Operational guide · Operational procedure

Predictive Maintenance based on IoT Sensors

Predictive and condition-based maintenance are voluntary class- and Company-driven approaches; they replace time-based tasks only within an approved scheme with adequate data and sensors.

predictive maintenanceIoTcondition monitoringdigital twin

Operational Explanation

Predictive and condition-based maintenance are voluntary class- and Company-driven approaches; they replace time-based tasks only within an approved scheme with adequate data and sensors.

Regulatory Reference

Approved PMS/machinery survey arrangement, class notation, maker recommendations, ISM risk assessment and data governance.

As an example of a class scheme, DNV describes a CBM arrangement combining scheduled and predictive maintenance with an approved service supplier. Check the rules and acceptance applicable to the ship: the service description alone does not authorise extending survey or maintenance intervals. DNV: Condition Based Maintenance.

In the operating plan identify the sensor, units, load and baseline; assign a person to verify alerts and document decisions. Missing data or sensor failure requires the planned alternative method and reporting: absence of alarms does not demonstrate healthy equipment. IMO: ISM safety management.

Scope of Application

Apply monitoring to components and failure modes with meaningful measurements and a response process. Define which tasks retain fixed intervals and which fall within the accepted condition-based scheme; an IoT platform does not itself extend the scope of approval.

Procedure / How to Complete It

Define failure modes and supported decisions.
Validate sensors, calibration, data quality and baselines.
Integrate alerts into PMS with responsibility and escalation.
Obtain approval before replacing time-based tasks.
Measure performance with documented fleet evidence, not commercial claims.

Practical Example

An anomaly model flags a trend: crew verify sensor and machinery and follow an approved work order; the alert does not automatically cancel PMS.

What Typically Goes Wrong

Citing 70% of new ships, 2024/2034 market values, or presenting predictive maintenance as automatic replacement.

Common Mistakes Mistake Library

Mistake	Consequence	How to Avoid It
Citing 70% of new ships, 2024/2034 market values, or presenting predictive maintenance as automatic replacement.	Non-compliant decision or treatment	Follow the approved arrangement and applicable sources

What the PSCO Checks

Evidence of the approved arrangement, procedures, records, competence, defect management and consistency with statutory/class/maker requirements.

Operational Tips

Separate current requirement, class/maker, SMS and voluntary guidance.
Do not improvise tests, thresholds or intervals.
Record deviations and corrective action.

Preparation checklist

Approved scheme
Sensor/data validation
Maker/class alignment
Human review
No unsupported market claims

FAQ

Does predictive maintenance automatically replace PMS?

No. Integrate decisions into the PMS and respect the accepted scheme’s scope. An alert, remaining-life prediction or missing data does not automatically authorise postponing a task.

Are market percentages needed?

No. They were removed as unverifiable and non-operational.

Predictive Maintenance based on IoT Sensors

Operational Explanation

Regulatory Reference

Scope of Application

Procedure / How to Complete It

Practical Example

What Typically Goes Wrong

Common Mistakes Mistake Library

What the PSCO Checks

Operational Tips

Preparation checklist

FAQ

Related Topics