BPMJ 12 2012 0135

Business Process Management Journal
Influence of resources on maintenance operations with different asset monitoring

levels: A simulation approach
Abdullah A. Alabdulkarim, Peter D. Ball, Ashutosh Tiwari,
Downloaded by Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jawa Timur, UPN Veteran Jatim At 01:20 06 July 2017 (PT)
Article information:
To cite this document:
Abdullah A. Alabdulkarim, Peter D. Ball, Ashutosh Tiwari, (2014) "Influence of resources on maintenance
operations with different asset monitoring levels: A simulation approach", Business Process Management
Journal, Vol. 20 Issue: 2, pp.195-212, https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-12-2012-0135
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-12-2012-0135
Downloaded on: 06 July 2017, At: 01:20 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 63 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 743 times since 2014*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2014),"Analysis of management practices in performance-based outsourcing contracts", Business
Process Management Journal, Vol. 20 Iss 2 pp. 178-194 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
BPMJ-01-2013-0007">https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-01-2013-0007</a>
(2015),"Assessing asset monitoring levels for maintenance operations: A simulation approach", Journal
of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 26 Iss 5 pp. 632-659 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/
JMTM-01-2013-0003">https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-01-2013-0003</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:609946 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1463-7154.htm
Resources on
Influence of resources maintenance
on maintenance operations with operations
different asset monitoring levels
195
A simulation approach
Received 13 December 2012
Abdullah A. Alabdulkarim Revised 12 March 2013
Mechanical Engineering, Majmaah University, 17 June 2013
Majmaah, Saudi Arabia, and Accepted 22 June 2013
Peter D. Ball and Ashutosh Tiwari

Manufacturing and Materials, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The demand for contracts on assets availability has increased. Recently published papers
show that the use of asset health monitoring technologies is being encouraged to improve the asset
performance. This is based on reason rather than analysis. This paper aims to understand and assess the
effect of different types of business processes for maintenance resource levels on the behaviour of the
maintenance operations and asset availability located at different customer locations using different
asset monitoring levels.
Design/methodology/approach – A discrete event simulation (DES) model was developed to mimic
complex maintenance operations with different monitoring levels (reactive, diagnostics, and
prognostics). The model was created to understand and assess the influence of resources (labour and
spare parts) on a particular maintenance operation. The model was created to represent different levels
of asset monitoring to be applied in a case study. Subsequently, different levels of spare parts (ranging
from deficient inventory to a plentiful spares inventory) and labour were applied to show the effects of
those resources on the asset availability.
Findings – This research has found that the DES was able to discern different processes for asset
monitoring levels in complex maintenance operations. It also provided numerical evidence about
applying such asset monitoring levels and proved that the higher asset monitoring level does not
always guarantee higher asset availability.
Practical implications – The developed model is a unique model that can provide the decision
makers of maintenance operations with numerical evidence to select an appropriate asset monitoring
level based on their particular maintenance operations.
Originality/value – A novel DES model was developed to support maintenance operations decision
makers in selecting the appropriate asset monitoring level for their particular operations. This unique
approach provides numerical evidence rather than reasoning, and also proves that the higher asset
monitoring level does not always guarantee higher asset availability.
Keywords Simulation, Process modelling, Discrete event simulation, Maintenance, Operation,
Asset health
Paper type Research paper
Business Process Management

Journal
Vol. 20 No. 2, 2014
The authors would like to acknowledge both the Operational Research Society Simulation pp. 195-212
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Workshop 2012 (SW12) for their permission to reproduce part of this research paper and 1463-7154
Majmaah University in Saudi Arabia for funding this research. DOI 10.1108/BPMJ-12-2012-0135
BPMJ 1. Introduction
20,2 There has been an increase in the demand for availability and capability contracts,
resulting in the emergence of business models such as product service systems (PSS),
which essentially move to the “sale of use” rather than the sale of the product itself
(Baines et al., 2007). Unlike traditional business models, in PSS customers are buying
the capability or availability of assets rather than owning the assets (Phumbua and
196 Tjahjono, 2012). Assets under such contracts are required to be available in order for
the manufacturer/supplier to survive and compete. Rolls-Royce (2013) is one of the
leading examples in PSS as they sell their “aircraft engines” under availability
contracts. The sale of an aircraft engine, along with the service and spare part support,
is negotiated on the basis of the hours that the engine actually flies (Baines et al., 2009).
In this case, business processes for maintenance operations need to be effective in order
to maximise the availability of an asset. Maintenance service is a key part in assuring
the availability of an asset, as it has a major impact on quality and cost.
The management of maintenance operations processes needs to be effective in order to
ensure the level of availability of an asset as contracted (Datta and Roy, 2012).
Maintenance operations are highly complex, especially if the manufacturer/supplier
has to manage different assets at different locations. For this reason, some authors
(including Bitner et al., 2000; Froehle and Roth, 2004; Lightfoot et al., 2011) have
proposed the application of monitoring technology to monitor asset health. It has
generally been considered that a higher monitoring level results in higher asset
availability. This was based on reasoning, not on experimental/empirical methods;
therefore, further experimental research is required to observe the influence of such
monitoring levels on maintenance operations systems as a whole.
Simulation of business processes has been widely applied in manufacturing systems
as well as in the defense, healthcare and public services ( Jahangirian et al., 2010).
Simulation is defined as “experimentation with a simplified imitation of an operations
system as it progresses through time, for the purpose of better understanding and/or
improving that system” (Robinson, 2004). Simulation techniques have the capability to
analyse the performance of any operating system without affecting the real system.
Discrete event simulation (DES) is based on the assumption that time only exists at
determined points, and that events will only take place at these points, hence this method
is more appropriate for detailed operations systems where each item needs to be traced
within the organisation’s dynamics (Robinson, 2004). This is particularly relevant to
process modeling of maintenance systems. Simulation has been described as the second
most widely used technique in operations management (Pannirselvam et al., 1999) and
has the potential to represent the complexity of different maintenance processes.
However, when seen in the context of wider manufacturing analysis, maintenance
modelling is poorly covered within available literature.
This paper examines the effects of different levels of resources (for instance, spare
parts and labour levels) on the ability of maintenance operations to maintain assets
with different levels of monitoring using a DES approach; how the system behaves?
Would higher monitoring levels assure higher availability? The asset monitoring
levels used in this paper are:
.
Reactive maintenance strategy, also known as “traditional maintenance”
(low monitoring level).
.
Diagnostics maintenance strategy, where the asset is able to diagnose itself and Resources on
identify the failed part (medium monitoring level). maintenance
.
Prognostics maintenance strategy, where the asset is able to predict the future operations
failure of a part (high monitoring level).
2. Literature review
2.1 The drivers to adopt product monitoring levels 197

Manufacturing organisations have developed an interest of offering services along
with their manufactured products. This is evident in the literature which reveals
trends towards “integrated solutions” or “PSSs” (Mont, 2002; Baines et al., 2007).
The literature also suggests that developing service strategies produces a number of
advantages. Benefits for the providers who integrate services with their core
products that they are often more profitable than those who only sell their physical
products (Cohen et al., 2006). These integrated services also balance the economic
cycles in an organisation and provide a steadier cash flow (Anderson et al., 1997).
IBM, GE, and Siemens are organisations that attract service revenues, and where
services now account for a significant slice of their total incomes (Gebauer et al.,
2004).
Recently, Nordin et al. (2011) stated that by combining services with products
offered to customers, the risk of maintenance cost is shifted to manufacturers/suppliers.
As a result of providing customers with capable products, as in the case of PSS and
availability contracts, maintenance operations is the key to the product’s performance.
Researchers have suggested ways to reduce the maintenance cost, or the cost incurred
based on the down time of the equipment “product”, and have urged a move towards
e-maintenance. Tsang (2002) defined e-maintenance as a maintenance strategy that uses
new technologies to manage its tasks, these include: mobile devices, remote sensing,
condition monitoring, knowledge engineering, telecommunications and internet
technologies. As a result of this definition, e-maintenance can be considered as a
maintenance management process (Hausladen and Bechheim, 2004), which deals with
the expansion of the volume of data available. Moore and Starr (2006) re-defined
e-maintenance as “an asset information management network that integrates and
synchronises the various maintenance and reliability applications to gather and deliver
asset information where it is needed when it is needed”.
Lee et al. (2006) have described the reactive and proactive strategies that are often
implemented in maintenance as an extreme waste. They urged the use of new sensing
technologies, such as prognostics which monitors the actual health of the product. Banks
and Merenich (2007) and Lightfoot et al. (2011) advised employing product health
monitoring technologies as this leads to an improvement of maintenance actions which
will lead to the higher availability of an asset. This also results in feedback that could
improve the design of the asset (Lightfoot et al., 2011).
System health monitoring has been described by Kothamasu et al. (2006) as a
number of performed activities on a system required to maintain it in an operational
condition. Monitoring can be restricted to the current system state, with maintenance
and repair activities encouraged by these observations. On the other hand,
monitoring of the current system state is being improved in order to be able to predict
its future operating state and give a diagnosis of future failures. This types of
predictive diagnosis or prognosis is needed by manufacturers and other operators
BPMJ of complex systems in order to optimise their product performance and thereby
20,2 minimise the cost and unplanned downtime.
These above mentioned reasons are to show the importance of implementing such
technologies so as to be able to monitor the product remotely. Prognostics and health
management (PHM) and integrated vehicle health management (IVHM) are examples of
an extensive technological research which apply such monitoring on existing products
198 (Rajpathak et al., 2012; Teixeira et al., 2012). The literature lacks an assessment tool to
enable decision makers to select the level of asset health monitoring suitable for their
specific maintenance operation. Section 2.2 will highlight the maintenance approaches
and describe the mechanisms used.
2.2 Maintenance approaches

Maintenance plays an important role in product availability. Willmott (2000) defined
maintenance as:
[. . .] a management, control, execution, and quality of these activities which will ensure the
optimum levels of availability and overall performance of plant are achieved, in order to meet
business objectives.
The consequences of equipment or products failures does not only lead to loss of
productivity, but also to loss of timely services to customers, and may result in safety
and environmental issues which will damage the organisation’s image (Alsyouf, 2007).
Selecting the right maintenance activity, or the right combination of activities, is vital
to ensure product availability and its overall performance.
The literature shows different maintenance approaches have been utilised for different
maintenance operations. Most of the approaches identified were based on being reactive
towards failure. Some of them focused on preventing failure by maintaining the asset
according to it is historical data. This approach is costly as the asset will be maintained
frequently to avoid breakdown. It could also be considered inefficient, as failure can occur
before the preventative activity. Finally, it was evident from the literature that proactive
strategies, as in condition based monitoring (CBM), have been introduced to monitor the
actual asset health and plan the maintenance activity accordingly.
This section will highlight these approaches and resolve any misunderstanding that
could arise as a result of unclear definitions. These approaches are described as
follows:
.
Reactive maintenance. Maintenance activities take place only when a breakdown
occurs (Kothamasu et al., 2006; Lee and Wang, 2008). Also called failure-driven
maintenance (FDM) (Moubray, 1997).
.
Preventive maintenance. This includes inspections and routine maintenance
activity for equipment (such as lubricating, cleaning and changing of filters).
This also involves maintaining the equipment based on the mean time between
failures MTBF; trying to prevent expected breakdown. However, this could incur
unnecessary maintenance as it is based on historical data (Swanson, 2001;
Kothamasu et al., 2006).
.
Predictive maintenance. This will anticipate when a repair will need to take place
and plans can be made for this using equipment monitoring technologies. Thus,
the actual time of failure is predicted rather than expected based on MTBF
(Niebel, 1994; Eade, 1997).
.
Proactive maintenance. As the name suggests, it does not wait for the equipment Resources on
to fail. Therefore, it is a combination of preventive and predictive maintenance
(Swanson, 2001; Lee and Wang, 2008) (Figure 1).
maintenance
operations
As defined earlier, preventive maintenance includes both routine inspection and
anticipates repair based on MTBF data which is represented by statistical
distributions of historical data without using sensing monitoring. Most models 199
make an effort to apply distributions of historical data and assumed these will
represent the system. This assumption is unconvincing as the whole data history is
considered. In fact, systems could change modes due to reasons, which are not directly
related to the machines or even due to unknown reasons (Khalil et al., 2009). Predictive
maintenance uses technologies such as CBM, which is a monitoring strategy based on
a real time diagnosis of impeding failures and prognosis of future equipment health
(Peng et al., 2010). The monitoring technologies are divided into two levels; diagnostics
and prognostics (Banks and Merenich, 2007; Greenough and Grubic, 2011). Diagnostics
technologies enable service providers to identify the cause of breakdown, as manual
diagnosis takes one-half of maintenance time in some applications (Niebel, 1994). As a
result of the successful application of diagnostics technologies, researchers have taken
this a step further and now utilise prognostics technologies which warns of future
breakdowns (Greenough and Grubic, 2011).
In order to maintain equipment effectively and cost efficiently, a proper maintenance
strategy should be selected to suit the operating need. Based upon the reviewed
literature a classification of maintenance processes according to the different levels of
asset monitoring has been developed according to their process modelling differences:
.
Reactive maintenance level (no monitoring). In this strategy maintenance
activities will only take place when an asset has failed. Manual diagnosis will be
carried out, followed by a spare part request then a repair activity.
. Diagnostics maintenance level (medium monitoring level). Where the asset is able
to diagnose itself and identify the failed part. Therefore, the labour will only
travel to the asset when the spare part is in stock to perform the repair activity.
.
Prognostics maintenance level (high monitoring level). Where the asset is able to
predict the future failure of a part. It is hoped that the labour will have the
required spare part on hand before the failure occurs to be able to travel and
replace the degraded part before the failure could occur.
Figure 1.
Maintenance approaches
Source: Adopted from Kothamasu et al. (2006)
BPMJ Therefore, organisations tend to apply reliability-centred maintenance (RCM) or total
20,2 productive maintenance (TPM) to formulate the most suitable maintenance approaches
to best serve their businesses.
Maintenance communities have applied RCM to allow them to select an appropriate
maintenance strategy for their equipment. Moubray (1997) defines it as “a process used
to determine the maintenance requirements of any physical asset in its operating
200 context”. Tsang (1995) added that RCM is a controlled methodology to determine the
maintenance requirements of any physical asset in its operating context.
Smith (1993) stated that the core objective of RCM is to maintain system function.
As a result, the random maintenance activities which are not cost effective should be
eliminated (Anderson and Neri, 1990). The RCM process involves investigating the
way equipment fails, and assesses the consequences of each failure while choosing the
correct maintenance action to ensure that the desired overall level of equipment
performance (availability, reliability) is met (Smith, 1993). Therefore, it is a structured
methodology and a unique process, which is used to develop optimum equipment
maintenance plans (Ochoa and Wendell, 1995).
RCM consists of two main tasks; one is to study and classify failure modes based on
the effect of the failure on the system; and the other is to examine the maintenance
schedule and reliability influence (Kothamasu et al., 2006). Applying RCM has benefits
as outlined by Moubray (1997), which are as follows:
. improving the understanding of how assets work;
.
better understanding of how assets can fail;
.
greater safety and environmental protection;
.
improved operating performance (output, product quality, and customer service);
.
greater maintenance cost-effectiveness;
.
longer useful life of expensive item;
.
a comprehensive maintenance database; and
.
greater motivation of individuals.
TPM is a maintenance management philosophy which was established by Japanese

manufacturing to back the just-in-time manufacturing implementation, to advance
manufacturing technologies, and to support the efforts toward improving product
quality (Swanson, 2001). It concentrates on eliminating; equipment failure, set-up and
adjustment time, idling and minor stoppages, reduced speed, defects in process and
reduced yield (Macaulay, 1988). TPM is described by Maggard and Rhyne (1992) as a
partnership approach to maintenance. In TPM, small teams build a relationship based
on cooperation between production and maintenance which supports the success
of maintenance work. Furthermore, production workers collaborate in carrying out
maintenance activities which allows them to perform a role in monitoring and
maintaining the production equipment and this improves their skills and allows them
to be more active in maintenance (Swanson, 2001).
RCM and TPM formulised an important structure within maintenance management
(Hipkin and DeCock, 2000), which is defined as “all activities of the management
that determine the maintenance objectives, strategies, and responsibilities [. . .]”
(Swedish Standards Institute, 2001). TPM was established for the manufacturing sector,
while RCM was originally established for the aircraft industry; both are now widely Resources on
applied in different industries. TPM combined production operators within maintenance maintenance
activities and enabled continuous improvement to maximise the overall equipment
performance. The essential objective is robust processes, that are free from disruption operations
(Nakajima, 1989). However, TPM cannot be applied on complicated physical assets
whereas RCM focuses more on technology and offers a sound basis for evaluating
maintenance requirements in this context (Geraghty, 1996). RCM can be described as 201
“a systematic approach for identifying effective and efficient preventive maintenance
tasks, by means of function and risk analysis” (Hansson et al., 2003).
The RCM and TPM techniques can provide more understanding of the technical
aspects of maintenance activities; for example, identifying the cause of the failure
modes and how to improve MTBF by selecting the appropriate maintenance strategy.
Also the severity and consequences of a breakdown can be specified. Usually the
decision is made on whether or not to adopt the CBM technology based on the experience
of maintenance personnel and managers as well as assessing the maintenance data
gathered. TPM and RCM on their own are unable to provide quantitative “what if”
analysis for decision-making by taking a dynamic system level view rather than a local
asset view. This being the case, simulation has the ability to do so, and is therefore
suggested by the authors as an appropriate approach for deciding upon a suitable
maintenance approach to be applied.
2.3 Simulation applications in maintenance

DES has been employed to simulate various system; such as those in a supply chain
(Rytila and Spens, 2006), health care (Wang et al., 2009), production systems (Kiba et al.,
2009) and construction (Hassan and Gruber, 2008).
In addition, DES has been utilised in decision-making mechanisms in asset
availability. Ali et al. (2008) carried out an assessment on manufacturing performance in
the automotive industry, in particular identifying the bottlenecks and selecting suitable
strategies using simulation and optimisation. They looked at why most currently
available production systems have disappointing overall availability which is primarily
due to excessive downtime caused by failures of machine/components along with
quality problems. Moreover, in order to assess the maintenance performance plan in the
manufacturing field, a new approach combining simulation techniques and optimising
algorithms has been advocated by Roux et al. (2008).
Meanwhile, more emphasis has been given on optimising preventive maintenance
in a similar area of manufacturing such as the work done by Oyarbide-Zubillaga et al.
(2008). Their primary goal was to search for the optimal frequencies for the preventive
maintenance of a multi-equipment system based upon profit and cost factors.
Eventually, a machine service support (MSS) system was invented by Ng et al. (2008)
allowing an operation and maintenance expert to study and identify disturbances that
occur at all locations, however remote.
Besides manufacturing systems, some studies have drawn attention to maintenance
operations beyond the factory boundary. A DES model was created by Greasley (2000)
for a company tendering for the operation of a train maintenance depot. By applying the
model, the company benefitted in comprehending the operational impacts of a variety of
plans and was able to work out how to meet the depot’s demand no matter how stringent
the conditions. Finnish Air Forces have also developed a DES model in their effort
BPMJ to understand the effects of maintenance resources, policies, and operating
20,2 environments for aircraft availability (Mattila et al., 2008).
Maintenance modelling work entails production as well as business processes as it
covers material movement, information and decision-making. It is more difficult and
complex to model a maintenance operation, since maintenance operation is not as
developed as the manufacturing system operation model mainly due to the fact that in
202 the former, more sub-systems are working together in a complex manner. Usually, the
sub-systems, such as production, maintenance staff, and spare parts inventory, are
modelled separately. In an effort to understand this complex mechanism, Duffuaa et al.
(2001) developed a generic conceptual model that best signifies the maintenance in a
manufacturing system, and combines various modules together. Other studies have
formed a conceptual framework which combines maintenance operations in the airline
industry (Duffuaa and Andijani, 1999). Those models, however, were only conceptual
and were not represented using simulation methods which are able to simulate real life
performance. In spite of these examples, no discussion was made on how the service
performance was affected by the maintenance of the product in use. The system
becomes more complex with the maintenance of an asset “product” at a customer site
in comparison with the maintenance in a manufacturing system. This is simply due to
the availability contract’s complexity, caused by the distance between the asset
location and the service provider, and the availability of spares.
A single bespoke model was created by Agnihothri and Karmarkar (1992) in order to
replicate field services operations with reactive maintenance only. The effect of
diagnostics/prognostics monitoring technologies on asset maintenance operations has not
been modelled in simulation over reactive maintenance. A model of asset maintenance
was developed by Ball et al. (2010) to measure the ability of the DES system to differentiate
complex operations with three separate asset monitoring levels; reactive, diagnostics, and
prognostics. Consequently, they created a single bespoke hypothetical model. This model
is one of the few mentioned in the literature to replicate maintenance of the product in use
by combining all the sub-systems of maintenance involved in such an operation that
contribute to complexity in modelling. Simulation functionalities have been developed by
Alabdulkarim et al. (2011) in order to simulate various asset monitoring levels, i.e. reactive,
diagnostics and prognostics, for rapid modelling using DES.
This paper intends to answer the following research questions using a DES approach
as a novel method of tackling such a problem as stated by Alabdulkarim et al. (2013):
RQ1. How would different spare parts and labour levels affect the availability of
assets with different monitoring levels in complex maintenance operations?
RQ2. Would higher monitoring levels result in higher asset availability?
3. Methodology
The aim is to understand and assess the effect of different levels of spare parts and
labour availability (as system constraints) on different asset monitoring levels
(reactive, diagnostics, and prognostics) of products in different locations far from their
service providers. Additionally, the research aims to provide a dynamic assessment
tool to make comparisons between different monitoring levels.
It has been stated by Yin (1994) that case studies ought to be employed when
“a why or how question is being asked about a contemporary set of events over which
the investigator has little or no control”. Further, Voss et al. (2002) argue that in the field Resources on
of operations management, case studies should be more focused on the techniques
(manufacturing and services) and systems to be analysed.
maintenance
A typical simulation study process is: model build, model validation, operations
experimentation, model analysis and conclusion. A case study was created and then
modelled using the simulation functionalities built by Alabdulkarim et al. (2011).
Following model validation, experimentation was carried out to compare different 203
monitoring levels (reactive, diagnostics, and prognostics) using different levels of spare
parts and labour availability as system constraints, to understand the effect of different
monitoring levels on the overall system performance.
The expected output of this simulation study is to have more understanding of the
dynamic behaviour of a complex system which contains a fleet of assets, with failure
modes and different spare parts ordering policies. It would give quantitative results to
measure the effect of different asset monitoring levels on availability and labour
utilisation. Based on the behaviour of a complex system, the impact of higher monitoring
levels on asset availability can be assessed. The simulation approach would benefit
maintenance operations decision makers, but will not provide any technical insight of
how the asset fails. It is a tool to quantify based on historical data which is then
transformed into statistical distributions to mimic the breakdown pattern.
The next section explains the case study, results, discussion and conclusions drawn
from this experimentation.
4. Case study
In this case study, a scenario of assets that were sold under availability contracts are
described in detail. Next, a DES model was created applying different monitoring levels
on each asset to understand how the complex maintenance operations (which include
inventory, asset location from service provider, and number of labour units) will behave.
Finally, different levels of spare parts and labour were applied in order to gain a deeper
understanding of their effect on the availability on different monitoring levels, using
DES. The different monitoring levels applied in this case study are as follows:
.
Reactive maintenance. On failure labour diagnoses, checks stock, attempt repair
or returns when stock is available.
.
Diagnostics maintenance. On failure asset diagnoses itself, checks stock,
attempts repair or travels when stock available.
.
Prognostics maintenance. Predicts failure, checks stock, maintains.
In the reactive scenario, the labour visits the failed assets twice. The first visit is to
diagnose the fault and is followed by a second visit when the spare part is available to
carry out the repair. This scenario is the traditional maintenance process where
monitoring levels are not applied. The second scenario, diagnostics, requires one visit
only as the asset is able to diagnose itself, after which the labour will visit the asset for
the purpose of repair when the spare part is available. This scenario has applied a
medium asset monitoring level. The third scenario, which is considered as high asset
monitoring, is prognostics. Within this scenario the asset is able to detect future failure,
so the labour will travel to the asset to repair it prior to failure when a spare part is
available. If the required spare is not immediately available, the asset may fail before a
spare arrives.
BPMJ These scenarios were applied to a case study for the purpose of comparing and
20,2 understanding the effect of each of those scenarios on complex maintenance operations.
Within the case study, a supplier provides assets to different customers and provides them
with maintenance services. The supplier has a maintenance centre to provide maintenance
services for three customers; Customer 1, Customer 2, and Customer 3. All of these
customers use the same asset functionality for their production purposes. Customers 1, 2,
204 and 3 have four, two, and two assets, respectively, as shown in Figure 3. The travel time
from the service provider (maintenance centre) to the customers’ site is 15 time units for
Customer 1, 20 time units for Customer 2, and 30 time units for Customer 3. The model was
run with equal service priority for all customers.
This case study has been applied using three asset monitoring levels; reactive,
diagnostics, and prognostics as described earlier. The model were run for 43,200 time units,
and if one time unit is considered to equal 1 hour, then the model was run over five years to
enable the simulation to achieve a reliable output. Each single model was applied with
different levels of spare part inter-arrival time (assuming spare parts arrived by regular
delivery) and labour (testing for one and two labour units). Figure 2 represents the case
study described including the input data. Figure 3 shows the inter-arrival times of spare
parts for a range of spares inventory from a deficient inventory to a plentiful inventory.
The case study was run 36 times, and was run independently in the simulation tool
each time with a different strategy in order to compare the strategies. Different runs were
made in each strategy representing different levels of the spares’ availability in stock. On
each level of spare availability, two different levels of labour availability were examined.
Figure 3 shows how these different runs were made in the case study, it shows the
inter-arrival times of spare parts for a range of spares inventory from a deficient inventory
to plentiful inventory. The availability of the assets were then measured and compared.
Figure 2.
Case study
representation diagram
Resources on
Case Study
maintenance
operations
Reactive Diagnostics Prognostics
Strategy Strategy Strategy
205
Each strategy has been run for different inter-arrival times of spare parts
(50, 100, 120, 150, 300 and 500 time unit) ranging from high inventory
stock to starving inventory
Figure 3.
Each of the above inter-arrival times of spare parts Description of number of
has been run for 1 labour and then 2 labour model runs
4.1 Results and analysis

This section discusses the key results of the case study simulation experimentation
with different scenarios and discusses how the system behaves with the different levels
of asset monitoring. The experimentation provides further insight into understanding
how complex maintenance operations behave using the DES approach. It also
addresses the question of whether a higher asset monitoring level results in higher
availability.
Figure 4 represents the result of the average availability of assets (products) with
different monitoring levels among different levels of spare part inter-arrival time
(ranging from high stock availability to a deficient inventory), with one labour unit
available. The figure shows the following:
100
90
80
70
Availability %
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
50 100 120 150 300 500 Figure 4.
Spare part inter-arrival time Average assets
availability % vs spare
Reactive Strategy Diagnostic Strategy part inter-arrival time with
one labour unit
Prognostics Strategy
BPMJ .
When spare parts are always available, the prognostics strategy results in higher
20,2 availability, even though there was not much difference between the prognostics
and diagnostics strategies. However, both prognostics and diagnostics strategies
give much higher availability compared to the reactive strategy.
.
When there is a low inventory stock level of spare parts, there is a large decline in
the average availability of assets (products). The prognostics strategy still shows
206 a slightly better availability than the other two strategies, while diagnostics and
reactive strategies are now showing the same availability.
Figure 5 repeats Figure 4, but considers the effect of two labour units involved in the
maintenance operations. Figure 5 shows the following:
.
When spare parts are always available, the prognostics and diagnostics
strategies still guarantee a better average availability of assets (products) with a
slight improvement than when just one labour unit is available.
.
The reactive strategy gives a higher availability with two labour units than
when dealing with just one.
.
When the levels of inventory are very low, prognostics still performs slightly
better than the other strategies, but diagnostics and reactive shows almost the
same average availability of assets (products).
The above results show that the prognostics strategy never achieves 100 per cent
availability for the asset, even when the spare part is always on stock, as repair is carried out.
4.2 Validation
According to Robinson (2004) validation is a process of confirming that the simulation
model is adequately accurate. The accuracy of the model refers to the purpose or
objectives of the model. In other words, validation means either the model is adequately
accurate for its purpose or not. It is a matter of “yes” or “no”.
100
90
80
70
Availability %
60
50
40
30
20
10
Figure 5. 0
50 100 120 150 300 500
Average assets
availability % vs spare Spare parts inter-arrival time
part inter-arrival time Reactive Strategy Diagnostic Strategy
with two labours
Prognostics Strategy
The purpose of this paper is to determine the potential of the DES approach in Resources on
discerning different asset monitoring levels in complex maintenance operations rather maintenance
than assessing a particular service operation. Therefore, data such as the MTBF and
the diagnoses and repair times were synthetic. operations
A validation process for the model building and the experimentations results was
conducted with an expert with more than 20 years of expertise in the field of simulation
and service consultation. The face validation process with the expert was divided into 207
two stages. The first stage was to examine the modelling logic of the different
monitoring levels to ensure that these different levels of monitoring were represented
appropriately. The second stage was to assess the simulation experimentations’ results
for each of the different monitoring levels.
The model logic was deemed to be accurate and representative of the process flow
for each level of monitoring whilst the results obtained appeared logical. The expert
commented on the modelling approach assuming the failure detection technologies in
the diagnostics and prognostics strategies to be 100 per cent accurate. In industrial
applications there is an error percentage on the diagnostics and prognostics sensing
technologies that was not taken into account.
5. Discussion
With the recent increase in the integration of product and service as in PSS,
manufacturers and suppliers need to enhance the complex processes of their maintenance
operation. Maintenance is a key aspect in product performance, but the research tends to
focus on maintenance within production systems (manufacturing plant) or field assets in
isolation. Maintenance of products (assets) in use is complex, as fleets of assets are
scattered among different customers. Therefore, ensuring the availability of these assets
as contracted under PSS, is a necessity.
Under PSS, complexity rises as the assets are scattered and the
manufacturers/suppliers have no direct contact with them. Any tardiness in repairing
these assets will result in incentives being paid to the customers and customer
satisfaction will decrease. This has led to the discussion of introducing CBM, which in
general is divided into two main types; diagnostics and prognostics, as described earlier.
Applying these advance techniques are hoped to reduce the breakdown time as these
technologies could self-diagnose and/or predict future failure.
Implementing such technologies was solely based on the severity of breakdown
consequences and associated cost. These were based on reasoning of experts rather than
being numerically quantified. In this paper, simulation, in particular DES demonstrated
the ability to represent reality when implementing such technologies. The processes of
different monitoring levels were modelled and can be compared in terms of asset
availability, labour utilisation, and spare parts ordering policy. DES lacks the ability to
analyse the technicality of a failure and cannot provide the root causes of failure.
Additionally, it is challenging to model this type of set up in current DES software as the
functionality required is not provided as standard options in the same way functionality
is provided for volume production systems.
This research sought to examine the effects of different levels of resources on the ability
of maintenance operations to maintain assets with different monitoring levels. Three
different monitoring levels of reactive, diagnostic and prognostic were used to investigate
both whether simulation was able to detect differences in performance; and to understand
BPMJ if the logical assessment held that prognostics was operationally better than diagnostics,
20,2 and in turn both were better than reactive maintenance. In order to investigate performance
differences, changes were made to the three sub-systems of inventory, service and assets.
In practice the changes made were to the availability of spare parts, the availability of
labour and the reliability of assets. By changing the availability and reliability of the
sub-systems, then monitoring levels could be tested for their effect on availability.
208 This paper has shown that DES is able to discern different processes of asset
monitoring levels. The modelling work demonstrates that the individual component
characteristics and operational interaction can be captured and performance
differences tracked over time. In turn different operational set ups can be compared.
The results show that higher monitoring levels consistently result in better performance;
in the form of higher asset availability. This addresses RQ2. Although the significance of the
performance improvement will vary, it was shown that typically prognostics delivers better
performance than diagnostics and diagnostics better than reactive. These observations can
be generalised as the performance differences were due to faster reaction time to
breakdowns and the need for spares delivery. Such observations, however, must take into
consideration the operation of the whole system including labour and inventory.
The higher monitoring level will generally improve asset performance but, this
would depend on wider system policies; for instance, spare part policy and labour
availability. In the best case scenario, when high resources are available prognostics will
not reach 100 per cent availability as the repair needs to take place. The authors conclude
that a higher monitoring level would not always result in higher asset availability,
as this depends on how effectively the resources have been managed. This addresses
RQ1, showing that asset performance is not independent of wider maintenance system
performance. Therefore, future research into improving asset availability should
account for the wider business process and include areas that have potential to impact on
interaction with an asset, such as labour or parts, and act as constraints.
6. Conclusion
This paper examined the behaviour of a maintenance processes for assets under
different monitoring levels using DES. This paper also investigated the behaviour of
complex processes of maintenance operation and showed how different levels of spare
parts and labour availability would affect asset availability. It shows how DES can
discern the different asset monitoring levels.
The case study results and analysis leads to the conclusion that a higher level of asset
monitoring does not necessarily assure higher performance, as it depends on how the
spare parts and labour units are managed. If the maintenance operations do not have an
efficient way of managing these resources, there is no point in investing in such high cost
technologies, as there is no guarantee for a higher performance of the assets.
References
Agnihothri, S.R. and Karmarkar, U.S. (1992), “Performance evaluation of service territories”,
Operations Research, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 355-366.
Alabdulkarim, A.A., Ball, P.D. and Tiwari, A. (2011), “Rapid modeling of field maintenance
using discrete event simulation”, in Jain, S., Creasey, R.R., Himmelspach, J., White, K.P. and
Fu, M. (Eds), Proceedings of 2011 Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc., Piscataway, NJ, pp. 637-646.
Alabdulkarim, A.A., Ball, P.D. and Tiwari, A. (2013), “Applications of simulation in maintenance Resources on
research”, World Journal of Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 14-37.
maintenance
Ali, A., Chen, X., Yang, Z., Lee, J. and Ni, J. (2008), “Optimized maintenance design for
manufacturing performance improvement using simulation”, in Mason, S.J., Hill, R.R., operations
Mönch, L., Rose, O., Jefferson, T. and Fowler, J.W. (Eds), Proceedings of 2008
Winter Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.,
Piscataway, NJ, pp. 1811-1819. 209

Alsyouf, I. (2007), “The role of maintenance in improving companies’ productivity and
profitability”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 105 No. 1, pp. 70-78.
Anderson, E., Fornell, C. and Rust, R. (1997), “Customer satisfaction, productivity and
profitability: differences between goods and services”, Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 129-145.
Anderson, R.T. and Neri, L. (1990), Reliability-Centered Maintenance: Management and
Engineering Methods, Elsevier, London.
Baines, T.S., Lightfoot, H.W., Benedettini, O. and Kay, J.M. (2009), “The servitization of
manufacturing: a review of literature and reflection on future challenges”, Journal of
Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 547-567.
Baines, T.S., Lightfoot, H.W., Evans, S., Neely, A., Greenough, R., Peppard, J., Roy, R., Shehab, E.,
Barganza, A., Tiwari, A., Alcock, J.R., Angus, J.P., Bastl, M., Cousens, A., Irving, P.,
Johnson, M., Kingston, J., Lockett, H., Martinez, V., Michele, P., Tranfield, D., Walton, I.M.
and Wilson, H. (2007), “State of the art in the product service systems”, Proc. IMechE
Part B, Vol. 221, pp. 1543-1552.
Ball, P.D., Tiwari, A., Alabdulkarim, A., Cuthbert, R. and Thorne, A. (2010), “Using discrete event
simulation to investigate engineering product service strategies”, in Vitanov, V.I. and
Harrison, D. (Eds), Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Manufacturing
Research, Durham University, Durham, pp. 318-323.
Banks, J. and Merenich, J. (2007), “Cost benefit analysis for asset health management
technology”, Reliability and Maintainability, IEEE, New York, NY, pp. 95-100.
Bitner, M.J., Brown, S.W. and Meuter, M.L. (2000), “Technology infusion in service encounters”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 138-149.
Cohen, M., Argrawal, N. and Arawal, V. (2006), “Winning in the aftermarket”, Harvard Business
Review, May, pp. 129-138.
Datta, P. and Roy, R. (2012), “Operations strategy for the effective delivery of integrated
industrial product-service offerings: two exploratory defence industry case studies”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 579-603.
Duffuaa, S.O. and Andijani, A. (1999), “An integrated simulation model for effective planning of
maintenance operations for Saudi Arabian Airlines (SAUDIA)”, Production Planning &
Control, Vol. 10, pp. 579-584.
Duffuaa, S.O., Ben-Daya, M., Al-Sultan, K.S. and Andijani, A.A. (2001), “A generic conceptual
simulation model for maintenance systems”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 7, pp. 207-219.
Eade, R. (1997), “The importance of predictive maintenance”, Iron Age New Steel, Vol. 13 No. 9,
pp. 68-72.
Froehle, C.M. and Roth, A.V. (2004), “New measurement scales for evaluating perceptions of the
technology-mediated customer service experience”, Journal of Operation Management,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1-21.
BPMJ Gebauer, H., Beckenbauer, B. and Fleisch, E. (2004), “How to innovate customer support services in
manufacturing firms?”, in Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, A., Brown, S.B. and Johnston, R. (Eds),
20,2 Service Excellence in Management: Interdisciplinary Contributions, Proceedings of the QUIS 9
Conference, Karlstad, 15-18 June, pp. 397-406.
Geraghty, T. (1996), “RCM and TPM – complementary rather than conflicting techniques”,
Metallurgia, Vol. 63, June, p. 231.
210 Greasley, A. (2000), “Using simulation to assess the service reliability of a train maintenance
depot”, Quality & Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 16, pp. 221-228.
Greenough, R.M. and Grubic, T. (2011), “Modelling condition-based maintenance to deliver a
service to machine tool users”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 52 Nos 9-12, pp. 1117-1132.
Hansson, J., Backlund, F. and Lycke, L. (2003), “Managing commitment: increasing the odds for
successful implementation of TQM, TPM or RCM”, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 20 No. 9, pp. 993-1008.
Hassan, M.M. and Gruber, S. (2008), “Application of discrete-event to study the paving operation
of asphalt concrete”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 8, pp. 7-22.
Hausladen, I. and Bechheim, C. (2004), “E-maintenance platform as a basis for business process
integration”, Proceedings of INDIN04, Second IEEE International Conference on Industrial
Informatics, Berlin, Germany, pp. 46-51.
Hipkin, I.B. and DeCock, C. (2000), “TQM and BPR: lessons for maintenance management”,
OMEGA – The International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 277-292.
Jahangirian, M., Eldabi, T., Naseer, A., Stergioulas, L.K. and Young, T. (2010), “Simulation in
manufacturing and business: a review”, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 203, pp. 1-13.
Khalil, J., Saad, S.M. and Gindy, N. (2009), “An integrated cost optimisation maintenance model
for industrial equipment”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 15 No. 1,
pp. 106-118.
Kiba, J., Dauzère-Pérès, S., Lamiable, G. and Yugma, C. (2009), “Simulation of full 300 mm
semiconductor manufacturing plant with material handling constraints”, in Rossetti, M.D.,
Hill, R.R., Johansson, B., Dunkin, A. and Ingalls, R.G. (Eds), Proceedings of 2009 Winter
Simulation Conference, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Piscataway,
NJ, pp. 1601-1609.
Kothamasu, R., Huang, S.H. and VerDuin, W.H. (2006), “System health monitoring and
prognostics – a review of current paradigms and practices”, International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 1012-1024.
Lee, J. and Wang, H. (2008), “New technologies for maintenance”, Complex System Maintenance
Handbook, Springer, Berlin, pp. 49-78.
Lee, J., Ni, J., Djurdjanovic, D., Qiu, H. and Liao, H. (2006), “Intelligent prognostics tools and
e-maintenance”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 476-489.
Lightfoot, H.W., Baines, T. and Smart, P. (2011), “Examining the information and communication
technologies enabling servitized manufacture”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol. 225 No. 10, pp. 1964-1968.
Macaulay, S. (1988), “Amazing things can happen if you keep it clean”, Production, Vol. 100 No. 5,
pp. 72-74.
Maggard, B.N. and Rhyne, D.M. (1992), “Total productive maintenance: a timely integration of
production and maintenance”, Production & Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 33 No. 4,
pp. 6-10.
Mattila, V., Virtanen, K. and Raivio, T. (2008), “Improving maintenance decision making in the Resources on
Finnish air force through simulation”, Interfaces, Vol. 38, pp. 187-201.
maintenance
Mont, O. (2002), “Clarifying the concept of product service-systems”, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 237-245. operations
Moore, W.J. and Starr, A.G. (2006), “An intelligent maintenance system for continuous cost-based
prioritisation of maintenance activities”, Computers in Industry, Vol. 57 No. 6, pp. 595-606
(special issue on e-maintenance). 211

Moubray, J. (1997), Reliability-Centred Maintenance, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Nakajima, S. (1989), TPM Development Programme: Implementing Total Productive
Maintenance, Productivity Press, Portland, OR.
Ng, A.H.C., Adolfsson, J., Sundberg, M. and De Vin, L.J. (2008), “Virtual manufacturing for press
line monitoring and diagnostics”, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture,
Vol. 48, pp. 565-575.
Niebel, B. (1994), Engineering Maintenance Management, 2nd ed., Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.
Nordin, F., Kindström, D., Kowalkowski, C. and Rehme, J. (2011), “The risks of providing
services: differential risk effects of the service-development strategies of customisation,
bundling, and range”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 390-408.
Ochoa, J.R. and Wendell, S.L. (1995), “Application of reliability-centered maintenance in the T&D
utility industry”, Proceedings of the 57th Annual American Power Conference, Chicago, IL,
USA, 18-20 April, Part 2 of 3, pp. 883-888.
Oyarbide-Zubillaga, A., Goti, A. and Sancheze, A. (2008), “Preventive maintenance optimisation
of multi-equipment manufacturing systems by combining discrete-event simulation
and multi-objective evolutionary algorithms”, Production Planning & Control, Vol. 19,
pp. 342-355.
Pannirselvam, G.P., Ferguson, L.A., Ash, R.C. and Siferd, S.P. (1999), “Operations management
research: an update for the 1990s”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18, pp. 95-112.
Peng, Y., Dong, M. and Zuo, M.J. (2010), “Current status of machine prognostics in
condition-based maintenance: a review”, The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 50 Nos 1-4, pp. 297-313.
Phumbua, S. and Tjahjono, B. (2012), “Towards product-service systems modelling: a quest for
dynamic behaviour and model parameters”, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 425-442.
Rajpathak, D., Subramania, H.S. and Bandyopadhyay, P. (2012), “Ontology driven data collection
and validation framework for the diagnosis of the vehicle health management”,
International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 25 No. 9, pp. 774-789.
Robinson, S. (2004), Simulation: The Practice of Model Development and Use, Wiley, Chichester.
Rolls-Royce (2013), Rolls-Royce Celebrates 50th Anniversary of Power-by-the-Hour,
available at: www.rolls-royce.com/news/press_releases/2012/121030_the_Hour.jsp
(accessed 7 June 2013).
Roux, O., Jamali, M.A., Kadi, D.A. and Chatelet, E. (2008), “Development of simulation and
optimization platform to analyse maintenance policies performance for manufacturing
systems”, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 21,
pp. 407-414.
Rytila, J.S. and Spens, K.M. (2006), “Using simulation to increase efficiency in blood supply
chains”, Management Research News, Vol. 29, pp. 801-819.
Smith, A.M. (1993), Reliability-Centered Maintenance, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
BPMJ Swanson, L. (2001), “Linking maintenance strategies to performance”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 237-244.
20,2 Swedish Standards Institute (2001), Maintenance Terminology, Research Report SS-EN 13306,
Swedish Standards Institute, Stockholm.
Teixeira, E., Tjahjono, B. and Alfaro, S. (2012), “A novel framework to link prognostics and
health management and product-service systems using online simulation”, Computers in
212 Industry, Vol. 63 No. 7, pp. 669-679.

Tsang, A. (1995), “Condition-based maintenance: tools and decision making”, Journal of Quality
in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 3-17.
Tsang, A. (2002), “Strategic dimensions of maintenance management”, Journal of Quality
Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 7-39.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002), “Case research in operations management”,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 195-219.
Wang, T., Guinet, A., Belaidi, A. and Besombes, B. (2009), “Modelling and simulation of
emergency services with ARIS and Arena – case study: the emergency department of the
Saint Joseph and Saint Luc Hospital”, Production Planning & Control, Vol. 20, pp. 484-495.
Willmott, P. (2000), TPM the Route to World Class Performance, 2nd ed., Butterworth-Heinemann,
Oxford.
Yin, R. (1994), Case Study Research – Design and Methods, Sage, London.
About the authors

Abdullah A. Alabdulkarim is a Lecturer in industrial systems simulation at Majmaah University
in Saudi Arabia. Currently, he is a PhD student at Cranfield University, UK. His research focuses
on simulation modelling for service sectors. He obtained his MSc in logistics and optimization
from University of Portsmouth, and his BSc in industrial engineering was obtained from King Saud
University. His background is from the aerospace industry in aviation maintenance and operations.
He worked for several industries before pursuing his academic career. Abdullah A. Alabdulkarim
is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: a.alabdulkarim@mu.edu.sa
Peter D. Ball, CEng MIET, is currently a Reader in manufacturing operations in the
Manufacturing and Materials Department at Cranfield University with research interests in the
design, operation and modelling of manufacturing systems. He has published papers on simulation,
outsourcing, supply chain management and sustainability. At Cranfield, he is a course Director
for MSc in engineering and management of manufacturing systems and MSc in sustainable
manufacturing. He is a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy, an Associate of the HEA’s
Engineering Subject Centre and active within the Institution of Engineering and Technology.
Ashutosh Tiwari is currently a Professor of manufacturing informatics and Head of the
Product and Service Innovation Centre at Cranfield University. He gained his PhD in multi-criteria
optimization from Cranfield University, UK. His research focus is on the application of computing
techniques to process re-design/optimization. He has published extensively in his research career
with around 150 research publications. He was awarded the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
(IMechE) Thatcher Bros Prize 2008/09 for the best journal paper in manufacturing.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
This article has been cited by:
1. Ayse Sena Eruguz, Tarkan Tan, Geert-Jan van Houtum. 2017. A survey of maintenance and service
logistics management: Classification and research agenda from a maritime sector perspective. Computers
& Operations Research 85, 184-205. [CrossRef]
2. Abdullah Alrabghi, Ashutosh Tiwari. 2016. A novel approach for modelling complex maintenance systems
using discrete event simulation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 154, 160-170. [CrossRef]

BPMJ 12 2012 0135

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

BPMJ 12 2012 0135

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BPMJ 12 2012 0135

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business Process Management Journal

Influence of resources on maintenance operations with different asset monitoring

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Peter D. Ball and Ashutosh Tiwari

Business Process Management

2.1 The drivers to adopt product monitoring levels 197

2.2 Maintenance approaches

TPM is a maintenance management philosophy which was established by Japanese

2.3 Simulation applications in maintenance

4.1 Results and analysis

Piscataway, NJ, pp. 1811-1819. 209

(special issue on e-maintenance). 211

212 Industry, Vol. 63 No. 7, pp. 669-679.

About the authors

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

You might also like