Probabilistic Life Cycle Costing: A Case Study of Centrifugal Pumps

  • Ainul Akmar MokhtarEmail author
  • Freselam Mulubran
  • Masdi Muhammad
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)


Life cycle costing (LCC) has been gaining attention in industries as a decision-making tool for the management of assets. LCC is generally recognized as a valuable tool in making an optimal decision considering the total cost of ownership rather than just the initial acquisition cost. The deterministic LCC model is commonly used in many plants; however, the deterministic model only inherently encompasses uncertainty factors, i.e., the economic issue alone, and cannot practically and effectively handle the ambiguous other uncertainties such as changes in interest rate, cost of production loss per hour due to unexpected failure, and labor cost per failure, to name a few. The life cycle cost of a repairable system is closely linked to and highly influenced by its maintenance cost which includes its reliability, maintainability, and maintenance support. Thus, to incorporate these uncertainties into LCC, one needs to consider the application of the reliability engineering principles to evaluate the probabilistic nature of the equipment failures and repairs.


  1. 1.
    E. Korpi, T. Ala-Risku, Life cycle costing: a review of published case studies. Manag. Audit. J. 23, 240–261 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Harris, Introduction to Decision Making, VirtualSalt, 2012.
  3. 3.
    R.D. Stewart, R.M. Wyskida, J.D. Johannes, Cost Estimator’s Reference Manual, vol. 15 (Wiley, New York, 1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Moazzami, R. Hemmati, F. Haghighatdar Fesharaki, S. Rafiee Rad, Reliability evaluation for different power plant busbar layouts by using sequential Monte Carlo simulation. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 53, 987–993 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Dhillon, Life Cycle Costing: Techniques, Models and Applications (Routledge, 2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Peurifoy, C. Schexnayder, Construction Planning, Equipment, and Methods (McGraw-Hill, New York, 2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    O.P. Okafor, Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in the selection of an effective refinery for life cycle cost analysis. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol. (IJERT) 2 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. Waghmode, A. Sahasrabudhe, P. Kulkarni, Life cycle cost modeling of pumps using an activity based costing methodology. J. Mech. Des. Trans. ASME 132 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    O.P. Okafor, Development of a life cycle cost estimating framework for oil refineries. Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science by Research M.Sc. thesis, School of Applied Science, Cranfield University (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Aien, A. Hajebrahimi, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, A comprehensive review on uncertainty modeling techniques in power system studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57, 1077–1089 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H.-S. Hwang, Costing RAM design and test analysis model for production facility. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 98, 143–149 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ainul Akmar Mokhtar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Freselam Mulubran
    • 1
  • Masdi Muhammad
    • 1
  1. 1.Universiti Teknologi PETRONASPerakMalaysia

Personalised recommendations