Given the current strict regulations on fuel emissions, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have been considered as ideal non-polluting vehicles. As the kernel subsystem of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, the fuel cell engine, which is a complex system, may fail because of multiple competing failure causes. In fuel cell engine reliability engineering, discriminating and measuring dependency among multiple failure causes is an urgent problem that should be addressed. This study proposes a statistical dependency analysis model under competing risks based on reliability field data of fuel cell engines. The multivariate lognormal distribution is employed to model joint failure distribution. Then, using simulated annealing algorithm to estimate the parameters of the conditional probability likelihood function. Moreover, p-value hypothesis test procedures are developed to determine the significance of the dependence degree among multiple competing failure causes. In this article, the failure mechanisms of fuel cell engine are comprehensively discussed to prove the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method. Results can provide technical support for studies on optimal maintenance strategies.
HwangJJ. Sustainability study of hydrogen pathways for fuel cell vehicle applications. Renew Sust Energ Rev2013; 19: 220–229.
2.
EhsaniMGaoYEmadiA. Modern electric, hybrid electric, and fuel cell vehicles: fundamentals, theory, and design. 2nd ed.Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.
3.
FrenetteGForthofferD. Economic & commercial viability of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles from an automotive manufacturer perspective. Int J Hydrogen Energ2009; 34: 3578–3588.
4.
HaslamGEJupestaJParayilG. Assessing fuel cell vehicle innovation and the role of policy in Japan, Korea, and China. Int J Hydrogen Energ2012; 37: 14612–14623.
5.
WipkeKSprikSKurtzJ. National fuel cell electric vehicle learning demonstration final report. Contract2012; 303: 275–300.
6.
DixonRKWangXWangMQ. Development and demonstration of fuel cell vehicles and supporting infrastructure in China. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change2011; 16: 775–789.
7.
LiuXTQiHZWangXL. Reliability analysis and evaluation of differential system based on low load strengthening model. Qual Reliab Eng Int2015; 32: 647–662.
8.
HwangJJKuoJKWuW. Lifecycle performance assessment of fuel cell/battery electric vehicles. Int J Hydrogen Energ2013; 38(8): 3433–3446.
9.
CerriINagamiTDaviesJ. Innovative catalyst supports to address fuel cell stack durability. Int J Hydrogen Energ2013; 38: 640–645.
10.
ZhangGKandlikarSG. A critical review of cooling techniques in proton exchange membrane fuel cell stacks. Int J Hydrogen Energ2012; 37: 2412–2429.
11.
WuJNYanSZXieLY. Reliability analysis method of a solar array by using fault tree analysis and fuzzy reasoning petri net. Acta Astronaut2011; 69: 960–968.
12.
BizonN. A new topology of fuel cell hybrid power source for efficient operation and high reliability. J Power Sources2011; 196(6): 3260–3270.
13.
ZamelNLiXG. Life cycle analysis of vehicles powered by a fuel cell and by internal combustion engine for Canada. J Power Sources2006; 155(2): 297–310.
14.
WuJYuanXZMartinJJ. A review of PEM fuel cell durability: degradation mechanisms and mitigation strategies. J Power Sources2008; 184: 104–119.
15.
YuanXZLiHZhangS. A review of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell durability test protocols. J Power Sources2011; 196: 9107–9116.
16.
ChenTZhengSLLiuXT. Statistical reliability analysis for fuel cell vehicle based on field test data. Int J Reliab Qual Saf Eng2014; 21: 1450013.
17.
HouYPHaoDShenCY. Experimental investigation of the steady-state efficiency of fuel cell stack under strengthened road vibrating condition. Int J Hydrogen Energ2013; 38(9): 3767–3772.
18.
ZhangZCaiQZSunM. Failure analysis of fuel cell engine. J Jiamusi Univ (Natural Science Edition)2013; 31(2): 165–168, 173 (in Chinese).
19.
MurthyDNPWilsonRJ. Parameter estimation in multi–component systems with failure interaction. Appl Stoch Model D A1994; 10(1): 47–60.
20.
CornellCA. Bounds on the reliability of structural systems. J Struct Div: ASCE1967; 93(1): 171–200.
YuTXSongBFWangFY. Research on calculation the reliability of mechanical component with correlated failure modes. J Mech Strength2006; 28(4): 508–511 (in Chinese).
23.
PanZQBalakrishnanN. Reliability modeling of degradation of products with multiple performance characteristics based on gamma processes. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2011; 96: 949–957.
24.
WangYPhamH. A multi-objective optimization of imperfect preventive maintenance policy for dependent competing risk systems with hidden failure. IEEE T Reliab2011; 60(4): 770–781.
25.
YangQYZhangNLHongYL. Reliability analysis of repairable systems with dependent component failures under partially perfect repair. IEEE T Reliab2013; 62(2): 490–498.
26.
FiondellaLXingL. Reliability of two failure mode systems subject to correlated failures. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on reliability and maintainability symposium (ed FaganT), Colorado Springs, CO, 27–30 January 2014, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
27.
ChenYYangLYeC. Failure mechanism dependence and reliability evaluation of non-repairable system. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2015; 138: 273–283.
28.
XieWLiaoHTJinTD. Maximizing system availability through joint decision on component redundancy and spares inventory. Eur J Oper Res2014; 237: 164–176.
29.
WangHWGaoJ. A reliability evaluation study based on competing failures for aircraft engines. Eksploat Niezawodn2014; 16(2): 171–178.
30.
KaishevVKDimitrovaDSHabermanS. Modelling the joint distribution of competing risks survival times using copula functions. Insur Math Econ2007; 41(3): 339–361.
31.
YangQYHongYLChenY. Failure profile analysis of complex repairable systems with multiple failure modes. IEEE T Reliab2012; 61(1): 180–191.
32.
PengHFengQMCoitDW. Reliability and maintenance modeling for systems subject to multiple dependent competing failure processes. IIE Trans2010; 43(1): 12–22.
33.
SongSLCoitDWFengQM. Reliability analysis for multi-component systems subject to multiple dependent competing failure processes. IEEE T Reliab2014; 63(1): 331–345.
34.
WangYPhamH. Modeling the dependent competing risks with multiple degradation processes and random shock using time-varying copulas. IEEE T Reliab2012; 61(1): 13–22.
35.
HeckmanJJ. The identifiability of the competing risks model. Biometrika1989; 76(2): 325–330.
36.
ChenTZhengSLLuoHW. Reliability analysis of multiple causes of failure in present of independent competing risks. Qual Reliab Eng Int2014; 32: 363–372.
37.
MeekerWQEscobarLA. Statistical methods for reliability data. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1998.
38.
JeraldFL. Statistical models and methods for lifetime data. 2nd ed.New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
39.
HornRAJohnsonCR. Matrix analysis. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
40.
CramerJS. Econometric applications of maximum likelihood methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
41.
AbbasiBEshragh JahromiAHArkatJ. Estimating the parameters of Weibull distribution using simulated annealing algorithm. Appl Math Comput2006; 183(1): 85–93.
42.
EscobarLAMeekerWQ. The asymptotic equivalence of the Fisher information matrices for type I and type II censored data from location-scale families. Commun Stat: Theor M2001; 30(10): 2211–2225.
43.
NelsonWB. Accelerated testing: statistical models, test plans, and data analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
44.
HoggRVTanisEA. Probability and statistical inference. 9th ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2009.
