Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A mathematical model for aerospace product MRO scheduling with remanufacturing

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Remanufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aerospace industry is pivotal for global transportation and is a cornerstone of high-tech industry growth in both developed and developing nations. Ensuring the integrity of aircraft products and components, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) operations is critical to the sector's success. This paper presents a linear programming model for scheduling aircraft C-check and D-check maintenance operations with multiple component treatment options: replacement, repair, and remanufacturing. Risk of component failure before the next maintenance is integrated into the model. The objective is to minimize maintenance cost while adhering to safety standards. The model also incorporates allocation of maintenance resources including labor and machinery capacities. Scenario analyses are conducted to assess varying parameters such as resource availability, unplanned maintenance costs, and penalty on the model solutions. The potential for remanufacturing to reduce maintenance expenses in MRO operations is evaluated. The main contribution of this work lies in its novel approach to integrating risk assessment with resource optimization in MRO scheduling with remanufacturing and in providing a comprehensive framework to enhance decision-making for MRO maintenance operations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not Applicable.

References

  1. IATA (2018) Maintenance costs for aging aircraft. montreal. kolanjiappan, s 2011 lean philosophy in aircraft maintenance. J Manag Res Dev 1(1):27–41

    Google Scholar 

  2. International Air Transport Association (2017) IATA annual review 2017. Retrieved from https://www.iata.org/contentassets/c81222d96c9a4e0bb4ff6ced0126f0bb/iata-annual-review-2017.pdf

  3. Lagos C, Delgado F, Klapp MA (2020) Dynamic optimization for airline maintenance operations. Transp Sci 54:998–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kinnison HA, Tariq S (2013) Aviation maintenance management

  5. Saraçyakupoğlu T (2021) The implementation of additive manufacturing technologies in aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) operations. 1st International Hasankeyf Scientific Studies and Innovation Congress: Online Presentations, Batman/Turkey

  6. Pimapunsri K, Weeranant D (2018) Solving complexity and resource–constrained project scheduling problem in aircraft heavy maintenance. Int J Appl Eng Res 13:8998–9004

    Google Scholar 

  7. IATA, (2017a) Eu261: the road to clarity [online] available at:. https: //airlines.iata.org/analysis/eu261-the-road-to-clarity

  8. Wendy Womack (2010) Planes with maintenance problems have flown anyway. USA Today, Feb 2 (2010). from: https://www.wltx.com/article/news/nation/planes-with-maintenance-problems-have-flown-anyway/101-379884432. Accessed 2 Sept 2023

  9. Cook AJ, Tanner G, Anderson S (2004) Evaluating the true cost to airlines of one minute of airborne or ground delay: Final report. Eurocontrol

  10. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2017) Airline on-time performance and causes of flight delays. from https://www.bts.gov/explore-topics-and-geography/topics/airline-time-performance-and-causes-flight-delays. Accessed 2 Sept 2023

  11. PogAčnik, B, Duhovnik, J, TAvčAr, J, (2017) Aircraft fault forecasting at maintenance service on the basis of historic data and aircraft parameters. Eksploatacja i Niezawodność 19 https://doi.org/10.17531/ein.2017.4.17

  12. Kozik, P, (2016) The application of ontology in forecasting the demand for spare parts. Research in Logistics & Production 6. https://doi.org/10.21008/j.2083-4950.2016.6.4.1

  13. Demirel NÖ, Gökçen H (2008) A mixed integer programming model for remanufacturing in reverse logistics environment. The Int J Advanced Manufact Technol 39:1197–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huang R, Riddle M, Graziano D, Warren J, Das S, Nimbalkar S, Cresko J, Masanet E (2016) Energy and emissions saving potential of additive manufacturing: the case of lightweight aircraft components. J Clean Prod 135:1559–1570

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Boere N (1977) Air Canada saves with aircraft maintenance scheduling. Interfaces 7:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. IFS, (2019) IFS MAINTENIX: Aircraft Fleet Management Software – A New Approach to Maintenance Planning. URL: https://www.ifs.com/corp/solutions/ifs-maintenix/fleet-planner/. (Accessed on March 21, 2022)

  17. Samaranayake, P, Kiridena, S, (2012) Aircraft maintenance planning and scheduling: an integrated framework. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552511211281598

  18. Samaranayake, P, Lewis, GS, Woxvold, ERA, Toncich, D (2002) Development of engineering structures for scheduling and control of aircraft maintenance. Int J Operations Product Manag https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210436172

  19. van der Weide T, Deng Q, Santos BF (2022) Robust long-term aircraft heavy maintenance check scheduling optimization under uncertainty. Comput Oper Res 141:105667

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Yan S, Chen CY, Yuan CY (2008) Long-term aircraft maintenance scheduling for an aircraft maintenance centre: a case study. Int J Appl Manag Sci 1:143–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Deng Q, Santos BF, Curran R (2020) A practical dynamic programming based methodology for aircraft maintenance check scheduling optimization. Eur J Oper Res 281:256–273

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Qin Y, Ma HL, Chan FT, Khan WA (2020) A scenario-based stochastic programming approach for aircraft expendable and rotable spare parts planning in mro provider. Ind Manag Data Syst 120:1635–1657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pimapunsri, K,Weeranant, D, Riel, A (2022) Genetic algorithms for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem in aircraft heavy maintenance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.07169

  24. Semaan, NM, Yehia, N (2019) A stochastic detailed scheduling model for periodic maintenance of military rotorcraft. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-09-2018-0254

  25. Qin Y, Wang Z, Chan FT, Chung S, Qu T (2019) A mathematical model and algorithms for the aircraft hangar maintenance scheduling problem. Appl Math Model 67:491–509

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Sriram C, Haghani A (2003) An optimization model for aircraft maintenance scheduling and re-assignment. Transport Res Part A: Policy Pract 37:29–48

    Google Scholar 

  27. Reményi C, Staudacher S (2014) Systematic simulation based approach for the identification and implementation of a scheduling rule in the aircraft engine maintenance. Int J Prod Econ 147:94–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kennet DM (1994) A structural model of aircraft engine maintenance. J Appl Economet 9:351–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Antonakis A, Giannakoglou K (2018) Optimisation of military aircraft engine maintenance subject to engine part shortages using asynchronous metamodel-assisted particle swarm optimisation and monte-carlo simulations. Int J Syst Sci Operations Logistics 5:239–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Stranjak A, Dutta PS, Ebden M, Vytelingum P, Rogers A (2008) A multi-agent simulation system for prediction and scheduling of aero engine overhaul. Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 81–88

  31. Hu Y, Miao X, Zhang J, Liu J, Pan E (2021) Reinforcement learning-driven maintenance strategy: A novel solution for long-term aircraft maintenance decision optimization. Comput Ind Eng 153:107056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Verhagen WJ, De Boer LW (2018) Predictive maintenance for aircraft components using proportional hazard models. J Ind Inf Integr 12:23–30

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kozik P, Sęp J (2012) Aircraft engine overhaul demand forecasting using ann. Manag Product Eng Rev 3:21–26

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rajamani R, Wang J, Jeong KY (2004) Condition-based maintenance for aircraft engines. In: Turbo Expo: Power for Land, Sea, and Air (vol 41677, pp 819–823)

  35. Yang Q, Zheng L (2016) Managing coordination complexity in the remanufacturing of aircraft engines. Front Eng Manag 3:158–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Johnson PK, Kulasiri D, Sedcole JR (1999) Simmat: an aircraft materials remanufacturing system simulation model. Part I: background and concept

  37. Asmatulu E, Twomey J, Overcash M (2013) Evaluation of recycling efforts of aircraft companies in Wichita. Resour Conserv Recycl 80:36–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zheng P, Wang J, Zhang J, Yang C, Jin Y (2019) An adaptive cgan/irf-based rescheduling strategy for aircraft parts remanufacturing system under dynamic environment. Robot Comput Integrated Manufact 58:230–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lee YW, Allen T, Wang RY (2001) Information products for remanufacturing: Tracing the repair of an aircraft fuel-pump. In: IQ, Citeseer, (pp 77–82). Retrieved from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=8a4aad171121ba624cdd658549fe4ae78d6c8333

  40. Macedo PB, Alem D, Santos M, Junior ML, Moreno A (2016) Hybrid manufacturing and remanufacturing lot-sizing problem with stochastic demand, return, and setup costs. The Int J Adv Manufact Technol 82:1241–1257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Vercraene S, Gayon JP, Flapper SD (2014) Coordination of manufacturing, remanufacturing and returns acceptance in hybrid manufacturing/ remanufacturing systems. Int J Product Econ 148:62–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zhang J, Liu X, Tu Y (2011) A capacitated production planning problem for closed-loop supply chain with remanufacturing. The Int J Adv Manufact Technol 54:757–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kenné JP, Dejax P, Gharbi A (2012) Production planning of a hybrid manufacturing–remanufacturing system under uncertainty within a closed-loop supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 135:81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. van Loon P, Van Wassenhove LN (2018) Assessing the economic and environmental impact of remanufacturing: a decision support tool for oem suppliers. Int J Prod Res 56:1662–1674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wakiru J, Pintelon L, Muchiri P, Chemweno P (2018) Maintenance optimization: application of remanufacturing and repair strategies. Procedia CIRP 69:899–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang Y, Jiang Z, Hu X, Li C (2020) Optimization of reconditioning scheme for remanufacturing of used parts based on failure characteristics. Robot Comput Integrated Manufact 61:101833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ma YS, Jun HB, Kim HW, Lee DH (2011) Disassembly process planning algorithms for end-of-life product recovery and environmentally conscious disposal. Int J Prod Res 49:7007–7027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Deng Q, Santos BF, Verhagen WJ (2021) A novel decision support system for optimizing aircraft maintenance check schedule and task allocation. Decis Support Syst 146:113545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Liu Y, Wang T, Zhang H, Cheutet V, Shen G (2019) The design and simulation of an autonomous system for aircraft maintenance scheduling. Comput Ind Eng 137:106041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (n.d.) Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2020: 49–3011 Aircraft Mechanics and Service Technicians. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes493011.htm. Accessed 10 Oct 2023

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported in part by FRS-GCS funding of Concordia University, Canada, and NSERC discovery grant, Canada.

Funding

The research work presented in this paper was supported in part by Faculty Research Support (FRS) grant from Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science, Concordia University, and by Discovery Grant from Natural Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical, Industrial & Aerospace Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, H3G 1M8, Canada

    Yasser Ghamary & Mingyuan Chen

Authors
  1. Yasser Ghamary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mingyuan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Mr. Yasser Ghamary, the first author, conducted the research, developed the mathematical model and performed numerical experiments with analysis presented in this paper. This is part of his Ph.D. research program in the Department of Mechanical, Industrial & Aerospace Engineering at Concordia University. Mr. Ghamary also composed the first draft of this manuscript.

Dr. Mingyuan Chen, the second and corresponding author, guided and supervised the research work as Mr. Ghamary’s Ph.D. thesis supervisor and finalized the composition of this paper with Mr. Ghamary together.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mingyuan Chen.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Not Applicable.

Competing interests

The subject and the content of this study does not have financial nor personal interests of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Nomenclator.

  1. 1.

    Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO): Refers to a set of operations and activities associated with the maintenance and repair of equipment, particularly in aviation, to ensure they are safe and efficient for use.

  2. 2.

    Unscheduled Maintenance: Maintenance events that are not planned and are typically performed in response to unforeseen failures or issues.

  3. 3.

    Scheduled Maintenance: Regularly planned maintenance events that are conducted at predetermined intervals to prevent failures and ensure optimal operation.

  4. 4.

    Heavy Maintenance: Extensive maintenance activities that involve thorough inspection, overhaul, and repair of equipment or aircraft, often requiring a significant amount of time to complete.

  5. 5.

    Precedent Sequence: The specific order in which tasks or activities must be carried out, often due to technical, safety, or operational requirements.

  6. 6.

    C-Check: A type of heavy maintenance check in aviation that involves detailed inspection and repair of an aircraft's components and systems.

  7. 7.

    D-Check: The most comprehensive and demanding type of heavy maintenance check for aircraft, involving extensive inspections and overhauls.

  8. 8.

    Project: In the context of MRO, a project refers to the entire set of operations and activities undertaken to perform maintenance, repair, and overhaul on an aircraft.

  9. 9.

    Work Package (WP): A collection of components within an aircraft that are grouped together for maintenance in an MRO project, addressing specific maintenance needs.

  10. 10.

    Components: Individual parts or elements of an aircraft, each potentially requiring specific maintenance, repair, or overhaul actions.

  11. 11.

    Tasks: Specific maintenance actions decided for a component within an MRO project, such as replacement, repair, or remanufacturing.

  12. 12.

    Activities: Detailed steps or procedures required to effectively complete a maintenance task on an aircraft component within the MRO process.

  13. 13.

    Remanufacturing: The process of restoring used or worn components to a like-new condition.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghamary, Y., Chen, M. A mathematical model for aerospace product MRO scheduling with remanufacturing. Jnl Remanufactur 14, 93–123 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-024-00135-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-024-00135-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation