Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:45:52.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inspection and replacement policies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

Dror Zuckerman
Dror Zuckerman*
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University
*
∗Present address: Graduate School of Management, MEDS Department, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60201, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we examine a breakdown model in which the system's status can be determined only by a test. Upon detection of failure the system must be replaced by a new identical one. The costs incurred include cost of inspection, operating costs, failure cost and a cost associated with planned replacements. Throughout the paper we restrict attention to replacement rules in which the time interval between two successive inspections is regarded as a fixed quantity. The decision variables include the inspection interval and the scheduling for preventive (planned) replacements. The problem is to specify a replacement rule which minimizes the long-run average cost per unit time. We show that under certain monotone conditions there is a natural candidate for an optimal replacement rule.

Keywords

REPLACEMENT POLICYOPTIMAL POLICYPLANNED REPLACEMENTSTOPPING TIMEINSPECTION POLICY
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Applied Probability , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 1980 , pp. 168 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1980 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Abdel-Hameed, M. S. and Shimi, I. N. (1978) Optimal replacement of damaged devices. J. Appl. Prob. 15, 153–161.Google Scholar
[2] Barlow, R. E. and Proschan, F. (1965) Mathematical Theory of Reliability. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
[3] Bergman, B. (1978) Optimal replacement under a general failure model. Adv. Appl. Prob. 10, 431–451.Google Scholar
[4] Dynkin, E. B. (1965) Markov Processes 1. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
[5] Feldman, R. M. (1976) Optimal replacement with semi-Markov shock models. J. Appl. Prob. 13, 108–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Feldman, R. M. (1977) Optimal replacement for systems governed by Markov additive shock processes. Ann. Prob. 5, 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Kao, E. P. (1973) Optimal replacement rules when changes of state are semi-Markovian. Operat. Res. 21, 1231–1249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Klein, M. (1962) Inspection — maintenance — replacement schedules under Markovian deterioration. Management. Sci. 9, 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Luss, H. (1976) Maintenance policies when deterioration can be observed by inspections. Operat. Res. 24, 359–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Ross, S. M. (1970) Applied Probability Models with Optimization Applications. Holden-Day, San Francisco.Google Scholar
[11] Taylor, H. M. (1975) Optimal replacement under additive damage and other failure models. Naval Res. Logist. Quart. 22, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Zuckerman, D. (1978) Optimal stopping in a semi-Markov shock model. J. Appl. Prob. 15, 629–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Zuckerman, D. (1979) Optimal replacement policy for the case where the damage process is a one-sided Lévy process. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 7, 141–151.Google Scholar