2015
DOI: 10.1155/2015/728241
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling Spare Parts Demands Forecast under Two-Dimensional Preventive Maintenance Policy

Abstract: In maintenance practice, there is such a situation where the spare parts replacement should be carried out at the scheduling time of calendar or usage for whichever comes first. The issue of two-dimensional preventive maintenance usually was not addressed by traditional methods, and at present, few studies were focused on this very topic. Based on these considerations, this paper presented the two-dimensional preventive policy where replacements of spare parts are based on both calendar time and usage time. A … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…x x x Deshpande et al (2006) x x x Hua et al (2007) (H) Hong et al (2008) x 2012x x Lanza et al (2009) x x x x Jalil et al 2011x x (H) x Minner 2011x x x Wang & Syntetos (2011) x x x Barabadi (2012) x x Romeijnders et al 2012(H) Hong & Meeker (2013) x x x Barabadi et al (2014) x x x x Hellingrath & Cordes (2014) x x x Chou et al (2015) x x x x x Hu et al (2015) x x x Kontrec et al (2015) x x x Lu & Wang (2015) x x x x Gharahasanlou et al (2016) x x x x Chou et al (2016) x Kim et al (2017) x x x x Kontrec & Stefan (2017) x x x Qarahasanlou et al (2017) x x x x Si et al (2017) x Stormi et al (2018) x x x (H) Fortuin (1984) Linear growth function Yamashina (1989) Time dependent sales rate / Lump production Jin & Liao (2009) Homogeneous Poisson Process Minner 2011Logistic growth function Jin & Tian (2012) Homogeneous Poisson Process Liu & Tang (2016) Deterministic Table 7: Assumptions on the distribution of the new sales…”
Section: Papersmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…x x x Deshpande et al (2006) x x x Hua et al (2007) (H) Hong et al (2008) x 2012x x Lanza et al (2009) x x x x Jalil et al 2011x x (H) x Minner 2011x x x Wang & Syntetos (2011) x x x Barabadi (2012) x x Romeijnders et al 2012(H) Hong & Meeker (2013) x x x Barabadi et al (2014) x x x x Hellingrath & Cordes (2014) x x x Chou et al (2015) x x x x x Hu et al (2015) x x x Kontrec et al (2015) x x x Lu & Wang (2015) x x x x Gharahasanlou et al (2016) x x x x Chou et al (2016) x Kim et al (2017) x x x x Kontrec & Stefan (2017) x x x Qarahasanlou et al (2017) x x x x Si et al (2017) x Stormi et al (2018) x x x (H) Fortuin (1984) Linear growth function Yamashina (1989) Time dependent sales rate / Lump production Jin & Liao (2009) Homogeneous Poisson Process Minner 2011Logistic growth function Jin & Tian (2012) Homogeneous Poisson Process Liu & Tang (2016) Deterministic Table 7: Assumptions on the distribution of the new sales…”
Section: Papersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results / comparison Ritchie & Wilcox (1977) Case study Good graphical fit with real demand Fortuin (1984) Case study 25% stock reduction / current policy Ghodrati & Kumar (2005b) Case study Difference in forecasted demand of 20% / covariates not included Ghodrati & Kumar (2005a) Case study Difference in forecasted demand of 40% / covariates not included Deshpande et al (2006) Empirical study Average inventory cost reduction of 20% / exogenous lead time demand Ghodrati et al (2007) Case study Greater economical/production losses for noninclusion of covariates Hua et al (2007) Case study Lower error ratio, percentage error / SES, CR, bootstrapping Hong et al (2008) Graphical analysis Better fit with real demand / Ritchie & Wilcox (1977) Jin & Liao (2009 Numerical example Inventory control system is sensitive to time-tofailure distribution Ghodrati (2011) Sensitivity analysis Exp. time-to-failure distribution more affected by covariates than Weibull Jalil et al 2011Case study Cost improvement of 1-16% for small and 1-58% for large installed base / current policy Minner 2011Simulation Average inventory reduction of 50% / SES Wang & Syntetos 2011Simulation Reduced MAD / SBA Barabadi (2012) Case study Influence of time-dependence of covariates on spare part demand Ghodrati et al (2012) Implementation Less downtime and increased efficiency when considering covariates Jin & Tian (2012) Simulation Validation of the method Romeijnders et al (2012) Case study MSE and MAD reduced up to 20% / CR, SES, Moving Average (MA), TSB Hong & Meeker (2013) Simulation Reduced MSE when applying use-rate data Barabadi et al (2014) Case study hazard rate up to 1.8 times higher in different operating conditions Hellingrath & Cordes (2014) Case study Reduced forecast error / SBA Chou et al (2015) Case study MAD improves 16% / other regression models Hu et al (2015) Case study Influence of usage rates on spare part demand Kontrec et al (2015) Case study No validation/evaluation Lu & Wang (2015) Simulation No significant difference / simulated demand data Chou et al (2016) Case study MAD improvements of ...…”
Section: Papermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Spare parts are common inventory stock items that are required for timely maintenance of industrial plant systems. A recent study [51] shows that the operational and maintenance support costs in a typical industrial plant account for more than 60% of the overall cost, where the spare parts related costs alone account for about 25% to 30%. This clearly indicates that better operations management of spare parts is required and has an important role in the availability of the plant at an optimal cost.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With its help, we can achieve not only the on-time transportations but also lower warehousing costs. Hu [7] presented a two-dimensional preventive policy where replacements of objects were determined based on both calendar and usage times. Besides the common short-term prediction, Mei [8] proposed a method for long-term volatility predictions.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%