Advertisement

Towards Value-Based Asset Maintenance

  • Ali Rezvani
  • Rengarajan Srinivasan
  • Farnaz Farhan
  • Ajith Kumar Parlikad
  • Mohsen Jafari
Conference paper

Abstract

The management of assets such as equipment and infrastructure can be a challenging task, and optimizing their usage is critical. Consequently, the importance of the maintenance function has increased because of its role in ensuring and improving asset performance and safety. Over the past few decades, there has been increasing interest in the area of maintenance modelling and optimization. More recently, the focus of research has been to take a whole-life perspective of the asset, and optimise maintenance decisions across the complete asset lifecycle. Most of the current research in this area takes cost (e.g., Life Cycle Cost) as the primary objective for optimisation (minimisation). These approaches do not effectively represent the role of maintenance because they do not consider the performance improvement organisations can expect to gain by proper maintenance – and this, we feel is a key limitation. In order to use maintenance as a “value driver” for the organisation, one must move away from cost-based thinking to value-based thinking. An important step in this direction is to consider net present value/utility of the decisions as the objective function, which will be discussed in detail in this paper. Nevertheless, the key parameters that are involved in a NPV or MVA based optimisation are still related to cost or “money” in general. By doing so, we would miss a number of other value-drivers that would be affected by maintenance. Examples of these are quality of products/service, customer satisfaction, environmental impact, etc. In this paper, we examine the possible elements of value provided by assets to the organisation owning those assets, and discuss how these value-drivers are affected by maintenance decisions. In this direction, we propose a measure - Value of Ownership (VOO) - to assess the value of maintenance and performance of maintenance decisions throughout an assets lifecycle. This measure will consider different value-drivers of a decision and makes it possible to consider the impact of maintenance decisions on a broader value space.

Keywords

Maintenance Action Asset Management Mean Time Between Failure Maintenance Decision Demand Profile 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    (n.d.). Retrieved May 28, 2009, from Institute of Value Management United Kingdom: http://www.ivm.org.uk/whatisivm.phpGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dwight, R. (1995) New Developments in maintenance: An international review. IFRIM.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dwight, R. (1999) Searching for real maintenance performance measures. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering , 5 (3), 258-275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liyanage, J., & Kumar, U. (2003) Towards a value-based view on operations and maintenance performance management. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering , 9, 333-350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Macke, M., & Higuchi, S. (2007) Optimizing Maintenance Interventions for Deteriorating Structures Using Cost-Benefit Criteria. Journal of Structural Engineering , 925-934.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marais, K. B., & Saleh, J. H. (2009) Beyonditscost,the value of maintenance:An analytical framework for capturing its net present valu. Reliability Engineering and System Safety , 94, 644-657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nakajima, S. (1989) TPM development program. Productivity Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pintelon, L., & Puyvelde, F. V. (1997) Maintenance performance reporting systems: some experiences. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering , 3, 4-15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rosqvist, T., Laakso, K., & Reunanen, M. (2009) Value-driven maintenance planning for a production plant. Reliability Engineering and systems safety , 94, 97-110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sohn, S. Y., & Moon, H. U. (2003) Cost of Ownership model for inspection of multiple quality attributes. IEEE transactions on semiconductor manufacturing , 16, 565-571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, H. (2002) A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems. European Journal of Operational Research , 139, 469–489.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Rezvani
    • 1
  • Rengarajan Srinivasan
    • 2
  • Farnaz Farhan
    • 1
  • Ajith Kumar Parlikad
    • 2
  • Mohsen Jafari
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Industrial & Systems EngineeringRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  2. 2.Cambridge University Engineering DepartmentCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations