Proposing an Approach to Determine the Appropriate Multi-product Preventive and Maintenance Policies Using Simulation and MCDM

Document Type : Research Paper


1 MSc. Student of Industrial Engineering, Urmia University of Technology (UUT), Urmia, Iran

2 Assistant Prof., Dep. of Industrial Engineering, Urmia University of Technology (UUT), Urmia, Iran


Objective: Utilizing appropriate policies can reduce maintenance costs. In conventional methods for selecting appropriate maintenance policies in multi-product processes, only one policy is taken for the entire production line. The current research objective is to provide a multi-criteria decision-making method based on computer simulation results in order to select the best maintenance policy for each production line.
Methodology: The simulation model is made up according to the number of maintenance policies and according to the parameters of each production line. The results of the implementation of the simulation model determine the quantities of each production line maintenance criteria. Using the Network Analysis Process (ANP) and Vikor Decision-Making Technique, maintenance ranking policies and top policy are selected for each production line.
Results: The results of the research showed the effectiveness of the newly proposed method in comparison to conventional methods. Because in a multi-product manufacturing unit, the performance of the equipment varies from one production line to another, and requires separate maintenance methods; So that a given policy may be appropriate for a set of equipment at one time and not in a different period. The results are based on a case study in an Iranian food industry unit.
Conclusion: Selection of different maintenance policies for various production lines will increase the efficiency of the lines and reduce production costs.


Aghaee, R., Aghaee, A. & Mohammad Hosseini Najizadeh, R. (2016). Key effective factors on Agile Maintenance in vehicle industry using fuzzy Delphi method and Fuzzy DEMATEL. Journal of Industrial Management, 7(4), 641-672. (in Persian)
Ahmadi, SH. Mokhtarzadeh, N. (2014). Checking and Prioritizing the Rate of Sensitivity of Machines for Precautionary Maintenance with Martel & Zaras Method (The Case: Tolid Atash Factory). Journal of Industrial Management, 5(2), 1-22. (in Persian)
Alrabghi, A., & Tiwari, A. (2015). State of the art in simulation-based optimisation for maintenance systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 82, 167-182.
Bowling, S. R., Khasawneh, M. T., Kaewkuekool, S., & Cho, B. R. (2004). A Markovian approach to determining optimum process target levels for a multi-stage serial production system. European Journal of Operational Research, 159(3), 636-650.
Caballé, N., Castro, I., Pérez, C. & Lanza-Gutiérrez, J. M. (2015). A condition-based maintenance of a dependent degradation-threshold-shock model in a system with multiple degradation processes. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 134, 98-109.
Cassady, C. R. & Kutanoglu, E. (2005). Integrating preventive maintenance planning and production scheduling for a single machine. IEEE Transactions on reliability, 54(2), 304-309.
Das, K. Lashkari, R. & Sengupta, S. (2007). Machine reliability and preventive maintenance planning for cellular manufacturing systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 183(1), 162-180.
Ding, S.-H. and S. Kamaruddin (2015). Maintenance policy optimization—literature review and directions. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 76(5-8), 1263-1283.
Do, P., Voisin, A., Levrat, E., & Iung, B. (2015). A proactive condition-based maintenance strategy with both perfect and imperfect maintenance actions. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 133, 22-32.
Esmaeilian, GH., Lourak Zadeh, F. & zareayan, R. (2015). Evaluating and comparing the implementation effectiveness of corrective maintenance and preventive maintenance with a systems dynamic approach (Case Study: Symcan Company). Journal of Industrial Management, 7(2), 189-214. (in Persian)
Fitouhi, M.C. & Nourelfath, M. (2014). Integrating noncyclical preventive maintenance scheduling and production planning for multi-state systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 121, 175-186.
Hosseini F. M. & Ghadimi, N. (2016). Optimal preventive maintenance policy for electric power distribution systems based on the fuzzy AHP methods. Complexity, 21(6), 70-88.
Liu, B., Xu, Z., Xie, M. & Kuo, W. (2014). A value-based preventive maintenance policy for multi-component system with continuously degrading components. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 132, 83-89.
Opricovic, S. & Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European journal of operational research, 156(2), 445-455.
Saaty, T. L. (2004). Decision making-the analytic hierarchy and network processes (AHP/ANP). Journal of systems science and systems engineering, 13(1), 1-35.
Shafiee, M. (2015). Maintenance strategy selection problem: an MCDM overview. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 21(4), 378-402.
Sherafat, A., Karimi, F. & Davoodi, S. M.R. (2017). Proposing a Comprehensive Maintenance Model Using Meta-synthesis. Journal of Industrial Management, 9(4), 691-734.
(in Persian)
Shi, H. & Zeng, J. (2016). Real-time prediction of remaining useful life and preventive opportunistic maintenance strategy for multi-component systems considering stochastic dependence. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 93, 192-204.
Tzeng, G.H. & Huang, J.J. (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. CRC press.
Wang, L., Chu, J., & Wu, J. (2007). Selection of Optimum Maintenance Strategies Based on a fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Production Economics, 107(1), 151-163.
Zaim, S., Turkylmaz, A., Acar, M.F., Al-turki, U., & Demirel, O.F. (2012). Maintenace Strategy Selection Using AHP and ANP Algorithms: a case study. Journal of quality in maintenance engineering, 18(1), 16-29.
Zhang, N., & Wei, G. (2013). Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Applied Mathematical Modeling, 37(7), 4938-4947.