Skip to main content

Sustainable Maintenance Strategy Under Uncertainty in the Lifetime Distribution of Deteriorating Assets

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Strategic Engineering for Cloud Computing and Big Data Analytics

Abstract

In the life-cycle management of systems under continuous deterioration, studying the sensitivity analysis of the optimised preventive maintenance decisions with respect to the changes in the model parameters is of a great importance. Since the calculations of the mean cost rates considered in the preventive maintenance policies are not sufficiently robust, the corresponding maintenance model can generate outcomes that are not robust and this would subsequently require interventions that are costly. This chapter presents a computationally efficient decision-theoretic sensitivity analysis for a maintenance optimisation problem for systems/structures/assets subject to measurable deterioration using the Partial Expected Value of Perfect Information (PEVPI) concept. Furthermore, this sensitivity analysis approach provides a framework to quantify the benefits of the proposed maintenance/replacement strategies or inspection schedules in terms of their expected costs and in light of accumulated information about the model parameters and aspects of the system, such as the ageing process. In this paper, we consider random variable model and stochastic Gamma process model as two well-known probabilistic models to present the uncertainty associated with the asset deterioration. We illustrate the use of PEVPI to perform sensitivity analysis on a maintenance optimisation problem by using two standard preventive maintenance policies, namely age-based and condition-based maintenance policies. The optimal strategy of the former policy is the time of replacement or repair and the optimal strategies of the later policy are the inspection time and the preventive maintenance ratio. These optimal strategies are determined by minimising the corresponding expected cost rates for the given deterioration models’ parameters, total cost and replacement or repair cost. The robust optimised strategies to the changes of the models’ parameters can be determined by evaluating PEVPI’s which involves the computation of multi-dimensional integrals and is often computationally demanding, and conventional numerical integration or Monte Carlo simulation techniques would not be helpful. To overcome this computational difficulty, we approximate the PEVPI using Gaussian process emulators.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ahmad, R., & Kamaruddin, S. (2012). An overview of time-based and condition-based maintenance in industrial application. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63, 135149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aven, T., & Dekker, R. (1997). A useful framework for optimal replacement models. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 58, 61–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barlow, R. E., Lai, C. D., & Xie, M. (2006). Stochastic ageing and dependence for reliability. New York: Springer Science & Business.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Christer, A. H., & Wang, W. (1995). A delay-time-based maintenance model of a multi-component system. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business & Industry, 6, 205–222.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Conti, S., & O’Hagan, A. (2010). Bayesian emulation of complex multi-output and dynamic computer models. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 140, 640–651.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Daneshkhah, A., & Bedford, T. (2013). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of system availability using Gaussian processes. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 112, 8293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. De Jonge, B., Dijkstra, A. S., & Romeijnders, W. (2015). Cost benefits of postponing time-based maintenance under lifetime distribution uncertainty. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 140, 1521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dekker, R., & Plasmeijer, R. P. (2001). Multi-oparameter maintenance optimisation via the marginal cost approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 52, 188–197.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Dekker, R. (1996). Applications of maintenance optimization models: a review and analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 51, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dobbs, R., Pohl, H., Lin, D., Mischke, J., Garemo, N., Hexter, J., et al. (2013). Infrastructure productivity: How to save $1 trillion a year. McKinsey Global Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ellis, H., Jiang, M., & Corotis, R. (1995). Inspection, maintenance and repair with partial observability. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 1(2), 9299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-Win-Win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hosseinian-Far, A., & Chang, V. (2015). Sustainability of strategic information systems in emergent vs. prescriptive strategic. Management, International Journal of Organizational and Collective Intelligence, 5(4), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kennedy, M. C., & O’Hagan, A. (2001). Bayesian calibration of Computer models (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 63, 425–464.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Kleijnen, J. P. C. (2009). Kriging metamodeling in simulation: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 192, 707–716.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. McKay, M. D., Beckman, R. J., & Conover, W. J. (1979). A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics, 21(2), 239–245.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Nicolai, R. P., & Dekker, R. (2007). A review of multi-component maintenance models. In T. Aven & J. E. Vinnem (Eds.), Risk, Reliability and Societal Policy, VOLS 1–3—VOL 1: Specialisation topics; VOL 2: Thematic topics; VOL 3: Application topics (Vol. 1, pp. 289–296). London, England: Taylor & Francis LTD.

    Google Scholar 

  18. O’Hagan, A. (2006). Bayesian analysis of computer code outputs: A tutorial. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 91, 1290–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. O’Hagan, A. (1991). Bayes-Hermit quadrature. Journal of Statistical Planning & Inference, 91, 245–260.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Oakley, J., & O’Hagan, A. (2004). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: A bayesian approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 66, 751–769.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Oakley, J. E. (2009). Decision-theoretic sensitivity analysis for complex computer models. Technometrics, 51(2), 121–129.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Pandey, M. D., Yuan, X. X., & Van Noortwijk, J. M. (2009). The influence of temporal uncertainty of deterioration on life-cycle management of structures. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 5(2), 145156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Park, K. S. (1988). Optimal continuous-wear limit replacement under periodic inspections. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 37(1), 97102.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pham, H., & Wang, H. (1996). Imperfect maintenance. European Journal of Operational Research, 94(3), 425–438.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Rougier, J. (2008). Efficient emulators for multivariate deterministic functions. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 14(4), 827–843.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Sacks, J., Welch, W. J., Mitchell, T. J., & Wynn, H. P. (1989). Design and analysis of computer experiments. Statistical Science, 4(4), 40935.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Saltelli, A. (2002). Sensitivity analysis for importance assessment. Risk analysis, 22(3), 579–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang, H. Z. (2002). A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 139(3), 469–489.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Zitrou, A., Bedford, T., & Daneshkhah, A. (2013). Robustness of maintenance decisions: Uncertainty modelling and value of information. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 120, 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alireza Daneshkhah .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix A: Optimal CBM Maintenance Decisions’ Tables

Appendix A: Optimal CBM Maintenance Decisions’ Tables

See Tables 8, 9, 10 and 11.

Table 8 Optimal decisions when parameter \(\eta \) is known prior the maintenance decision
Table 9 Optimal decisions when parameter \(\delta \) is known prior the maintenance decision
Table 10 Optimal decisions when parameter \(\alpha \) is known prior the maintenance decision
Table 11 Optimal decisions when parameter \(\beta \) is known prior the maintenance decision

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Daneshkhah, A., Hosseinian-Far, A., Chatrabgoun, O. (2017). Sustainable Maintenance Strategy Under Uncertainty in the Lifetime Distribution of Deteriorating Assets. In: Hosseinian-Far, A., Ramachandran, M., Sarwar, D. (eds) Strategic Engineering for Cloud Computing and Big Data Analytics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52491-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52491-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-52490-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-52491-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics