Article 3 - Joint Optimal Inventory Control and Preventive Maintenance Policy

This article was downloaded by: [Inria Lorraine]
On: 25 September 2008

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 789543219]
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Production Research

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713696255
Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance policy

N. Rezg a; S. Dellagi a; A. Chelbi b
a
Universit de Metz, Metz, France b cole Suprieure des Sciences et Techniques de Tunis, Tunisia
Online Publication Date: 01 October 2008
To cite this Article Rezg, N., Dellagi, S. and Chelbi, A.(2008)'Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance
policy',International Journal of Production Research,46:19,5349 5365
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00207540802273942
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207540802273942
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 46, No. 19, 1 October 2008, 53495365
Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance policy
N. REZG*y, S. DELLAGIy and A. CHELBIz
yUniversite de Metz, Metz, France

zEcole Superieure des Sciences et Techniques de Tunis, Tunisia
(Revision received April 2008)
This paper investigates an integrated strategy of inventory control and preventive

maintenance for a randomly failing production unit subject to a minimum
required availability level. The production unit is submitted to a maintenance
Downloaded By: [Inria Lorraine] At: 08:40 25 September 2008
action as soon as it reaches a certain age m or at failure, whichever occurs Erst.

A buffer stock h is built up at time A from the start of a production cycle in order
to allow a continuous supply of the subsequent production unit at a constant rate
during repair and preventive maintenance actions whose respective durations are
random. A mathematical model and a numerical procedure are developed to find
simultaneously the optimal values of the three decision variables (m*, h*, A*)
which minimize the total average cost per time unit and satisfy the availability
constraint.
Keywords: Inventory control; Preventive maintenance; Availability
1. Introduction
Production unit failures are considered as an important source of disturbance and

loss of productivity, particularly in a just-in-time manufacturing context. High
availability levels must be guaranteed in order to provide the production units with
the required effective capacity. Implementing preventive maintenance policies
represents the favoured means to reach this objective. However, the deployment of
maintenance actions often requires the complete stopping of the maintained
production units. To minimize the impact of these stops on the production system
global performance, the maintenance and production control policies should be
concurrently considered.
The simultaneous consideration of maintenance policies and production planning
and control has recently become an important research area. The effect of
maintenance policies on just-in-time production systems has been studied by
Abdelnour et al. (1995). Some studies have examined the conditions of building
buffer stocks to guarantee the continuous supply of the subsequent production unit
during the interruptions of service due to repair or preventive maintenance. Van der
Duyn Schouen and Vanneste (1995) proposed two machines and one buffer between
*Corresponding author. Email: nrezg@loria.fr
International Journal of Production Research

ISSN 00207543 print/ISSN 1366588X online 2008 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/00207540802273942
5350 N. Rezg et al.
them, a preventive maintenance policy based not only on the age of the machine but
also on the size of the buffer, which are both used to determine when to perform a
preventive maintenance action. Meller and Kim (1996) studied the impact of a
preventive maintenance policy on a two-machine system with Exed-capacity buffer
between the machines. They suppose in their model that machine failure rates are
constant and that repair time is exponentially distributed and preventive
maintenance actions known and of constant duration. Chan (2001) developed a
simulation model to evaluate the performance of a production line in the presence
of several maintenance strategies. Rempelmeier (2001) considered the performance
evaluation of a non-homogeneous production system taking into account the
maintenance parameters and the quality of the manufactured products. Chelbi and
Ait-Kadi (2004) developed an analytical model to determine both the buffer stock
size and the preventive maintenance period for an unreliable production unit which is
submitted to regular preventive maintenance of random duration.
Other related works appearing in the literature include Groenvelt et al. (1992a, b)
which studied buffer sizing under the constraint of machine breakdowns. In the same
context, Cheung and Hausmann (1997) proposed through their study a simultaneous
optimization of strategic stock and an age-based maintenance policy. Gharbi and
Kenne (2000) and Kenne and Gharbi (2001) studied the optimal flow control for a
manufacturing system subject to random failures, repair and preventive main-
tenance. Recently, Chelbi and Rezg (2006) developed an integrated model of
production and inventory for a randomly failing system subjected to a minimum
required availability level.
The present study focuses on a joint policy of maintenance and inventory control
for a repairable production unit subject to random failures, which supplies input to a
subsequent unit operating according to a just-in-time configuration. The production
unit is submitted to a maintenance action as soon as it reaches a certain age m or at
failure, whichever occurs first. According to the proposed strategy, a buffer stock h is
built-up at the maximum production rate at time A from the start of a production
cycle, and not from the beginning of the cycle as is commonly supposed in the related
literature. This buffer is developed to hedge against potential future capacity
shortage during repair or planned maintenance actions whose respective durations
are random. Once the inventory level reaches h, the exact amount should be
produced to satisfy the demand.
We develop a mathematical model which considers simultaneously the three
following decision variables: the threshold inventory level h, the preventive
maintenance critical age m and the inventory build-up start time A. The objective
being to minimize the total expected cost per time unit including maintenance and
inventory related costs, under the constraint of a minimum required stationary
availability level of the production unit. We also propose a numerical procedure to
generate the optimal values of the decision variables for any given set of input
parameters.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the working
assumptions and the notation used. Section 3 is dedicated to the development of
the mathematical model. Section 4 presents the implemented numerical algorithm.
A numerical example is studied in section 5. Some concluding remarks and
indications about possible extensions to this work are provided in section 6.
Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance policy 5351
2. Working assumptions and notation
We are interested in a production system composed of one randomly failing machine

which supplies a subsequent unit with a single product. The demand rate d is
constant. The machine has a maximum production rate Umax with Umax4d. A buffer
stock is built up to allow the continuous supply during repair following failures and
during the execution of planned preventive maintenance actions (figure 1).
Considering A as the time at which the buildup of the buffer stock starts from the
beginning of a production cycle, and s(t) as the inventory level at instant t, the
production control policy is as follows:
8
<d t5A
Production rate Umax t A and st5h
:
d t A and st h:
The maintenance policy consists of submitting the machine to a preventive
maintenance action as soon as it reaches a certain age m or at failure; whichever

occurs Erst. Each maintenance action restores the machine to a state as good as new.
We define as the accumulation rate, equal to the difference between the buffers
input and output rates.
The inventory level evolution during a production cycle goes through four phases
as shown in figure 2.
Phase I production corresponds to demand; i.e. 0. Phase II stands for the
buffer build-up period, i.e. Umax d. Phase III is the saturation period in which
s(t) is kept at level h and the production rate is equal to d, i.e. 0. Phase IV
corresponds to a maintenance action during which production is stopped and
demand is satisfied from the buffer stock, i.e. d. A loss is incurred if the
maintenance time exceeds h/d.
d
Machine
Figure 1. The considered production system.
stock s(t) Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV

d =0
h
d =Umaxd
= d
0 d =0
A Loss Time
TBM TTR
Tcyc
Figure 2. The inventory level evolution during a production cycle.

5352 N. Rezg et al.
The production cycle Tcyc is divided into two periods: a working period, TBM,
before the start of a maintenance action (preventive or corrective), and a
maintenance period, TTR.
Our objective is to simultaneously determine the age m at which preventive
maintenance must be performed, the size of the buffer stock h, and the instant at
which its build-up should start, so as to operate at minimum cost per time unit over
an infinite horizon and meet concurrently the minimum required stationary
availability level.
All costs related to maintenance and inventory are supposed to be known and
constant. The following notation will also be used throughout the model.
Cs Holding cost of a product unit during a unit of time.
Cl Loss cost due to an unsatisfied demand of one produced item during
a unit of time.
Cpm Preventive maintenance action cost.
Ccm Corrective maintenance action cost.
f(t) Probability density function associated to the machine time to failure.

F(t) Probability distribution function associated to the machine time to
failure.
R(t) Reliability function associated to the machine, R(t) 1 F(t).
r(t) Machine instantaneous failure rate function.
Machine average time to failure.
Instant of failure of the machine.
gp(t) Probability density function associated to the duration of a preventive
maintenance action.
gc(t) Probability density function associated to the duration of a corrective
maintenance action.
CT(A, m, h) The total average cost per time unit over an infinite horizon as a
function of the three decision variables.
We also consider that failures are detected instantaneously, the produced items
are imperishable with time and all the resources needed to perform the maintenance
actions are available at the right time.
3. The mathematical model
3.1 The maintenance cost model

The maintenance strategy under consideration is the well known age-based
preventive maintenance policy (Barlow and Proschan 1965). The corresponding
total expected cost per time unit is given by:
Ccm Fm Cpm Rm
m R m 1
0 Rudu p Rm c Fm
where p and c stand respectively for the average duration of preventive and
corrective maintenance actions. It is also well known that if the maintained system
has an increasing failure rate, there is a finite and unique optimal strategy m* which
minimizes (m).
3.2 Inventory control cost model

In order to develop the inventory control cost model, let us consider all possible
scenarios which may take place during a production cycle of length Tcyc. We assume
that the buffer stock level is equal to zero at the beginning of each cycle.
3.2.1 Scenario s1. The first scenario, s1, is represented by figure 3. It characterizes a
production cycle with no maintenance action before the start of the buffer stock
building-up period (phase II in figure 2), and without loss.
This means that: TBM4A and (TBM A)(Umax d) h (i.e. the buffer stock
level h is reached) and TTR h/d (i.e. the system downtime period TTR is shorter
than the period h/d of consumption of the buffer).
The corresponding inventory cost Ls1 (A, h) can be written as follows:
Cs h2 dTTR2 Umax d2 TTR2
Ls1 A, h TTR TBM ACs h : 2
2Umax d
This result is obtained by multiplying the unitary inventory cost Cs by the area of
the surface delimited by K1 K2 K3 K4 K5 (see figure 3).
Hence, the mean inventory cost E(Ls1(A, h) is given by:
ELs1 A, h ETTR ETBM ACs h

Cs h2 dE TTR2 Umax d2 E TTR2 3
:
2Umax d
with
Zm
ETBM Rtdt
0
ETTR d
where d p Rm c Fm:
Let us now express the probability of occurrence of scenario s1. To do so, we
define the two following indicator functions:

1 if m4A
indm4A
0 if m A
(
h 1 if m Umaxh d A
indm A :
Umax d 0 if m5 Umaxh d A
s(t)
K2 d=0 K3
h d= d
d = Umaxd K4 A
0 d =0 A
K1 tS t* K5
TTR Time
TBM
Tcyc
Figure 3. Scenario s1.

5354 N. Rezg et al.
The probability of occurrence of scenario s1 is given by:

h h h
Ps1 indm4A ind m A P A Gd
Umax d Umax d d

h h h
Ps1 indm4A ind m A R A Gd
Umax d Umax d d
4
with
Zh=d
h
Gd gd udu
d
0
where gd u gp u Rm gc u Fm:
3.2.2 Scenario s2. The second scenario, s2, is represented by figure 4. It

characterizes a production cycle with no maintenance action before the start of
the buffer stock building-up period (phase II in figure 2) but with loss at the end of
phase IV.
This means that:
TBM4A and TBM AUmax d h
(i.e. the buffer stock level h is reached) and TTR 4 h/d (i.e. the system downtime
period TTR is longer than the period h/d of consumption of the buffer).
For this scenario, the inventory cost Ls2(A, h) can be written as:
CS Umax 2d 2
Ls2 A, h h Cs TBM A Cl h Cl dTTR: 5
2dUmax d
This expression is obtained by summing up the inventory holding cost (Cs As)
and the loss cost (Nl Cl), where As corresponds to the area of the surface delimited
by K1 K2 K3 K4 (see figure 4) and Nl corresponds to the unsatisfied demand during
the period (TTR h/d).
The mean inventory cost E(Ls2(A, h)) is then expressed by:
CS Umax 2d 2
ELs2 A, h h CS ETBM A Cl h Cl dETTR 6
2dUmax d
s(t)
K2 d =0 K3
h
d = Umaxd d = d
0 d =0 A K4 A Time
K1 ts t* Loss
TBM TTR
Tcyc

with
Zm
ETBM Rtdt
0
ETTR d
where d p Rm c Fm:
The probability of occurrence of this scenario s2 is given by:

h
Ps2 indm4A ind m A
Umax d

h h
P A 1 Gd
Umax d d
7
h
Ps2 indm4A ind m A
Umax d

h h
R A 1 Gd
Umax d d
with
Zh=d
h
Gd gd udu
d
0
where gd u gp u Rm gc u Fm:
3.2.3 Scenario s3. The third scenario, s3, is represented by figure 5. It characterizes
a production cycle with a maintenance action taking place during the buffer
building-up period (phase II in figure 2), and without loss. Note that, unlike most of
the inventory control analytical models developed in the literature, we consider that
failure and maintenance actions may take place during the buffer stock building-up
period.
According to this scenario, we have TBM4and (TBM A)(Umax d)5h and
TTR {s[E(TBM)]}/d.
s[E(TBM)] represents the inventory level reached at the start of a preventive or
corrective maintenance action.
s(t)
h
s(TBM) d =Umaxd d = d A
0 d =0 A
t* Time
TBM TTR
Tcyc

5356 N. Rezg et al.
The inventory cost Ls3(A) corresponding to scenario s4 is expressed as follows:
Ls3 A TTR TBM A Cs sTBM

Cs sTBM2 dTTR2 Umax d2 TTR2 8

2Umax d
with
sTBM TBM AUmax d:

The corresponding expression of the mean inventory cost is:
ELs3 A d ETBM A Cs sETBM

Cs sETBM2 dE TTR2 Umax d 2 E TTR2 9

2Umax d
with
sETBM ETBM AUmax d

Z m
Rtdt A Umax d
0
d p Rm c Fm:
Ps3 indm4A P4A

0 1
ind m Umaxh d A P Umaxh d A
@1 AGd sETBM
P4A d
Ps3 indm4A RA
0 1
ind m Umaxh d A R Umaxh d A
@ A sETBM
1 Gd
RA d
10
with
Z =d
sETBM
sETBM
Gd gd udu
d
0
where
gd u gp u Rm gc u Fm
and
0m 1
Z
sETBM ETBM AUmax d @ Rtdt AAUmax d:
0
3.2.4 Scenario s4. The fourth scenario, s4, is represented in figure 6. It characterizes
a production cycle with a maintenance action performed during the buffer building-
up period (phase II in figure 2), and with loss.
According to this scenario, we have TBM 4 A and (TBM A)(Umax d)5h and
TTR4{s[E(TBM)]}/d.
The inventory cost Ls4(A) corresponding to scenario s4 can be written as:

Cs sTBM2 Cs TBM A
Ls4 A Cl sTBM Cl dTTR: 11
2d 2
The corresponding expression of the mean inventory cost is

Cs sETBM2 Cs ETBM A
ELS4 A Cl
2d 2 12
sETBM Cl dd
with
sETBM ETBM AUmax d

0m 1
Z
@ Rtdt AAUmax d
0
d p Rm c Fm:
Ps4 indm4A P4A

0 1
ind m Umaxh d A P Umaxh d A
@ A sETBM
1 1 Gd
P4A d
Ps4 indm4A RA
0 1
ind m Umaxh d A R Umaxh d A
@ A sETBM
1 1 Gd
RA d
13
s(t)
h
s(TBM)
d = Umaxd
d = d Time
d =0 A A
t* t** Loss
TTR
Tcyc

5358 N. Rezg et al.
with
Z =d
sETBM
sETBM
Gd gd udu
d
0
where
gd u gp u Rm gc u Fm
and
sETBM ETBM AUmax d

0m 1
Z
@ Rtdt AAUmax d:
0
3.2.5 Scenario s5. The fifth scenario, s5 (see figure 7), corresponds to a production
cycle with a maintenance action taking place before the start of the buffer building-
up (during phase I of figure 2).
In this case, we have TBM A. The inventory cost Ls5(A) is restricted only to the
incurred loss:
Ls5 A Cl dTTR: 14
The corresponding expression of the mean inventory cost is:
ELs5 Cl dd 15
where d p Rm c Fm:
Ps5 1 Pm4AP4A 1 indm4ARA: 16
Finally, given the five possible scenarios described above, it can easily be shown
that:
X
5
Psi 1 8m, A, h
i1
s(t)
Phase I
A
0 d =0
d = d Time
TBM TTR

3.2.6 The total expected inventory cost. Taking into account the probabilities of
occurrence of each scenario and the expressions of the corresponding average
inventory cost, the total average inventory cost, (A, h, m), can now be expressed as
follows:
X 5
A, h, m Psi ELsi : 17
i1
The average total inventory cost per time unit, A, h, m, over an infinite horizon
can be written as:
A, h, m
A, h, m 18
E Tcyc
where
Z m

E Tcyc Rudu d 19
0
with d p Rm c Fm:
3.3 The expression of the average total cost per time unit
The total average cost per time unit is the sum of the unitary costs related to
maintenance and to inventory control as they have been developed in this section.
This total expected cost is expressed as a function of the three decision variables m, h
and A:
CTm, A, h A, h, m m: 20
Using equations (1), (17), (18) and (19):
P
5
Psi ELsi Ccm Fm Cpm Rm
CTm, A, h i1
Rm : 21
0 Rudu p Rm c Fm
Our objective consists of finding the optimal values of the decision variables
which minimize the total average cost per time unit under the constraint of a
minimum required stationary availability level K.
The stationary availability of the production unit submitted to an age based
preventive maintenance policy is given by:
Rm
0 Rudu
SAm R m : 22
0 Rudu p Rm c Fm
It has been proven (Ait-Kadi and Chelbi 2000) that for systems with increasing
failure rates (for which preventive maintenance is generally recommended), the
stationary availability function is concave in m, which means that it has a unique
maximum as shown in figure 8:
Hence, we obtain for a given situation, the following non linear optimization
problem:
Minimize Z CTm, A, h
Subject to : SAm K

With m, A, h 2 < < N :
5360 N. Rezg et al.
SA(m)
1/1+(mc mp)
r(m*)
m/m+mc
m* Age m
Figure 8. The stationary availability for an age-based preventive maintenance policy (case of
increasing failure rate).
4. Solving numerical algorithm

Considering the behaviour of the stationary availability function (section 3.3,

equation (22)), especially the concavity in case of equipment with increasing failure
rate, one should first determine the time interval [m1, m2], if it exists, for which the
availability constraint is satisfied. To do so, the following cases must be taken
into account depending on the value of the minimum required availability level K
(see figure 9):
Case1 : K 2 0, SA1 ) m1 , m2 mk , 1

Case2 : K 2 SA1, SA ) m1 , m2 mi , mj
Case3 : K 2 SA , 1 ) m1 , m2 does not exist
with SA* representing the maximum availability level and

SA1 lim SAm :
m!1 c
An iterative numerical procedure has been developed in order to firstly determine
the time interval [m1, m2], and then generate the optimal values m* 2 [m1, m2], A* and
h* which minimize the total average cost per time unit CT(A, m, h) as given by
equation (21).
Figure 10 shows the whole solving procedure.
This procedure has been implemented using MATLAB software. Section 5 will
show the obtained results for a given numerical example with arbitrarily chosen
input data.
5. Numerical example
The following input data were used to illustrate our approach to find the best
strategy.
. Costs (in monetary units): Cs 2, Cl 250, Ccm 2000, Cpm 300.
. Demand: d 0.5 unit/time unit.
Figure 9. Existence of time intervals for which the availability constraint K can be satisfied.
. Maximal production capacity: Umax 1 unit/time unit.

. Production unit time to failure distribution F(t): Weibull distribution with
shape parameter 2 and scale parameter 100, leading to an average lifetime
88.6 time units. We have an increasing failure rate in this case.
. Repair time distribution gc(t): Lognormal distribution with mean c 50
time units and standard deviation c 2 time units.
. Preventive maintenance duration distribution gp(t): Lognormal distribution
with mean p 10 time units and standard deviation p 1.5 time units.
. Minimum required availability level: K 70%.
Applying the numerical algorithm described in section 4, we obtain the following:
The time interval for which the availability constraint K 70% is satisfied is
[m1, m2] [37, 72].
The optimal strategy corresponds to the following values shown in table 1.
Figure 11 shows the evolution of the total expected cost per time unit as a
function of A and m for m 2 [37, 72].
Figure 12 shows the evolution of the total average cost per time unit as a function
of A for m* 37.
The obtained optimal values correspond to the following probabilities of
occurrence of each of the scenarios analysed in the mathematical model (table 2).
Table 2 shows that only scenarios s3, s4 and s5 are possible with the optimal
combination found. These are the three scenarios for which the buffer stock level h
cannot be reached, this explains the fact that the optimal solution is in terms of m*
and A* only. The most likely scenario (s3) is a scenario without loss of demand
consisting in the buffer stock building-up operation being interrupted at failure, to
perform a corrective maintenance or at instant m 37 time units, to perform a
preventive maintenance, whichever occurs first.
5362 N. Rezg et al.
Input data: Cs, Cl, Ccm, Cpm, d, , c, p,

Umax, f(.), gc(.), gp(.), K, n, i = 1
Compute
SA(+) = m
m + mc
SA* = max(SA)
No solution. Yes
(The availability constraint K[SA*, 1]
can not be satisfied) (Case 3)
No
(case 1)
Find m1 = SA1 (K) No
m K[SA(+), SA*]
m2 = min SA1 (Case 2)
m +mc
Yes
Find m1 and m2 solution of:

SA(m) = K
=(m2m1)/n
mj=m1 + i
Find CTi(Ai*, hi*, mj) = Min CT(A, h, mj)

i =i+ 1 Store CTi(Ai*, hi*, mj)
Yes
in
No
Chose CT(A, h, m) =Min CTi(Ai*, hi*,

mj) for i= 1, 2, . , n
Figure 10. Numerical algorithm to find the optimal strategy.

Table 1. Optimal values of the decision variables.
m* A* CT* (monetary units/

(time units) (time units) time unit)
37 21.93 14.28
Figure 11. Total average cost per time unit as a function of A and m for m 2 [37, 72].
Figure 12. The evolution of the total average cost per time unit as function of A for m* 37.
Table 2. Probability of occurrence of each scenario corresponding to the

optimal policy.
Ps1 0 Ps2 0 Ps3 0.83 Ps4 0.13 Ps5 0.04
5364 N. Rezg et al.
Table 3. Optimal values of the decision variables with Cs 1.
m* A* CT* (monetary units/

(time units) (time units) h* time unit)
50 5.9 22 10.71
Table 4. Probability of occurrence of each scenario corresponding to the

optimal policy for Cs 1.
Ps1 0.60 Ps2 0.17 Ps3 0.17 Ps4 0.05 Ps5 0.01
Thus, the obtained optimal strategy consists globally, over a production cycle, in
waiting 21.93 time units before starting to build a buffer stock, keep on building the
buffer until instant m 37 time units (perform a preventive maintenance) or until
failure occurs (perform a corrective maintenance). However, it remains a small

probability (Ps5 0.04) that failure occurs before the start of building the buffer
stock (instant A 21.93 time units), in this case perform a corrective maintenance
and start a new production cycle.
Let us suppose, for example, that the unitary holding cost is reduced to half of its
initial value (Cs one instead of two monetary units). Applying the numerical
procedure while keeping all the other considered input parameters at their initial
values, we obtain the following optimal strategy:
The corresponding time interval for which the availability constraint K 70% is
satisfied is [m1, m2] [37, 72].
The obtained optimal values correspond to the following probabilities of
occurrence of each of the scenarios analysed in the mathematical model (table 4).
Table 4 shows that all scenarios are possible with the optimal combination found.
The most probable scenario (s1) is a scenario without loss of demand consisting of
the buffer stock building-up until reaching the optimal level h 22 product units.
Once this level is reached, the machine produces at a rate d to satisfy the demand
until instant m 50 time units, to perform a preventive maintenance, or until failure,
whichever occurs first.
Comparing the optimal strategies obtained respectively for the cases Cs 2 and
Cs 1, it is interesting to notice that when the holding cost decreases, the best
solution is to start building the buffer stock earlier (A 5, 95A 21, 93). The
optimal buffer stock level may then be reached while it was not possible to reach it in
the first case (Ps1 Ps2 0). And finally this reduction of the unitary holding cost
has concurrently affected the time for preventive maintenance by delaying it from 37
to 50 time units.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, we have presented a mathematical model and a numerical procedure

which allow determining a joint optimal inventory control and age-based preventive
maintenance policy for a randomly failing production system.
For given production capacity, downstream demand, maintenance and inventory

costs, machine time to failure distribution, and maintenance actions duration
probability distributions, the decision maker is provided with a decision tool which
helps him to decide simultaneously when to start building-up a buffer stock, what the
size of this buffer should be and at which instant the machine should be stopped for
preventive maintenance, so as to operate at a minimum total average cost per time
unit while respecting a minimum required stationary availability level.
A numerical example has been studied to test the proposed solving procedure.
An optimal solution was generated and interpreted.
One of the extensions of this work currently under consideration is the study of
the same joint strategy in a context of a stochastic demand.
References
Abdelnour, G., Duddek, R.A. and Smith, M., Effect of maintenance policies on just-in- time
production system. Int. J. Prod. Res., 1995, 33, 565585.
Ait-Kadi, D. and Chelbi, A., Periodic replacement strategies for availability maximization, in
International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Osaka,
Japan, November (2000), 25132520.
Barlow, R.E. and Proschan, F., Mathematical Theory of Reliability, pp. 108117, 1965 (John
Wiley & Sons: New York).
Chan, F.T.S., Simulation analysis of maintenance policies in a flow line production system.
Int. J. Comput. Applic. Tech., 2000, 14(13), 7886.
Chelbi, A. and Rezg, N., Analysis of a production/inventory system with randomly failing
production unit subjected to a minimum required availability level. Int. J. Prod. Econ.,
2006, 99, 131143.
Chelbi, A. and Ait-Kadi, D., Analysis of a production/inventory system with randomly failing
production unit submitted to regular preventive maintenance. Euro. J. Oper. Res., 2004,
156(3), 712718.
Cheung, K.L. and Hausmann, H.W., Joint determination of preventive maintenance and
safety stocks in an unreliable production environment. Naval Res. Logist., 1997, 44,
257272.
Gharbi, A. and Kenne, J.P., Production and preventive maintenance rates control for a
manufacturing system: An experimental design approach. Int. J. Prod. Econ., 2000, 65,
275287.
Groenevelt, H., Pintelon, L. and Seidmann, A., Production lot sizing with machine
breakdowns. Man. Sci., 1992a, 38(1), 104123.
Groenevelt, H., Pintelon, L. and Seidmann, A., Production batching with machine
breakdowns and safety stocks. Oper. Res., 1992b, 40(5), 959971.
Kenne, J.P. and Gharbi, A., A simulation optimization approach in production planning of
failure prone manufacturing systems. J. Intel. Manuf., 2001, 12(5/6), 421431.
Meller, R.D. and Kim, D.S., The impact of preventive maintenance on system cost and buffer
size. Euro. J. Oper. Res., 1996, 95, 577591.
Rempelmeier, H., Performance evaluation of unbalanced flow lines with general distributed
processing times, failures and imperfect production. IIE Trans., 2001, 33(4), 293302.
Van der Duyn Schouen, F.A. and Vanneste, S.G., Maintenance optimization of a production
system with buffer capacity. Euro. J. Oper. Res., 1995, 82(2), 323338.

Article 3 - Joint Optimal Inventory Control and Preventive Maintenance Policy

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Article 3 - Joint Optimal Inventory Control and Preventive Maintenance Policy

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

This article was downloaded by: [Inria Lorraine]

On: 25 September 2008

International Journal of Production Research

Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance policy

Online Publication Date: 01 October 2008

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

Joint optimal inventory control and preventive maintenance policy

N. REZG*y, S. DELLAGIy and A. CHELBIz

yUniversite de Metz, Metz, France

(Revision received April 2008)

This paper investigates an integrated strategy of inventory control and preventive

action as soon as it reaches a certain age m or at failure, whichever occurs Erst.

Keywords: Inventory control; Preventive maintenance; Availability

Production unit failures are considered as an important source of disturbance and

*Corresponding author. Email: nrezg@loria.fr

International Journal of Production Research

2. Working assumptions and notation

We are interested in a production system composed of one randomly failing machine

maintenance action as soon as it reaches a certain age m or at failure; whichever

Figure 1. The considered production system.

stock s(t) Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV

Figure 2. The inventory level evolution during a production cycle.

f(t) Probability density function associated to the machine time to failure.

3. The mathematical model

3.1 The maintenance cost model

3.2 Inventory control cost model

Figure 3. Scenario s1.

The probability of occurrence of scenario s1 is given by:

3.2.2 Scenario s2. The second scenario, s2, is represented by figure 4. It

Figure 4. Scenario s2.

Figure 5. Scenario s3.

The inventory cost Ls3(A) corresponding to scenario s4 is expressed as follows:

Ls3 A TTR TBM A Cs sTBM

sTBM TBM AUmax d:

ELs3 A d ETBM A Cs sETBM

sETBM ETBM AUmax d

The probability of occurrence of this scenario s3 is given by:

Ps3 indm4A  P4A

sETBM ETBM AUmax d

Ps4 indm4A  P4A

Figure 6. Scenario s4.

sETBM ETBM AUmax d

Ps5 1 Pm4AP4A 1 indm4ARA: 16

Figure 7. Scenario s5.

4. Solving numerical algorithm

Considering the behaviour of the stationary availability function (section 3.3,

. Maximal production capacity: Umax 1 unit/time unit.

Input data: Cs, Cl, Ccm, Cpm, d, , c, p,

Find m1 and m2 solution of:

Find CTi(Ai*, hi*, mj) = Min CT(A, h, mj)

Chose CT(A, h, m) =Min CTi(Ai*, hi*,

Figure 10. Numerical algorithm to find the optimal strategy.

Table 1. Optimal values of the decision variables.

m* A* CT* (monetary units/

Table 2. Probability of occurrence of each scenario corresponding to the

Table 3. Optimal values of the decision variables with Cs 1.

m* A* CT* (monetary units/

Table 4. Probability of occurrence of each scenario corresponding to the

failure occurs (perform a corrective maintenance). However, it remains a small

In this paper, we have presented a mathematical model and a numerical procedure

For given production capacity, downstream demand, maintenance and inventory

Anda mungkin juga menyukai

Ps3 indm4A P4A

Ps4 indm4A P4A

Find CTi(Ai, hi, mj) = Min CT(A, h, mj)

Chose CT(A, h, m) =Min CTi(Ai, hi,