IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v90y2005i2p177-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal maintenance decisions under imperfect inspection

Author

Listed:
  • Kallen, M.J.
  • van Noortwijk, J.M.

Abstract

The process industry is increasingly making use of Risk Based Inspection (RBI) techniques to develop cost and/or safety optimal inspection plans. This paper proposes an adaptive Bayesian decision model to determine these optimal inspection plans under uncertain deterioration. It uses the gamma stochastic process to model the corrosion damage mechanism and Bayes’ theorem to update prior knowledge over the corrosion rate with imperfect wall thickness measurements. This is very important in the process industry as current non-destructive inspection techniques are not capable of measuring the exact material thickness, nor can these inspections cover the total surface area of the component. The decision model finds a periodic inspection and replacement policy, which minimizes the expected average costs per year. The failure condition is assumed to be random and depends on uncertain operation conditions and material properties. The combined deterioration and decision model is illustrated by an example using actual plant data of a pressurized steel vessel.

Suggested Citation

  • Kallen, M.J. & van Noortwijk, J.M., 2005. "Optimal maintenance decisions under imperfect inspection," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 177-185.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:90:y:2005:i:2:p:177-185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2004.10.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832004002443
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2004.10.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. X Jia & A H Christer, 2002. "A prototype cost model of functional check decisions in reliability-centred maintenance," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(12), pages 1380-1384, December.
    2. van Noortwijk, Jan M. & Cooke, Roger M. & Kok, Matthijs, 1995. "A Bayesian failure model based on isotropic deterioration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 270-282, April.
    3. Dieulle, L. & Berenguer, C. & Grall, A. & Roussignol, M., 2003. "Sequential condition-based maintenance scheduling for a deteriorating system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(2), pages 451-461, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. van Noortwijk, J.M., 2009. "A survey of the application of gamma processes in maintenance," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 2-21.
    2. Zhao, Xuejing & Fouladirad, Mitra & Bérenguer, Christophe & Bordes, Laurent, 2010. "Condition-based inspection/replacement policies for non-monotone deteriorating systems with environmental covariates," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(8), pages 921-934.
    3. Liao, Haitao & Elsayed, Elsayed A. & Chan, Ling-Yau, 2006. "Maintenance of continuously monitored degrading systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(2), pages 821-835, December.
    4. Wang, Xiaofei & Wang, Bing Xing & Hong, Yili & Jiang, Pei Hua, 2021. "Degradation data analysis based on gamma process with random effects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1200-1208.
    5. Flage, Roger & Coit, David W. & Luxhøj, James T. & Aven, Terje, 2012. "Safety constraints applied to an adaptive Bayesian condition-based maintenance optimization model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 16-26.
    6. van Noortwijk, J.M. & van der Weide, J.A.M. & Kallen, M.J. & Pandey, M.D., 2007. "Gamma processes and peaks-over-threshold distributions for time-dependent reliability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(12), pages 1651-1658.
    7. 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.
    8. Lin Wang & Zhiqiang Lu & Yifei Ren, 2019. "A rolling horizon approach for production planning and condition-based maintenance under uncertain demand," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 233(6), pages 1014-1028, December.
    9. Mosayebi Omshi, E. & Grall, A., 2021. "Replacement and imperfect repair of deteriorating system: Study of a CBM policy and impact of repair efficiency," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    10. Salari, Nooshin & Makis, Viliam, 2017. "Comparison of two maintenance policies for a multi-unit system considering production and demand rates," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 381-391.
    11. Shen, Jingyuan & Cui, Lirong & Ma, Yizhong, 2019. "Availability and optimal maintenance policy for systems degrading in dynamic environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 133-143.
    12. Jørgen Vitting Andersen & Roy Cerqueti & Giulia Rotundo, 2017. "Rational expectations and stochastic systems," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 17060, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, revised Oct 2019.
    13. Jiang, R., 2010. "Optimization of alarm threshold and sequential inspection scheme," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 208-215.
    14. Zhang, Nan & Cai, Kaiquan & Zhang, Jun & Wang, Tian, 2022. "A condition-based maintenance policy considering failure dependence and imperfect inspection for a two-component system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    15. Shen, Jingyuan & Hu, Jiawen & Ma, Yizhong, 2020. "Two preventive replacement strategies for systems with protective auxiliary parts subject to degradation and economic dependence," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    16. Zhu, Qiushi & Peng, Hao & Timmermans, Bas & van Houtum, Geert-Jan, 2017. "A condition-based maintenance model for a single component in a system with scheduled and unscheduled downs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 365-380.
    17. Kampitsis, Dimitris & Panagiotidou, Sofia, 2022. "A Bayesian condition-based maintenance and monitoring policy with variable sampling intervals," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PA).
    18. Dieulle, L. & Berenguer, C. & Grall, A. & Roussignol, M., 2003. "Sequential condition-based maintenance scheduling for a deteriorating system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(2), pages 451-461, October.
    19. 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.
    20. Zhang, Chengjie & Qi, Faqun & Zhang, Ning & Li, Yong & Huang, Hongzhong, 2022. "Maintenance policy optimization for multi-component systems considering dynamic importance of components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).

    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:reensy:v:90:y:2005:i:2:p:177-185. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    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.