Advertisement

Water Resources Management

, Volume 30, Issue 9, pp 3093–3106 | Cite as

A Multicriteria Approach Using MAUT to Assist the Maintenance of a Water Supply System Located in a Low-Income Community

  • Madson B. S. Monte
  • Adiel T. de Almeida-Filho
Article

Abstract

Public services for low-income communities located in developing countries have shortcomings in their infrastructure, which very often result from the lack of capacity to supply water to all clients simultaneously. Because of this, in these regions maintenance activity becomes more important because besides the limited capacity, the losses of supply or availability due to system failures further increase the number of hours during which service to the whole community is interrupted. Given this problem, this article proposes a multi-criteria decision model based on MAUT for the planning of preventive maintenance in cases like this, and considers that besides costs, keeping the system available is an objective. The contribution of this paper is to present a model for a real and common problem in developing countries, besides the results found through the case study. By applying the model proposed in a case study in a low-income community in Brazil, it was possible to identify a maintenance policy that seeks to increase the efficiency of the system which can be achieved by making the increase in availability and minimizing cost compatible.

Keywords

Maintenance management Preventive maintenance Multi-attribute utility theory Water supply 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the support from CAPES, COMPESA (Sanitation Company of Pernambuco) and for the partial support of CNPq.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

No conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baker R (2010) Risk aversion in maintenance: a utility-based approach. IMA J Manag Math 21(4):319–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlow RE, Hunter L (1960) Optimum preventive maintenance polices. Oper Res 8(1):90–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bazzani GM (2005) An integrated decision support system for irrigation and water policy design: DSIRR. Environ Model Software 20:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beichelt F (1976) A general preventive maintenance policy. Math Oper Stat 7:927–932Google Scholar
  5. Brito AJM, de Almeida-Filho AT, de Almeida AT (2010) Multi-criteria decision model for selecting repair contracts by applying utility theory and variable interdependent parameters. IMA J Manag Math 21:349–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cassady CR, Kutanoglu E (2003) Minimizing job tardiness using integrated preventive maintenance planning and production scheduling. IIE Tran 35(6):503–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cassady CR, Kutanoglu E (2005) Integrating preventive maintenance planning and production scheduling for a single machine. IEEE Trans Reliab 54(2):304–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cavalcante CAV, de Almeida AT (2007) A multicriteria decision aiding model using PROMETHEE III for preventive maintenance planning under uncertain conditions. J Qual Maint Eng 13:385–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cavalcante CAV, Ferreira RJP, de Almeida AT (2010) A preventive maintenance decision model based on multicriteria method PROMETHEE II integrated with Bayesian approach. IMA J Manag Math 21:333–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chareonsuk C, Nagarur N, Tabucanon MT (1997) A multicriteria approach to the selection of preventive maintenance intervals. Int J Prod Econ 49:55–64Google Scholar
  11. Costa LHM, de Athayde PB, Ramos HM, de Castro MAH (2015) A branch-and-bound algorithm for optimal pump scheduling in water distribution networks. Water Resour Manag 30:1037–1052. doi: 10.1007/s11269-015-1209-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costas R (2015) Sao Paulo water crisis adds to Brazil business woes. BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-31419930. Accessed 25 March 2015
  13. Daher SFD, de Almeida AT (2012) The use of ranking veto concept to mitigate the compensatory effects of additive aggregation in group decisions on a water utility automation investment. Group Decis Negot 21:185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Danielson M, Ekenberg L, Idefeldt J, Larsson A (2007) Using a software tool for public decision analysis: the case of Nacka municipality. Decis Anal 4(2):76–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Almeida AT (2001) Multicriteria decision making on maintenance: spares and contracts planning. Eur J Oper Res 129(2):235–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Almeida AT (2005) Multicriteria modelling of repair contract based on utility and ELECTRE I method with dependability and service quality criteria. Ann Oper Res 138:113–126, the Netherlands CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Almeida AT (2012) Multicriteria model for selection of preventive maintenance intervals. Qual Reliab Eng Int 28:585–593Google Scholar
  18. de Almeida AT, Souza FMC (1993) Decision theory in maintenance strategy for a two-unit redundant standby system. IEEE Trans Reliab 42(3):401–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de Almeida AT, Cavalcante CAV, Alencar MH, Ferreira RJP, Almeida-Filho AT, Garcez TV (2015a) Multicriteria and multi-objective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision analysis. International series in operations research & management science. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Almeida AT, Ferreira RJP, Cavalcante CAV (2015b) A review of multicriteria and multi-objective models in maintenance and reliability problems. IMA J Manag Math 26(3):249–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de Almeida AT, de Almeida JA, Costa APCS, de Almeida-Filho AT (2016) A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoff. Eur J Oper Res 250:179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dong F, Liu Y, Su H, Liang Z, Zou R, Guo H (2016) Uncertainty-based multi-objective decision making with hierarchical reliability analysis under water resources and environmental constraints. Water Resour Manag 30(2):805–822. doi: 10.1007/s11269-015-1192-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glasser GJ (1969) Planned replacement: some theory and its application. J Qual Technol 1(2):110–119Google Scholar
  24. Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resour Manag 21(9):1553–1566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanbury S (2015) Brazil’s worst drought in history prompts protests and blackouts. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/23/brazil-worst-drought-history. Accessed 25 March 2015
  26. Jiang R, Ji P (2002) Age replacement policy: a multi-attribute value model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 76:311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Kwietniewski M (2004) Reliability modelling of water distribution system (WDS) for operation and maintenance needs. Hydro Eng Environ Mech 51(1):85–92Google Scholar
  29. Latinopulus D (2008) Estimating the potential impacts of irrigation water pricing using multicriteria decision making modelling. An application to Northern Greece. Water Resour Manag 22(12):1761–1782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lin KL, Lin CL (2011) Applying utility theory to cost allocation of pavement maintenance and repair. J Pavment Res Technol 4(4):212–221Google Scholar
  31. Mohan S, Kumar KP (2016a) Waste load allocation using machine scheduling: model formulation. Environ Process 3(1):125–137. doi: 10.1007/s40710-016-0121-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mohan S, Kumar KP (2016b) Waste load allocation using machine scheduling: model application. Environ Process 3(1):139–151. doi: 10.1007/s40710-016-0122-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2007) Group decision-making for leakage management strategy of water network. Resour Conserv Recycl 52:441–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2010) Water network rehabilitation: a group decision-making approach. Water SA 36:487–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Morais DC, de Almeida AT, Figueira JR (2014) A sorting model for group decision making: a case study of water losses in Brazil. Group Decis Negot 23:937–960Google Scholar
  36. Mylopoulos N (2015) Assessment of urban water full cost under the conditions of an economic crisis. Eur Water 49:89–105Google Scholar
  37. Pinto FS, Marques RC (2016) Tariff suitability framework for water supply services. Water Resour Manag 30:2037–2053. doi: 10.1007/s11269-016-1268-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Raju KS, Vasan A (2007) Multi attribute utility theory for irrigation system evaluation. Water Resour Manag 21(4):717–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rausand M, Høyland A (2004) System reliability theory: models, statistical methods and applications. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  40. Roseta-Palma C, Monteiro H, Coutinho PB, Afonso P (2013) Analysis of water prices in urban systems : experience from three basins in Southern Portugal. Eur Water 43:33–45Google Scholar
  41. Scholten L, Scheidegger A, Reichert P, Mauer M, Lienert J (2014) Strategic rehabilitation planning of piped water networks using multi-criteria decision analysis. Water Res 49:124–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Scholten L, Schuwirth N, Reichert P, Lienert J (2015) Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – an application to water supply infrastructure planning. Eur J Oper Res 242:243–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Silva VBS, Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2010) A multicriteria group decision model to support watershed committees in Brazil. Water Resour Manag 24:4075–4091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sortrakul N, Cassady CR (2007) Genetic algorithms for total weighted expected tardiness integrated preventive maintenance planning and production scheduling for a single machine. J Qual Maint Eng 13(1):49–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trojan F, Morais DC (2012) Prioritizing alternatives for maintenance of water distribution networks: a group decision approach. Water SA 38:555–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tsakiris G (2014) Rational design of urban water supply and distribution systems. Water Util J 8:5–16Google Scholar
  47. UNDP (2010) Atlas of human development – Brazil (in Portuguese) http://www.pnud.org.br/IDH/. Accessed 25 March 2015
  48. Wambrauw EV, Morgan TKKB (2015) Understanding the differing realities experienced by stakeholders impacted by the Agats municipal water supply, Papua. Water Util J 11:73–91Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Madson B. S. Monte
    • 1
  • Adiel T. de Almeida-Filho
    • 1
  1. 1.Management Engineering DepartmentUniversidade Federal de PernambucoRecifeBrazil

Personalised recommendations