LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS INCLUDING FAILURE ANALYSIS AND OPTIMAL LOCATION OF MAINTENANCE FACILITIES AND RESOURCES

Brick, Eduardo Siqueira; Pessoa, Artur Alves; Sacramento, Karina Thiebaut

doi:10.1590/0101-7438.2021.041.00238051

Eduardo Siqueira Brick

Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Departamento de Engenharia de Produção (TEP), Rua Passo da Pátria, 156, sala 306, Bloco D, S. Domingos, Niterói, RJ, Brazil - E-mail: brick@producao.uff.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6248-3680

Artur Alves Pessoa

Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Departamento de Engenharia de Produção (TEP), Rua Passo da Pátria, 156, sala 306, Bloco D, S. Domingos, Niterói, RJ, Brazil - E-mail: artur@producao.uff.br

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7421-4744

Karina Thiebaut Sacramento ^**Corresponding author

Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Departamento de Engenharia de Produção (TEP), Rua Passo da Pátria, 156, sala 306, Bloco D, S. Domingos, Niterói, RJ, Brazil - E-mail: karinathiebaut@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2358-8225

*Corresponding author

Maintenance action (set A)	Resource (set R)
Analysis	Worker and pre-analysis and replacement kit
Disposal	Worker
Repair	Equipment and worker

K	Set of geographical locations with operation sites k
J	Set of geographical locations j qualified to receive maintenance sites $(K \subseteq J)$ .
Q	Set of components q for all assets supported by the maintenance system
T ₁	Set of BITE indications t’
T ₂	Set of pre-analysis indications, or faults, t”
R	Set of resource types r
I	Set of repair attempt indexes i.
A	Set of possible maintenance actions a
H	Set of local resources $h = (r, j)$
f _h	Fixed cost to deploy each resource of type r with standard capacity at maintenance site j
f ’_h	Fixed cost to deploy each resource of type r with extra capacity at maintenance site j
s _qkj	Variable one-way transportation cost of component q between sites k and j
c _taj	Variable cost of applying action a to the component presenting the fault indication t at the location j.
d _t’k	Number of BITE indications of type t’, occurring at operation site k
λ ^t”	Failure rate of fault t”
λ ^q	Failure rate of component q
e ^tah	Fraction of the capacity of the resource type r consumed when action a, for fault indication t, is performed at maintenance site j
α ^ta	Success probability for maintenance type a on fault indication t.
M _h	Maximum number of resources of type r allowed at maintenance site j
$θ_{h} > 1$	Multiplying factor for extra capacity resources

Parameter	Cardinality	Comments
Operation sites	$\| K \| = 10$
Maintenance sites	$\| J \| = 15$	10 operating sites, and 5 sites exclusively for maintenance
Components	$\| Q \| = 10$	The 4 first indenture components are LRUs and the remaining 6 highest-level indenture components are SLRUs.
Fault indications	$\| T \| = 20$
	$\| T_{1} \| = 4$
	$\| T_{2} \| = 16$
Resource types	$\| R \| = 6$

Instance	COMP ($million)	NPA	HEF	LEF	NEC	PIF	OUT
1	279.66	6.07%	0.39%	13.42%	0.76%	-1.30%	-1.66%
2	323.74	7.27%	6.67%	24.97%	0.14%	-11.25%	-0.80%
3	173.50	4.93%	5.45%	25.44%	0.40%	-13.84%	-0.75%
4	215.20	12.90%	3.79%	21.11%	0.31%	-18.85%	-1.28%
5	226.69	3.01%	0.82%	32.53%	0.37%	-6.01%	-1.54%
6	252.43	5.09%	14.99%	20.58%	0.00%	0.03%	-0.18%
7	160.96	4.57%	4.64%	19.92%	0.53%	-7.49%	-1.40%
8	152.82	7.52%	3.74%	24.48%	0.05%	-18.22%	-1.83%
9	187.33	2.87%	6.86%	20.06%	0.09%	-9.55%	-1.86%
10	178.64	13.06%	11.32%	26.75%	0.48%	-22.89%	-2.11%
Average	215.10	6.73%	5.87%	22.93%	0.31%	-10.94%	-1.34%

TC	C	S	RT	G	MS	O	MA	PS	FC	PC	DF	E
COMP	161,0	Feas	3600	0.02%	3, 9	-	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st attempt) Repair high efficiency 100% (1st and 2nd attempt)	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	2
NPA	168.3	Feas	3600	0.22%	3, 9	-	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st attempt) Repair high efficiency 100% (1st and 2nd attempt)	3, 9	10.8	0.15	1/590	3
HEF	168.4	Opt	72	0.01%	3, 9	-	Repair high efficiency 100% (1st attempt)	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	2
LEF	193.0	Opt	204	4.44%	3, 9	-	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st and 2nd attempt)	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	4
LEF	193.0	Opt	204	4.44%	3, 9	-	Discard	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	4
NEC	161.8	Feas	3600	5.70%	3, 9	-	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st attempt) Repair high efficiency 100% (1st and 2nd attempt)	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	3
PIF	148.9	Feas	3600	0.04%	12, 13	12, 13	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st and 2nd attempt) Repair high efficiency 100% (1st and 2nd attempt) Discard	1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13	10.8	0.15	1/590	4
OUT	158.7	Feas	3600	0.28%	9, 12, 13	12, 13	Repair low efficiency 75% (1st attempt) Repair high efficiency 100% (1st and 2nd attempt)	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10	10.8	0.15	1/590	3

Operation site (k)	Asset A	Asset B	Asset C
1	10	20	0
2	10	40	0
3	0	0	80
4	0	0	50
5	0	10	20
6	50	0	0
7	40	30	10
8	0	0	40
9	20	0	40
10	40	40	20

Resource	10-year cost of ownership ($)	10 year capacity (operation hours)
Resource	10-year cost of ownership ($)	Normal	Extra
Equipment 1 with low effectiveness	3,000,000	70,800	8,760
Equipment 2 with high effectiveness	8,000,000	70,800	8,760
Pre-analysis and replacement kit	[70,000; 1,200,000]	70,800	8,760
Worker 1 high skilled	1,320,000	19,200	4,800
Worker 2 low skilled	792,000	19,200	4,800
Facility Installation	[10,000,000; 40,000,000]	87,600	0

Site (j)	Resource Cost Multiplying Factor
Site (j)	Equipment	Worker	Facility Installation
1, 2 and 11	1.3	1.4	1.2
3, 4 and 13	1	1	1
5,6 and 12	1.3	1.2	1.2
7, 8 and 14	1.2	1.1	1.2
9, 10 and 15	1.1	1	1.1

Maintenance action	Resource	Resource Usage (Hours)	Organic Maintenance Costs (% of component cost)	Outsourcing Maintenance Costs
Analysis	Pre-analysis and replacement kit	[2, 7]	0	[5, 10] (% of component cost)
Analysis	Worker	[4, 8]	0	[5, 10] (% of component cost)
Disposal	Worker	[1, 4]	[120, 150]	1.2× to 1.3× organic cost
Repair	Equipment high effectiveness	[3, 8]	[14, 20]	3× to 4× organic cost
Repair	Worker high effectiveness	[4, 16]	[14, 20]	3× to 4× organic cost
Repair	Equipment low effectiveness	[3, 8]	[10, 16]	3× to 4× organic cost
Repair	Worker low effectiveness	[4, 16]	[10, 16]	3× to 4× organic cost

Action	Necessary resources
Analysis	Worker 1	Pre-analysis and replacement Kit
Disposal	Worker 2	-
Repair high effectiveness	Worker 1	Equipment 2	Facility
Repair low effectiveness	Worker 2	Equipment 1	Facility

Component	Volume (m³)	Weight (kg)	Value (R$)
LRU 1	0.8	5.0	20,000
LRU 2	0.3	2.1	7,500
LRU 3	0.9	4.8	10,100
LRU 4	1.05	4.2	12,400
SLRU 5	0.1	0.5	2500
SLRU 6	0.4	0.8	4,800
SLRU 7	0.35	0.7	2,050
SLRU 8	0.1	0.3	1,150
SLRU 9	0.05	0.2	1,000
SLRU 10	0.5	2.5	8,200

[1] *Corresponding author

Brasil

Brasil

LEVEL OF REPAIR ANALYSIS INCLUDING FAILURE ANALYSIS AND OPTIMAL LOCATION OF MAINTENANCE FACILITIES AND RESOURCES

ABSTRACT