameters. The case study presented in this paper has
successfully shown that Weibull analysis can provide a simple and
informative graphical representation of characteristics of life data,
especially when the life data sample is small and other statistical
tools fail to given useful information. Weibull analysis is able to
answer many life cycle engineering problems such as mean life
estimation, reliability of products at any operational time and
warranty cost estimation etc. The advantages of Weibull model in
life data analysis can be extended to facilitate decision-making
processes in many remanufacturing practices such as prediction of
the number of cores returned for remanufacturing, estimation of
spare parts or remedy resources needed for each failure mode, and
so on. Future work of this study will include: 1) the analysis of
incomplete life data for the support of decision-making in product
EOL management and remanufacturing processes; and 2)
comparison and optimization of parameter estimation methods in
Weibull model. It is envisaged that the extension of this research will
see more robust capabilities of Weibull analysis in life cycle
engineering applications.
5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the Agency for Science, Technology
and Research (A*STAR) and the Science & Engineering Research
Council (SERC Grant No.: 112 290 4016) of Singapore for the
support of this research work under the Program of Innovations in
Remanufacturing.
703
6 REFERENCES
[1] Li, W. (2004): Evaluating Mean Life of Power System
Equipment with Limited End-of-life Failure Data, IEEE Trans.
Power Sys., Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 236 – 242.
[2] Weibull, W. (1951): A Statistical Distribution Function of Wide
Applicability, J. Appl. Mech.-Trans. ASME, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp.
293–297.
[3] Abernethy, R. B. (2006): The New Weibull Handbook, 5th
edition.
[4] Mazhar, M. I.; S. Kara; H. Kaebernick (2007): Remaining Life
Estimation of Used Components in Consumer Products: Life
Cycle Data Analysis by Weibull and Artificial Neural Networks,
Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 1184-
1193.
[5] Mazhar, M.I.; M. Salman; Ian H. (2010): Assessing the
Reliability of System Modules Used in Multiple Life Cycles,
Engineering Asset Lifecycle Management, pp. 567-573.
[6] Gu, Y.; Li, J. (2012): Engine Failure Data Analysis Method
Based on Weibull Distribution Model, Applied Mechanics and
Materials, Vol. 128-129, pp. 850-854.
[7] Pham, H. (2006): Springer Handbook of Engineering Statistics,
1st edition.
[8] Calixto E. (2013): Gas and Oil Reliability Engineering, Elsevier
Inc.
[9] Lourenco, R.B.R.; Mello, D.A.A. (2012): On the Exponential
Assumption for the Time-to-repair in Optical Network
Availability Analysis, in: proceedings of 14th International
Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON), 2-5
July 2012, pp.1 – 4.
[10] Groer, P. G. (2000): Analysis of Time-to-Failure with a Weibull
Model, in: Proceedings of the Maintenance and Reliability
Conference, MARCON 2000, Knoxville, TN.
[11] Artana, K. B.; Ishida, K. (2002): Spreadsheet Modeling of
Optimal Maintenance Schedule for Components in Wear-out
Phase, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 77, No.
1, pp. 81-91.
[12] Fitzgibbon, K.; R. Barker; T. Clayton; N. Wilson (2002): A
Failure-Forecast Method Based on Weibull and Statistical-
Pattern Analysis, Reliability and Maintainability Symposium
(IEEE), pp. 516 - 521.
[13] Pasha, G.R.; M. Shuaib Khan; Ahmed Hesham Pasha (2006):
Empirical Analysis of The Weibull Distribution for Failure Data,
Journal of Statistics, Vol. 13, No.1, pp.33-45.