Definition
Run-to-failure is a deliberate maintenance strategy choice (not the absence of a strategy) to let a specific, usually low-criticality asset operate without preventive or condition-based intervention until it actually fails, then repair or replace it. It is selected when the cost of monitoring or preventing failure exceeds the cost and risk of letting it happen.
Key facts
- A deliberate strategic choice for specific assets, not simply neglect or the absence of a maintenance plan.
- Suited to low-criticality, low-cost-of-failure, easily replaceable assets where prevention costs more than the failure itself.
- Requires spare parts and repair capacity to be ready, since failure is expected and accepted rather than avoided.
- Distinct from reactive maintenance, which is an unplanned response pattern rather than a chosen strategy for a specific asset.
Why does Run-to-failure matter in maintenance?
Run-to-failure is applied deliberately to assets where the consequence of failure is acceptable and the cost of preventing it (inspection, monitoring, premature part replacement) would exceed the cost of simply repairing or replacing the asset after it fails.
How do maintenance teams apply Run-to-failure?
Reactive maintenance describes an unplanned response pattern across an operation, often unintentional. Run-to-failure is the opposite of unintentional: it is a documented strategic decision for a specific asset or asset class, made in advance and reviewed periodically, rather than a symptom of poor planning. The repair that follows a run-to-failure event is still corrective maintenance in nature.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
When is a component deliberately run until failure?
When the asset is non-critical and inexpensive to fix or replace, and the cost of monitoring or preventing its failure would exceed simply repairing it afterward, making run-to-failure a deliberate strategic choice rather than neglect.
Last reviewed: