# Summarization of Remaining Life Prediction Methods for Special Power Plants
###### Abstract  
With continuous improvements in integration, totalization and automation, remaining useful life predictions of mechanical equipment have become a key feature of technology and core element of equipment prediction and health management. The traditional method based on degradation mechanisms is not fully capable of predicting remaining useful life, especially for special power plants that use industrial transmissions, barrel launchers, etc. The expected service requirements are higher for condition monitoring and remaining service life prediction. The effective prediction of the remaining useful life of such special power plants is a major challenge and technical bottleneck in the industrial field and national defense equipment construction. This paper analyzes and expands on the research on the remaining life prediction methods for special power plants and analyzes the remaining life prediction methods of existing dynamic models, as well as data-driven and data-model fusion drives, and specific ideas for future research and development in four aspects, including remaining useful life prediction tests supplemented with soft measurements. Additionally, future research directions for the remaining life prediction of special power plants are provided. remaining useful life prediction; special power plants; dynamic model; data-driven; data-model fusion +
Footnote †: journal:  
a major challenge and technical bottleneck in the industrial field and national defense equipment construction [4; 5]. The degradation of power plant performance is the main factor affecting a plant's RUL. Research on the degradation mechanisms of conventional power mechanisms, such as rotating mechanisms, has reached a very mature stage, and a complete set of research theories have been formed. However, it is difficult to directly recreate research on conventional power mechanisms for special power plants, mainly due to the following three differences:  
1. Different from rotating motion mechanisms such as those of gear boxes and rolling bearings, most parts of special power plants with structural wear or damage are reciprocating motion parts (Figures 1 and 2), and the related research results [6; 7] are not fully applicable in this field. Practical experience has shown that, due to the particularities of the working environment and the complexity of the task profile, the \"internal injury\" of special power plants is affected not only by the material and structure but also by dynamic parameters such as vibration, impact, and pressure in the process of work [8; 9; 10]. The degradation mechanism of these influencing factors in the reciprocating motion process is due to the different carriers of action. In the existing research process, the research theory of ordinary power plants cannot be fully followed, and improvements need to be made based on the motion characteristics of reciprocating mechanisms [11]. Therefore, the mapping relationship between a dynamic model constructed by integrating multiple degradation factors and equipment RUL is one of the key challenges in current research [12]. 2. After constructing the mapping relationship between the dynamic model and the RUL of mechanical equipment, it is necessary to build a prediction model through multi-scale and multi-source data monitoring to realize the real-time prediction of the RUL of special power plants [13]. However, due to the generally poor working conditions of special power plants, traditional measurement methods for the dynamic parameters of power plants are usually not applicable in this environment, making it difficult to directly measure the dynamic parameters. This means that data acquisition methods are lacking [14]. At the same time, the traditional method of installing wired or wireless sensors at key structural points, collecting operational data, and analyzing modes or responses in power plants cannot effectively and objectively reflect the  
Figure 1: Internal structural damage of a drive device. Figure 2: Structural damage of a body barrel launcher.