Published at : 21 Jul 2020
Volume : IJtech
Vol 11, No 3 (2020)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v11i3.3579
Ade Supriatna | Industrial Engineering, Universitas Darma Persada |
Moses Laksono Singgih | Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November |
Erwin Widodo | - Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November, Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia - |
Nani Kurniati | Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November |
Equipment performance is very important in
the production process. Equipment performance can be determined by overall
equipment effectiveness performance (OEE) and maintenance strategies. This
study encourages the use of OEE, in addition to the estimated total maintenance
costs, of rental equipment as a consideration in determining optimal
maintenance strategies. Meanwhile, the proposed maintenance strategies are
corrective maintenance (CM) and a combination of CM with preventive maintenance
(PM). The aim of this study was to obtain a maintenance strategy that would
minimize the estimated total maintenance costs and increase OEE. Mathematical
models of estimated total maintenance costs are developed based on maintenance
strategies generated by each maintenance combination. The results of this study
showed that when a rental period increases by two years, a combination of CM
and PM strategies will cause maintenance costs to increase by 37.54%.
Meanwhile, if the lessor only does CM, the increase will be greater (i.e.,
55.12%). Comparison of the two strategies revealed that the combination of PM
with CM is more efficient than CM alone. Further, OEE experienced an average
decline of 3.7% despite the maintenance strategy.
Maintenance; OEE; Overall equipment effectiveness; Rent equipment
At present,
the manufacturing industry is facing rapid technological developments.
Technology is generally expensive and requires special skills in both operating
and maintaining it. This has resulted in a change in the industry paradigm.
Generally, companies have their own equipment, so that production processes and
maintenance activities can be carried out by the maintenance department within
each company. However, companies with limited capital often choose to rent with
maintenance of production equipment. Thus, companies can focus on their core business matters and improve
efficiency by converting fixed costs to variable costs (Singgih et al., 2018).
A company may rent out equipment (lessee) to other companies (lessors) with the
cooperation stated in a contract agreement detailing the obligations of the
lessor and the lessee. The lessor is generally obliged to maintain equipment
performance, while the tenant is obliged to pay for the rented equipment. Thus,
the lessor must devise maintenance strategies that can minimize total
maintenance costs and optimize
equipment performance so as not to exceed the budget
Some researchers have previously discussed rental
equipment issues (Jaturonnatee,
2006; Pongpech and Murthy, 2006; Yeh and Chang, 2007; Yeh et al., 2009; Chang
and Lo, 2011; Yeh and Kao, 2011; Schutz and Rezg, 2013; Zhou et al., 2015;
Hajej et al., 2015; Mabrouk et al., 2016; Su and Wang, 2016; Hamidi et al.,
2016; Zhou et al., 2016; Hung et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2018). Wang et al. (2018) and Hajej et al. (2015) focused on guarantees in the area of ??rental equipment. Other studies
have addressed the issue of maintenance strategies by considering penalty
factors in equipment rental transactions (Jaturonnatee, 2006; Pongpech and Murthy, 2006; Yeh
and Chang, 2007; Yeh et al., 2009; Yeh and Kao, 2011; Yeh et al., 2011; Hung et
al., 2017). They used equipment
failure thresholds to determine the schedule and number of preventive
maintenance (PM) imperfections that can minimize total maintenance costs. In
addition to imperfect PMs, they used minimum CM to repair equipment failures.
Generally, they consider penalties when equipment failures occur. However,
penalties are not often considered for the duration of equipment repair. In
fact, this often happens.
In contrast with Jaturonnatee
et al. (2006), Pongpech
and Murthy (2006) used a periodical PM scheme in which PM actions were
implemented periodically with various levels of maintenance. Pongpech
and Murthy (2006) extended a mathematical model to determine the ideal
PM period and reduce the failure rate, resulting in a minimum estimated total
maintenance charge. This research method was more practical, but the resulting
performance was lower than that produced by Jaturonnatee
et al. (2006). Yeh et al. (2009) expanded
a mathematical model and algorithm to determine the total performed PM
schedules, the time interval between PM actions, and the best efficiency level
alongside the estimated total maintenance charge criteria. Yeh et
al. (2009) considered decreases in the secure failure rate of
each PM event during a rental period. However, Yeh et
al. (2009) assumed that the time of each equipment repair would
exceed the time specified in the contract agreement, and this does not always
occur. Consequently, the lessor will be in an unfavorable condition.
In contrast with previous studies, Schutz
and Rezg (2013) and Zhou et
al. (2007, 2015) established a reliability threshold for determining
PM schedules and discussed guarantees of rental equipment performance.
Meanwhile, Mabrouk
et al. (2016) used downtime as a barrier to determine when PM. Mabrouk
et al. (2016) combined PM with imperfect CM as a maintenance
strategy to determine future rental periods. Xiang
et al. (2017) developed a multi-unit maintenance rental equipment
scheme in which the effectiveness of the PM is
determined to reduce the failure rate. One method used to determine PM
effectiveness is the method of reducing the failure rate (FRRM) (Jaturonnatee, 2006; Pongpech and Murthy, 2006; Yeh and
Chang, 2007). The FRRM reduces the equipment failure rate by a safe amount or a safe
amount equal to the failure rates that exist after PM actions (Finkelstein, 2008). Another method for determining PM effectiveness is the age reduction
method (ARM) (Zhou et al., 2007; Schutz and Rezg, 2013; Zhou et al., 2015; Hajej et
al., 2015; Hamidi et al., 2016; Hung et al., 2017). The ARM is the age of
the equipment returned earlier than today with a safe amount after PM actions (Finkelstein, 2008).
Out of the
aforementioned research, only Zhou et al.
(2015) and Schutz and
Rezg (2013) discussed equipment
performance as a result of maintenance activities. However, they did not
discuss variable costs, such as penalties, in the context of optimization
determination. According to his research, maintenance not only affects
equipment performance but also affects the performance of maintenance
activities; overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) can do both. OEE provides an
overview of engine conditions determined by availability ratios, performance
ratios, and quality ratios. These three ratios are important because they
indicate the suitability of the equipment to be used in the production process (Pariaman et
al., 2017; Rahman et al., 2018).
For this reason, the present research integrated both
of them into rental equipment. In the present study, OEE was used as a measure
of equipment performance. Meanwhile, the proposed maintenance strategies
include minimal corrective maintenance (CM) and a combination of minimal CM
with imperfect PM. ARM was also used in this study to determine the
effectiveness of imperfect PM. The purpose of this study was to obtain a
maintenance strategy that could minimize estimated total maintenance costs and
increase OEE. Mathematical models of estimated total maintenance costs were
developed based on maintenance strategies generated by each maintenance
combination, and the failure rate was assumed to follow the Weibull
distribution.
This article was arranged systematically as follows. Segment 2 illustrates the mathematical model developed in the present study. The characteristics of an optimal maintenance strategy are explored in Segment 3. Segment 4 presents the characteristics of the model through numerical analysis. Finally, Section 5 presents conclusions drawn from the previous exposure.
In this study, we recall various notations:
Table 1 Notations of the present model
The use of OEE for the purpose of renting equipment has been carried out
successfully. The results of the OEE model characterization differed between
different renting period conditions. OEE has a different value because it is
influenced by many factors, such as renting period, number of PM, failure,
repair time, and maintenance level. Using a rent period of two to six years and
forming a shape parameter of 1.5 to 2, a scale parameter of 0.5 to 1, and a
repair time from one to two hours results in an OEE of 69.3% to 95.0%. The use
of PM and CM as a maintenance strategy yields differences in the estimated
total maintenance charge by increasing scale parameters, shape parameters,
rental periods, and the duration of repairs. Compared to the CM alone, the
combination of PM and CM can improve efficiency from 30.893% to 78.897%. Thus,
the results of this study can be considered by lessors to aid in devising
maintenance strategies to maintain efficient equipment performance. The results
of this study are promising for the future development of rented equipment
studies using OEE. For the purposes of future research, OEE is now proven to
measure equipment performance not only in the manufacturing industry but also
in equipment rental. OEE is useful as a threshold to determine when PM should
be executed. Future research may consider the duration of PM actions by
generalizing various statistical distributions to devise maintenance strategies
that can minimize total estimated maintenance charges.
Filename | Description |
---|---|
R1-IE-3579-20200408211834.pdf | --- |
Chang, W., Lo, H., 2011.
Joint Determination of Lease Period and Preventive Maintenance Policy for
Leased Equipment with Residual Value. Computers
& Industrial Engineering, Volume 61(3), pp. 489–496
Finkelstein, M., 2008. Failure Rate Modelling for Reliability and
Risk, Pham, H., (1st ed.), Springer London, New Jersey, United States
Hajej, Z., Rezg, N.,
Gharbi, A., 2015. A Decision Optimization Model for Leased Manufacturing
Equipment with Warranty Under Forecasting Production/Maintenance Problem. Hindawi, Volume 2015, pp. 1–14
Hamidi, M., Liao, H.,
Szidarovszky, F., 2016. Non-cooperative and Cooperative Game-theoretic Models
for Usage-based Lease Contracts. European
Journal of Operational Research, Volume 255(1), pp. 163–174
Hung, W., Tsai, T., Chang,
Y., 2017. Periodical Preventive Maintenance Contract for Leased Equipment with
Random Failure Penalties. Computers &
Industrial Engineering, Volume 113, pp. 437–444
Jaturonnatee, J.M.B.,
2006. Optimal Preventive Maintenance of Leased Equipment with Corrective
Minimal Repairs. European Journal of
Operational Research, Volume 174, pp. 201–215
Krit, M., Rebai, A., 2013.
Modeling of the Effect of Corrective and Preventive. International Journal of Technology, Volume 4(2), pp. 157–166
Mabrouk, A.B., Chelbi, A.,
Radhoui, M., 2016. Optimal Imperfect Maintenance Strategy for Leased Equipment.
International Journal of Production
Economics, Volume 178, pp. 57–64
Pariaman, H., Garniwa, I.,
Surjandari, I., Sugiarto, B., 2018. Performance Modelling for Maintenance
Outsourcing Providers based on the Kano Model. International Journal of Technology, Volume 9(4), pp. 797–808
Pongpech, J., Murthy,
D.N.P., 2006. Optimal Periodic Preventive Maintenance Policy for Leased
Equipment. Reliability Engineering and
System Safety, Volume 91(7), pp.772–777
Rahman, H.Z., Berawi,
M.A., Susantono, B., Miraj, P., Petroceany, J.S., Maya, R., 2018. Investigation
of an Operation and Maintenance Framework in the Railway Industry: A Case Study
of the Makassar-Parepare. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 9(3), pp. 549–557
Schutz, J., Rezg, N.,
2013. Maintenance Strategy for Leased Equipment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, Volume 66(3), pp. 593–600
Singgih, M.L., Dalulia,
P., Suef, M., Karningsih, P.D., 2018. Performance Modelling for Maintenance
Outsourcing Providers based on the Kano Model. International Journal of Technology, Volume 9(4), pp. 797–808
Su, C., Wang, X., 2016. A
Two-stage Preventive Maintenance Optimization Model Incorporating Two-dimensional
Extended Warranty. Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, Volume 155, pp. 169–178
Supriatna, A., Singgih,
M.L., Widodo, E., Kurniati, N., 2017. Preventive Maintenance Considering OEE
Threshold for Lease Equipment. In:
Proceedings of the Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering & Management Systems
Conference 2017, pp. 13–18
Wang, X., Li, L., Xie, M.,
2018. Optimal Preventive Maintenance Strategy for Leased Equipment Under
Successive Usage-based Contracts. International
Journal of Production Research, Volume 57(18), pp. 5705–5724
Xiang, Y., Zhu, Z., Coit,
D.W., Feng, Q., 2017. Condition-based Maintenance Under Performance-based
Contracting. Computers & Industrial
Engineering, Volume 111, pp. 391–402
Yeh, C., Lo, 2011. Optimal
Length of Lease Period and Maintenance Policy for Leased Equipment with a
Control-Limit on Age. Mathematical and
Computer Modeling, Volume 54(9-10), pp. 2014–2019
Yeh, Kao, C., 2011.
Preventive-Maintenance Policy for Leased Products Under Various Maintenance
Costs. Expert Systems with Applications, Volume
38(4), pp. 3558–3562
Yeh, R.H., Chang, W.L.,
2007. Optimal Threshold Value of Failure-rate for Leased Products with
Preventive Maintenance Actions. Mathematical
and Computer Modelling, Volume 46(5-6), pp. 730–737
Yeh, R.-H., Kao, K.,
Chang, W.-L., 2009. Optimal Preventive Maintenance Policy for Leased Equipment using
Failure Rate Reduction. Computers &
Industrial Engineering, Volume 57(1), pp. 304–309
Zhou, X., Li, Y., Xi, L.,
Lee, J., 2015. Multi-phase Preventive Maintenance Policy for Leased Equipment. International Journal of Production Research,
Volume 53(15), pp. 37–41
Zhou, X., Wu, C., Li, Y.,
Xi, L., 2016. A Preventive Maintenance Model for Leased Equipment Subject to
Internal Degradation and External Shock Damage. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Volume 154, pp. 1–7
Zhou, X., Xi, L., Lee, J.,
2007. Reliability-centered Predictive Maintenance Scheduling for a Continuously
Monitored System Subject to Degradation. Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, Volume 92(4), pp. 530–534