IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v205y2010i2p368-380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimally maintaining a Markovian deteriorating system with limited imperfect repairs

Author

Listed:
  • Kurt, Murat
  • Kharoufeh, Jeffrey P.

Abstract

We consider the problem of optimally maintaining a periodically inspected system that deteriorates according to a discrete-time Markov process and has a limit on the number of repairs that can be performed before it must be replaced. After each inspection, a decision maker must decide whether to repair the system, replace it with a new one, or leave it operating until the next inspection, where each repair makes the system more susceptible to future deterioration. If the system is found to be failed at an inspection, then it must be either repaired or replaced with a new one at an additional penalty cost. The objective is to minimize the total expected discounted cost due to operation, inspection, maintenance, replacement and failure. We formulate an infinite-horizon Markov decision process model and derive key structural properties of the resulting optimal cost function that are sufficient to establish the existence of an optimal threshold-type policy with respect to the system's deterioration level and cumulative number of repairs. We also explore the sensitivity of the optimal policy to inspection, repair and replacement costs. Numerical examples are presented to illustrate the structure and the sensitivity of the optimal policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kurt, Murat & Kharoufeh, Jeffrey P., 2010. "Optimally maintaining a Markovian deteriorating system with limited imperfect repairs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(2), pages 368-380, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:205:y:2010:i:2:p:368-380
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(10)00017-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Castro, I.T., 2009. "A model of imperfect preventive maintenance with dependent failure modes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 217-224, July.
    2. D. G. Nguyen & D. N. P. Murthy, 1981. "Optimal Preventive Maintenance Policies for Repairable Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1181-1194, December.
    3. Scarf, Philip A., 1997. "On the application of mathematical models in maintenance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 493-506, June.
    4. S El-Ferik & M Ben-Daya, 2008. "Model for imperfect age-based preventive maintenance with age reduction," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(12), pages 1644-1651, December.
    5. Pham, Hoang & Wang, Hongzhou, 1996. "Imperfect maintenance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 425-438, November.
    6. Morton Klein, 1962. "Inspection--Maintenance--Replacement Schedules Under Markovian Deterioration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 25-32, October.
    7. Wang, Hongzhou, 2002. "A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 469-489, June.
    8. Castro, I.T. & Sanjuan, E.L., 2008. "An optimal repair policy for systems with a limited number of repairs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 84-97, May.
    9. D Lugtigheid & X Jiang & A K S Jardine, 2008. "A finite horizon model for repairable systems with repair restrictions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(10), pages 1321-1331, October.
    10. Peter Kolesar, 1966. "Minimum Cost Replacement Under Markovian Deterioration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(9), pages 694-706, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ece Zeliha Demirci & Joachim Arts & Geert-Jan Van Houtum, 2022. "A restless bandit approach for capacitated condition based maintenance scheduling," DEM Discussion Paper Series 22-01, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    2. van Oosterom, C.D. & Elwany, A.H. & Çelebi, D. & van Houtum, G.J., 2014. "Optimal policies for a delay time model with postponed replacement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 186-197.
    3. de Jonge, Bram, 2019. "Discretizing continuous-time continuous-state deterioration processes, with an application to condition-based maintenance optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1-5.
    4. Badía, F.G. & Berrade, M.D. & Lee, Hyunju, 2020. "An study of cost effective maintenance policies: Age replacement versus replacement after N minimal repairs," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    5. Zhu, Zhicheng & Xiang, Yisha & Zhao, Ming & Shi, Yue, 2023. "Data-driven remanufacturing planning with parameter uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(1), pages 102-116.
    6. Kai He & Lisa M. Maillart & Oleg A. Prokopyev, 2019. "Optimal sequencing of heterogeneous, non-instantaneous interventions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 276(1), pages 109-135, May.
    7. Yousefi, Nooshin & Coit, David W. & Song, Sanling, 2020. "Reliability analysis of systems considering clusters of dependent degrading components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    8. Borrero, J.S. & Akhavan-Tabatabaei, R., 2013. "Time and inventory dependent optimal maintenance policies for single machine workstations: An MDP approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 545-555.
    9. Do, Phuc & Voisin, Alexandre & Levrat, Eric & Iung, Benoit, 2015. "A proactive condition-based maintenance strategy with both perfect and imperfect maintenance actions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 22-32.
    10. Badía, F.G. & Berrade, M.D. & Cha, Ji Hwan & Lee, Hyunju, 2018. "Optimal replacement policy under a general failure and repair model: Minimal versus worse than old repair," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 362-372.
    11. de Jonge, Bram & Scarf, Philip A., 2020. "A review on maintenance optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 805-824.
    12. Michael Jong Kim & Viliam Makis, 2013. "Joint Optimization of Sampling and Control of Partially Observable Failing Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 777-790, June.
    13. Zhou, Yifan & Li, Bangcheng & Lin, Tian Ran, 2022. "Maintenance optimisation of multicomponent systems using hierarchical coordinated reinforcement learning," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    14. Zhang, Zhengxin & Si, Xiaosheng & Hu, Changhua & Lei, Yaguo, 2018. "Degradation data analysis and remaining useful life estimation: A review on Wiener-process-based methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(3), pages 775-796.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wu, Jun & Xie, Min & Adam Ng, Tsan Sheng, 2011. "On a general periodic preventive maintenance policy incorporating warranty contracts and system ageing losses," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 102-110, January.
    2. Alaswad, Suzan & Xiang, Yisha, 2017. "A review on condition-based maintenance optimization models for stochastically deteriorating system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 54-63.
    3. Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Gau, Wei-Yo & Ho, Jyh-Wen, 2015. "Cost analysis of two-dimensional warranty for products with periodic preventive maintenance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 51-58.
    4. Marais, Karen B. & Saleh, Joseph H., 2009. "Beyond its cost, the value of maintenance: An analytical framework for capturing its net present value," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 644-657.
    5. Pascual, R. & Meruane, V. & Rey, P.A., 2008. "On the effect of downtime costs and budget constraint on preventive and replacement policies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 144-151.
    6. Wang, Hongzhou, 2002. "A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 469-489, June.
    7. Chaoqun Duan & Chao Deng & Bingran Wang, 2019. "Multi-phase sequential preventive maintenance scheduling for deteriorating repairable systems," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 1779-1793, April.
    8. Lin, Zu-Liang & Huang, Yeu-Shiang & Fang, Chih-Chiang, 2015. "Non-periodic preventive maintenance with reliability thresholds for complex repairable systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 145-156.
    9. Wu, Shaomin & Clements-Croome, Derek, 2005. "Preventive maintenance models with random maintenance quality," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 99-105.
    10. Taghipour, Sharareh & Banjevic, Dragan, 2012. "Optimal inspection of a complex system subject to periodic and opportunistic inspections and preventive replacements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 649-660.
    11. Nguyen, Van-Thai & Do, Phuc & Vosin, Alexandre & Iung, Benoit, 2022. "Artificial-intelligence-based maintenance decision-making and optimization for multi-state component systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    12. Si, Xiao-Sheng & Wang, Wenbin & Hu, Chang-Hua & Zhou, Dong-Hua, 2011. "Remaining useful life estimation - A review on the statistical data driven approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Xiang, Yisha, 2013. "Joint optimization of X¯ control chart and preventive maintenance policies: A discrete-time Markov chain approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(2), pages 382-390.
    14. Seyed Habib A. Rahmati & Abbas Ahmadi & Kannan Govindan, 2018. "A novel integrated condition-based maintenance and stochastic flexible job shop scheduling problem: simulation-based optimization approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 269(1), pages 583-621, October.
    15. Guo R. & Ascher H. & Love E., 2001. "Towards Practical and Synthetical Modelling of Repairable Systems," Stochastics and Quality Control, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 147-182, January.
    16. Zhengxin Zhang & Xiaosheng Si & Changhua Hu & Xiangyu Kong, 2015. "Degradation modeling–based remaining useful life estimation: A review on approaches for systems with heterogeneity," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 229(4), pages 343-355, August.
    17. Dimitrakos, T.D. & Kyriakidis, E.G., 2008. "A semi-Markov decision algorithm for the maintenance of a production system with buffer capacity and continuous repair times," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 752-762, February.
    18. Wang, Ling & Xu, Hong & Yuan, Hua & Zhao, Wenjie & Chen, Xiai, 2015. "Optimizing the re-profiling strategy of metro wheels based on a data-driven wear model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 975-986.
    19. Belyi, Dmitriy & Popova, Elmira & Morton, David P. & Damien, Paul, 2017. "Bayesian failure-rate modeling and preventive maintenance optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1085-1093.
    20. Nguyen, Kim-Anh & Do, Phuc & Grall, Antoine, 2017. "Joint predictive maintenance and inventory strategy for multi-component systems using Birnbaum’s structural importance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 249-261.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:205:y:2010:i:2:p:368-380. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.