Component failure rates for T-72 and T-80 AFVs

Component failure in Soviet armoured fighting vehicles (AFVs) and infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) is a common occurrence. The failure rate of components depends on factors such as quality, durability, service longevity, and serviceability. This variable can also be affected by poor repairability potential and a lack of automated diagnostic systems to monitor vehicle status.

The failure rate of components is determined by the number of failures that occur within a specified operating range. For Soviet vehicles, this operating range is measured in thousands of kilometres. Therefore, the failure rate can be expressed as the number of operational failures per 1000 kilometres [<i> Failure rate] = Operating Failure/1000km).  

Another important aspect is commonly occurring failure (COF). COF refers to parts within a module or an entire module that are prone to common failures. These failures require significant attention and resources for maintenance and repair.

The following set of data represents vehicles from the 1980s and 1990s; it does not include modernized AFVs like T-80BVM, T-90, T-72B3, T-90M and other modernizations. 
The generalized vehicles that fall under the category of analyzed vehicles are T-72A/B and T-80B/BV/U respectively. 

   Generalized failure rate among components between T-72 and T-80 tanks

 

Functional component group

T-72

T-80

Amount of COF

Percentage out of total COF

Amount of COF

Percentage out of total COF

Engine

76

0,067

185

0,124

Transmission

69

0,060

149

0,100

Engine support systems

83

0,077

55

0,037

Running gear

375

0,328

448

0,301

Weapons

61

0,053

128

0,086

Stabilizer

47

0,041

82

0,055

Autoloader (AZ or MZ)

72

0,063

139

0,093

Optics

74

0,065

107

0,072

General electrical equipment

22

0,019

149

0,100

Life support systems

15

0,013

32

0,022

Special equipment

-

-

14

0,009

According to the chart, the running gear module has a high failure rate, including rubberized roadwheels, support rollers, and track links. Engines and transmissions also have elevated failure rates, such as hermetic leaks, fuel line corrosion, fuel injector blocks, and cylinder gasket failures. The electrical systems, stabilizers, and optics primarily face issues like corrosion, seal failure, solenoid failure, among others.

Lastly, another important metric for COF is baseline guaranteed failure. This metric is developed by specialized institutions that test vehicles in a controlled environment using qualified personnel. These tests are conducted with facilitated servicing and repair, and appropriate use of oil, fuel, and coolant. Baseline guarantees are generated under near-perfect conditions, which lowers the COF significantly. During trials, various components may be overstressed or under-stressed, creating outliers. Additionally, a critical factor is how and when vehicles are operated in different climates and terrain conditions.

Baseline guarantee failures compared to service usage failures among various T-80 modifications between 1980-1992.

 

Functional component group

Amount of COF

Failure rate per/1000km

Baseline guarantee failure

Service usage failure

Baseline guarantee failure

Service usage failure

Engine

6

156

0,035

0,254

Transmission

2

66

0,012

0,107

Engine support systems

5

159

0,029

0,259

Running gear

42

419

0,244

0,682

Weapons

0

154

0,000

0,251

Autoloader (MZ)

1

125

0,006

0,204

Optics

4

234

0,023

0,382

General electrical equipment

13

247

0,076

0,402

Life support systems

1

40

0,006

0,065

Special equipment

0

14

0,000

0,023

General failure among tanks

74

1614

0,431

2,629

In summary, the data sets reveal two key points:

·       Factory-provided baseline guarantee failure rates are much lower than actual service usage rates for vehicles in uncontrolled environments.

·       The complexity of the T-80 significantly impacts failure rates, especially in engine transmission and running gear, possibly due to poor maintenance or unqualified personnel.

References: 

  • Защита оборудования и экипажа военных гусеничных машин от механоакустических и климатических воздействий: Монография. — СПб. : Издательство «Лань», 2016

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

GTD-1000 - GTD-1000TF - GTD-1250 Gas Turbine Engines

Soviet Union/Russian thermal sight development history

"AGAVA" - "AGAVA-2" and its confusing history