The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm

RELIABILITY PAPER An integrated

fuzzy-AHP
An integrated fuzzy-AHP and and TOPSIS
approach
TOPSIS approach for
maintenance policy selection
Narges Hemmati Received 17 November 2018
Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Revised 4 April 2019
Accepted 16 October 2019
University of Science and Technology of Mazandaran,
Behshahr, The Islamic Republic of Iran
Masoud Rahiminezhad Galankashi
Department of Materials, Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering,
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia and
Department of Industrial Engineering,
Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, The Islamic Republic of Iran
D.M. Imani
Welding and Joining Research Center, School of Industrial Engineering,
Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST),
Tehran, The Islamic Republic of Iran, and
Farimah Mokhatab Rafiei
Department of Industrial Engineering,
Tarbiat Modares University,
Tehran, The Islamic Republic of Iran

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to select the best maintenance policy for different types of equipment
of a manufacturer integrating the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) and the technique for order of
preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) models.
Design/methodology/approach – The decision hierarchy of this research includes three levels.
The first level aims to choose the best maintenance policy for different types of equipment of an acid
manufacturer. These equipment pieces include molten sulfur ponds, boiler, absorption tower, cooling
towers, converter, heat exchanger and sulfur fuel furnace. The second level includes decision criteria of
added-value, risk level and the cost. Lastly, the third level comprises time-based maintenance (TBM),
corrective maintenance (CM), shutdown maintenance and condition-based maintenance (CBM) as four
maintenance policies.
Findings – The best maintenance policy for different types of equipment of a manufacturer is the main
finding of this research. Based on the obtained results, CBM policy is suggested for absorption tower, boiler,
cooling tower and molten sulfur ponds, TBM policy is suggested for converters and heat exchanger and CM
policy is suggested for a sulfur fuel furnace.
Originality/value – This research develops a novel model by integrating FAHP and an interval TOPSIS
with concurrent consideration of added-value, risk level and cost to select the best maintenance policy.
According to the highlights of the previous studies conducted on maintenance policy selection and related
tools and techniques, an operative integrated approach to combine risk, added-value and cost with integrated
fuzzy models is not developed yet. The majority of the previous studies have considered classic fuzzy
approaches such as FAHP, FANP, Fuzzy TOPSIS, etc., which are not completely capable to reflect the
decision makers’ viewpoints. International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management
Keywords FAHP, TOPSIS, MCDM, Fuzzy logic, Maintenance, Maintenance policy selection © Emerald Publishing Limited
0265-671X
Paper type Research paper DOI 10.1108/IJQRM-10-2018-0283
IJQRM 1. Introduction
Growing competition in today’s volatile manufacturing industries has forced manufacturers to
link their activities with quality, efficiency and maintenance practices (Sharabi, 2014).
Consequently, companies aim to attain competitive advantages through cost, service, on-time
deliveries and quality (Luxhøj, 2000; Galankashi et al., 2016; Maletič et al., 2014; Rahiminezhad
Galankashi and Helmi, 2016; Braglia et al., 2013). Currently, manufacturing companies and their
associated industries are under the pressure of globalization competitiveness. So, higher
productivity with minimum production costs can be a proper target to deal with this issue.
Either production cost or productivity is not separated from maintenance-related problems
(Siew-Hong and Kamaruddin, 2012; Ahuja and Khamba, 2008; Lee Cooke, 2000; Bertolini
et al., 2004; You, 2017). According to the previous literature, maintenance costs include about
15–40 percent of the total production costs (Dunn, 1987), or even higher (Maletič et al., 2014).
Companies have acknowledged the necessity of improving their performance and
decreasing their manufacturing costs by appropriate maintenance policies. Numerous factors
should be considered to select an appropriate maintenance policy which make it as a
multiple-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem. With the advent of MCDM tools and
techniques, different models can be applied to select maintenance policies. Although MCDM
techniques have been integrated with maintenance policy selection problem in the previous
literature, two key issues are still less investigated. Primarily, concurrent consideration of
added-value, risk and cost factors, as important issues of manufacturing systems, is less
examined. Furthermore, the developed MCDM models can be integrated to provide more
realistic results. So, differentiating, integrating, quantifying and applying applicable criteria to
choose the most applicable maintenance policy for different types of equipment of
manufacturers is a challenge for engineers, practitioners, managers and scholars. Although the
added-value, risk level and cost are very important factors to be considered in maintenance-
related issues, their concurrent consideration is less examined in the previous literature. In
addition, it is recommended to consider fuzzy environment to improve the decision-making
process. In fact, decision makers desire to make their decisions in fuzzy environments with
regard to its flexibility to use different linguistic variables. However, as a result of the inherent
complications linked with fuzzy logic, the previous literature has focused on classic fuzzy
MCDM techniques and neglected to develop integrated fuzzy approaches which provide more
realistic results. Therefore, developing an integrated fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP)
and interval technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) model
for maintenance policy selection problem is the main aim of this research.
The study scope includes manufacturing companies with an emphasis on acid
production plants. However, the study framework, integrated model, research methodology
and obtained results can be applied in other similar studies on maintenance policy
selections. Regarding the novelty issues, this research develops a novel model by
integrating FAHP and an interval TOPSIS model with concurrent consideration of
added-value, risk level and cost to select the best maintenance policy of manufacturers. The
remainder of this study is organized as follows. A comprehensive review of previous
literature is presented in Section 2. This section is followed by a comprehensive analysis of
research gap. The research methodology of this study and different phases required to
achieve the research objectives are illuminated in Section 3. An introduction on the case
study of the research is discussed in Section 4. This is followed by Section 5 which discusses
the obtained results with regard to main concerns of this research. Lastly, concluding
remarks and future research recommendations are explained in Section 6.

2. Literature review
Manufacturing companies are very important to progress the performance of their related
industry and expansion of the economy of a country. Therefore, higher efficiency with
least manufacturing cost is necessary to attain these long-term goals and preserve the An integrated
competitiveness in the markets. Productivity is not possible without an appropriate fuzzy-AHP
maintenance system (Siew-Hong and Kamaruddin, 2012). The maintenance costs and TOPSIS
are generally high with regard to secondary damage, safety/health threats imposed by
the failure and restoring equipment (Shyjith et al., 2008). Different maintenance policies approach
are considered to minimize these costs. Following discusses the most important
maintenance policies highlighted in the previous literature.
Maintenance policies are ordered into two classes of preventive maintenance (PM) and
corrective maintenance (CM) (Azadeh and Abdolhossein Zadeh, 2016; Endharta and Yun,
2017; Oke and Charles-Owaba, 2006; Shankar and Sahani, 2003). PM comprises actions
intended to progress the total availability and reliability of a system (Ebrahimipour et al.,
2015). In contrast, in CM policy, maintenance is not executed till the occurrence of the
failure (Bashiri et al., 2011). Time-based maintenance (TBM) is developed based on the
bathtub curve (De Moubray, 1991; Arunraj and Maiti, 2010; Azadeh and Abdolhossein
Zadeh, 2016). Condition-Based Maintenance (CBM) is developed according to machine
diagnostic methods in the 1970s (Khan and Haddara, 2003; Luce, 1999; Baek, 2007). In this
policy, anticipatory activities are considered, whereas failures signs are documented by
diagnosis or monitoring. Consequently, using a right timing, it prevents failures if
the diagnostic is appropriately done (Arunraj and Maiti, 2010). Finally, shutdown
maintenance (SM) is performed, whereas the equipment pieces are not in use. This policy
is costly. However, it is the only feasible maintenance technique with regard to the
defective part/machine. Maintenance policy selection is a famous MCDM problem.
Following discusses the conducted studies of this area.
Azadivar and Shu (1999) provided a model to select the maintenance policy of just in time
( JIT) production systems. Numerous programs of JIT systems with a potential contribution in
maintenance planning are investigated in this research. Following, in an initial study in new
century, Bevilacqua and Braglia (2000) applied the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to select
the best maintenance policy among predictive, preventive, corrective, opportunistic and CBM
strategies. In another study, Labib (2004) developed a model for maintenance policy selection.
This study developed an integrated rule-based approach and AHP to achieve the objectives of
the research. With the advent of mathematical modeling, Bertolini and Bevilacqua (2006)
developed a new methodology to describe the best strategies for the maintenance of pumps.
Fuzzy logic is another interesting topic to be integrated with maintenance policy selection.
As an example, Wang et al. (2007) selected the best maintenance policies using an FAHP.
In another example, Ilangkumaran and Kumanan (2009) applied AHP under fuzzy
environment and TOPSIS to select the maintenance policy. In another research, Shyjith et al.
(2008) developed an integrated AHP-TOPSIS model to select the maintenance policy for a
textile industry. As highlighted in this study, the application of MCDM techniques in real case
studies can be beneficial for maintenance policy selection problem. As an example of real
world problem, Carazas and Souza (2010) developed an approach for maintenance policy
selection. As an important factor to be considered, the proposed method considers the risk
analysis concepts. In another risk-based maintenance policy selection, Arunraj and Maiti
(2010) focused on maintenance cost and equipment failure risk. An integrated AHP-goal
programming approach is applied for maintenance policy selection.
With the advent of fuzzy systems and their application in different areas of research,
Bashiri et al. (2011) developed a fuzzy method to choose the best maintenance policy by
quantitative and qualitative data. Usually, there are different people involved in
maintenance policy selection making the problem as a group decision making. As an
example of this concept, Sadeghi and Manesh (2012) investigated the application of fuzzy
group Analytic Network Process (ANP) to choose the best maintenance policy. Maintenance
policy selection has been considered in different industries. As an interesting example,
IJQRM Ding et al. (2014) developed a maintenance policy selection model in the palm oil industry.
The developed model provides precise outcomes within a short time that is appropriate for
operative and short-time decisions. In a recent study, Hemmati et al. (2018) developed a
Fuzzy Analytic Network Process (FANP) approach for maintenance policy selection. Four
maintenance strategies of TBM, CM, SM and CBM were examined in a real-case study.
Following discusses the latest studies on maintenance policy selection.
Lai et al. (2019) optimized the production planning of an inadequate manufacturing
system. The partial backlogging and shortages are allowed in the considered problem,
whereas a hybrid maintenance policy is focused in the case study. Seiti and Hafezalkotob
(2019) developed a fuzzy approach to consider the reliability of the system. This study
considered the error and risk of getting potential significant factors. Furthermore, other
methodologies are established for preventive maintenance. Jaderi et al. (2019) applied
operational flexibility, operational impact, impact on safety and environment and
maintenance cost for risk assessment of the assets failure. Singh et al. (2019) focused on
defective induction motors and the related monetary losses. This research developed an
algorithm to plan the maintenance actions with regard to operational losses. Wijesinghe
and Mallawarachchi (2019) developed significant maintenance performance indicators
applicable for maintenance planning of the apparel industry.
Liu et al. (2019) focused on prognostics information to develop a model for predictive
maintenance planning. This research considered a single-machine scheduling decision to
minimize the expected costs in a real case study. Phogat and Gupta (2019) examined the
relation between maintenance planning and JIT philosophy. According to this research, it
is probable to decrease the inventory level of spare parts and reduce the unnecessary
maintenance activities by JIT principles. Yang et al. (2019) developed a preventive
maintenance model for a single-component system to maximize the generated revenue.
This research has been conducted in a steel convertor company. Yazdi et al. (2019) applied
a maintenance model to enhance the safety performance and components’ reliability of the
facilities. This research integrated fuzzy dynamic risk-based method and optimization
techniques to achieve its objectives. Afzali et al. (2019) developed a new reliability index
model and a methodology to rank different components of the distribution system for
reliability centered maintenance (RCM). Braglia et al. (2019) proposed a maintenance
planning approach to set a new maintenance plan or enhance the current one. In another
recent research, Zhang et al. (2019) developed an opportunistic maintenance policy to be
applied for wind turbines. This research considered spare parts management and
stochastic weather conditions to model the problem. In addition, the Markov chain
model is applied to obtain the maintenance wait time and generate wind speed time series.
Table I shows a summary of previous studies on maintenance policy selection.
According to the highlights of the previous studies conducted on maintenance policy
selection and related tools and techniques, an operative approach to combine risk,
added-value and cost with integrated fuzzy models is not developed yet. The majority of the
previous studies have considered classic fuzzy approaches such as FAHP, FANP, Fuzzy
TOPSIS, etc., which are not completely capable to consider decision makers’ viewpoints. In
addition, there is no similar study to compare the result of developed fuzzy approaches with
classic models and check their performance. Therefore, an integrated developed model is
required to cover the shortages of previous classic models while maintaining their
advantages and providing comparative analysis with regard to the obtained results.
Additionally, a real case study with the major issue of choosing the best maintenance policy
for its equipment is required to check the applicability of the proposed model. Hence,
considering all these issues in maintenance policy selection problem is a critical assistance
for engineers, practitioners, managers and scholars as it provides more realistic results.
Hence, to fill the gap of previous studies, this study develops an integrated FAHP-interval
 Bibliography information Considered criteria Considered policies Applied model
No. Author Year Cost Risk Added-value Other CM TBM CBM SM MCDM Fuzzy logic Integrated models

1 Azadivar and Shu 1999 | × | | × | × × × × ×

2 Bevilacqua and Braglia 2000 | × | | | × | × | × ×
3 Al-Najjar and Alsyouf 2003 | | × | × × | × | | |
4 Labib 2004 × × × | × × | × | | |
5 Bertolini and Bevilacqua 2006 × × × | | × × × | × |
6 Wang et al. 2007 | × | | | | | × | | ×
7 Shyjith et al. 2008 | × × | × × | × | × |
8 Ilangkumaran and Kumanan 2009 | × × | × × | × | | |
9 Carazas and Souza 2010 | | × × × × × × × × |
10 Arunraj and Maiti 2010 | | × × | | | | | × |
11 Bashiri et al. 2011 | × × | | | | × × | |
12 Durán 2011 × × × | × × × × | | ×
13 Kumar and Maiti 2012 | | × × | | | | | | ×
14 Chan and Prakash 2012 | | × | × × | × | | |
15 Ding et al. 2014 × | × | | | | | | × |
16 Chemweno et al. 2015 | | × | × × × × | | ×
17 Goossens and Basten 2015 × × × | × | | × | × ×
18 Hemmati et al. 2018 | | | × | | | | | | ×
19 This research 2019 | | | × | | | | | | |
fuzzy-AHP
An integrated

approach
and TOPSIS

Table I.
Literature summary
IJQRM TOPSIS model to choose the best maintenance policy of an acid manufacturer. This is
mainly done to consider added-value, risk and cost in fuzzy environments which are more
applicable than previous classic fuzzy models.

3. Research methodology
This section illuminates the different steps considered to achieve the objectives of this
research. Different steps of conducting this research are shown in Figure 1. According to
Figure 1, added-value, risk level and the cost are considered as the main decision criteria of
the proposed FAHP-interval TOPSIS model to choose the maintenance policy for numerous
equipment pieces of the case study.

3.1 Step 1: problem definition

This research develops an integrated FAHP-interval TOPSIS approach to choose the best
maintenance policy for different types of equipment of an acid manufacturer. Based on the
previous literature, although the maintenance policy selection problem is widely investigated
in previous literature, the integration of MCDM models in the existence of added-value, risk
and cost is less investigated. Consequently, TBM, CM, SM and CBM are examined as the main
alternatives to be selected as maintenance policies. In summary, these steps expanded the

Problem Definition

Identification of maintenance policy

selection criteria

Selection of equipment

Determining the weights of criteria

using FAHP

Determining the best maintenance

policy using Interval-TOPSIS model

Maintenance policy is
known for all
equipment?
No

Yes
Figure 1.
Research steps Discussing the results
problem by finding the gap of previous literature, developing the decision criteria and, finally, An integrated
the potential maintenance policies. Figure 2 displays the decision hierarchy of the proposed fuzzy-AHP
FAHP-Interval TOPSIS model. and TOPSIS
The description of each criterion is discussed as follows:
approach
• Added-value: according to the business dictionary, the added value is the quantity
which is added to the value of a product once the machine is applied to process it.
In other words, it is equal to the difference between the associated costs and the
received quantity of money once the final product is sold.
• Risk: according to machinery rules and directives, any manufacturing machine which
is involved in production should follow a specific documented regulations to ensure
the safety of operators. In this regard, risk assessment of machines is very important
as it affects both the health of operators and also the quality of products. An unsafe
machines can cause many issues and stop the production line which imposes so
many undesired imposed costs to companies.
• Cost: according to business dictionary, cost is the quantity of money which should be
paid to take something. In other words, cost is a monetary term applied to pay for
efforts, resources, materials, consumed utilities, incurred risk, opportunities and the
spent time. In the context of this study, cost is defined as the required expenses to
make a machine operative.

3.2 Step 2: model development

As it is clear in Figure 2, the decision hierarchy of this research includes three levels. The initial
level is maintenance policy selection, the next level includes decision criteria of
added-value, risk and cost. Finally, the last level includes TBM, CM, SM and CBM as four
potential policies to be selected. As a common approach, decision makers’ comment should be
considered to compare all decision criteria. This process is followed by comparing all
alternatives based on each decision criteria. Therefore, the initial step of the proposed model is to
compare the decision criteria together. Decision makers apply their academic and practical
knowledge for the judgment and filling the pairwise comparison matrices (Nikulin et al., 2017;
Díaz et al., 2018). However, according to the previous literature, many MCDM techniques cannot
obviously show the thinking of human (Galankashi et al., 2013; Ziaei et al., 2013). Therefore,
fuzzy sets are recommended to solve this issue and deal with linguistic terms and ambiguities
used by decision makers (Zadeh, 1965). As a common and applicable approach, integration of
fuzzy techniques with MCDM approaches is conducted by numerous researchers and applied in

Maintenance Policy Selection

Added-Value Risk Cost

TBM CM SM CBM

Figure 2.
Decision hierarchy
Source: Adopted from Hemmati et al. (2018)
IJQRM different problems in the previous literature (Saaty, 2008; Galankashi et al., 2015). This study
firstly applies a FAHP approach to construct the pairwise comparison matrix of the decision
criteria. In other words, added-value, risk and cost are compared using an FAHP approach. The
obtained weight of this step is applied in the developed interval-TOPSIS method to rank the
maintenance policies for each equipment of the case study. The extended analysis of Chang
(1996) is practiced in this research. The applied equations are explained as follows:


M ij ¼ l ij ; mij ; uij ; (1)


l ij ¼ min Bijk ; (2)
qY ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
n
mij ¼ B ;
n
k¼1 ijk
(3)


uij ¼ max Bijk : (4)
Based on Chang (1996), l, m and u are Triangular Fuzzy Numbers (TFNs). These fuzzy
numbers are applied in all steps of FAHP. Kth decision-makers’ scores for comparing the
importance of Ci−Cj is shown by Bijk. Thus, Ci−Cj displays the model’s criteria. The related
computations of M1 and M2 (two fuzzy numbers) are as follows:
M 1 þM 2 ¼ ðl 1 þl 2 ; m1 þm2 ; u1 þu2 Þ; (5)

M 1  M 2 ¼ ðl 1  l 2 ; m1  m2 ; u1  u2 Þ; (6)
   
1 1 1 1 1 1
M 1
1 ¼ ; ; ; M 1
2 ¼ ; ; : (7)
u1 m1 l 1 u2 m 2 l 2
The inverse values of M1 and M2 are shown by M 1 1
1 and M 2 . The following equation
develops the TFN of Sk along with the fuzzy joint value for the ith object:
" #1
Xn Xm X n
Sk ¼ M kj  M ij : (8)
j¼1 i¼1 j¼1

After computing the Sk in previous stage, its possibility degree for each pair is calculated.
Following shows how to calculate their possibility degree if M1 and M2 are two TFNs:
8 9
< V ðM 1 XM 2 Þ ¼ 1
> if M 1 XM 2 > =
V ðM 1 XM 2 Þ ¼ 0 if L1 XU 2 ; (9)
>
: V ðM XM Þ ¼ hgt ðM \ M Þ otherwise >
;
1 2 1 2

u1 l 2
hgt ðM 1 \ M 2Þ ¼ : (10)
ðu1 l 2 Þþ ðm2 m1 Þ
The following equation calculates the possibility degree of a convex fuzzy number when it is
greater than k convex fuzzy numbers:
V ðM 1 XM 2 ; . . .; M k Þ ¼ V ðM 1 XM 2 Þ; . . .; V ðM 1 XM k Þ: (11)
The weights of indices are achieved by the following equation. Thus, W(xi) is calculated
as follows:
 
W ðxi Þ ¼ Min V ðS i XS k Þ k ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .; n kai: (12)
Then, the weight vectors w′(X i) is calculated by the following equation: An integrated

T fuzzy-AHP
w0 ðX i Þ ¼ W 0 ðC 1 Þ; W 0 ðC 2 Þ; W 0 ðC n Þ : (13) and TOPSIS
The attained results of Equation (11) should be imported to normal values. These normal approach
values are called Wi calculated by the following equation:
w0
W i ¼ P i 0: (14)
wi

As explained, the obtained weights of decision criteria are applied in the proposed interval-
TOPSIS model for the aim of maintenance policy selection. The TOPSIS model is developed
by Ching-Lai Hwang and Yoon in 1981 and is applied in different MCDM problems (Hwang
and Yoon, 1981). It is a common MCDM technique to find the best solution among a finite set
of alternatives. As a major principle of this method, the selected alternatives should be as
close as possible to Positive Ideal Solution (PIS) and as far as possible from the Negative
Ideal Solution (NIS) ( Jahanshahloo et al., 2009).
Normally, in real world situation, determining the exact values of ideal solutions is
impossible. Therefore, these values are commonly considered as interval values. Hence,
Jahanshahloo et al. (2009) developed an extension of TOPSIS for decision-making problems
with interval data. Assume that A1, A2, …, Am are some possible alternatives and the
decision makers have to select among them. C1, C2, …, Cn are the criteria which show the
performance of the alternatives. Xij is the rank of Ai alternative with regard to Cj criteria
where its exact value is not clear but it is known that X ij A ½X Lij X U ij . The MCDM problems
with interval data can be summarized in Table II. Wj shows the weight of Cj criteria.
The systematic approach to extend the TOPSIS for interval values developed by
Jahanshahloo et al. (2009) is discussed in this section. First, the normalized decision matrix is
calculated as follows.
The normalized values of nL1j and nU ij are calculated by the following equation:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Xm  2  2 
nij ¼ xij =
L L
j¼1
xLij þ xU ij i ¼ 1; . . .; n; j ¼ 1; . . .; m; (15)

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Xm  2  2 
nU
ij ¼ ij =
xU j¼1
xLij þ xU ij i ¼ 1; . . .; n; j ¼ 1; . . .; m; (16)

nLij ; nU
ij is the normalized form of xij ; xij . The developed normalization approach makes the
L U

interval numbers to be in [0, 1]. With regard to the different importance of each criteria, the
structure of weighted normalized matrix is as follows:

uLij ¼ wi nLij ; (17)

Ai C1 … Cj … Cn

A1 [XL11XU11] … [XL1jXU 1j] … [XL1nXU1n]

Ai [XLi1XU
i1] … [XLij XU
ij ] … [XLinXU
in] Table II.
Am [XLm1XU m1] … [XLmjXU mj] … [XLmnXU mn] Interval decision
W W1 … W2 … Wn matrix
 ij ¼ wi nij :
uU U
IJQRM (18)
Pn
In which, Wi is theþweight of

ith criteria and the i¼i wi ¼ 1. Next, Jahanshahloo et al. (2009)
introduced the A and A NIS as follows:
  n   o
þ L
A ¼ u1þ ; . . .; unþ ¼ maxj uUij j A I ; minj uij i A I ; (19)

   n   o
A ¼ u 
1 ; . . .; un ¼ minj uLij ji A I ; maxj uU
ij ji AJ ; (20)

Here, l is related to benefit criteria and j is related to cost criteria. Separation process of each
alternative from PIS is conducted using n-dimensional Euclidean norm as follows:
( )12
þ X 2 X 2
dj ¼ uLij ujþ þ ij ui
uU þ
j ¼ 1; . . .; m; (21)
iAI iAJ

( )12
 X 2 X 2

dj ¼ ij ui
uU þ uLij u
i j ¼ 1; . . .; m: (22)
iAI iAJ
þ
A relative

closeness is developed to determine the ranking level of each alternative.
þ
Ad
and d of each Aj is calculated. The adjacent coefficient of Aj with regard to A is defined
as follows:
 þ

Rj ¼ dj = d j þdj j ¼ 1; . . .; m: (23)
þ 
It is clear that the alternative Aj approaches to A and goes far from A . Therefore,
according to adjacent coefficient, it is possible to rank all possible alternatives and choose
the best one. The developed approach of Izadikhah et al. (2014) is applied in this study.
Izadikhah et al. (2014) extended TOPSIS in fuzzy environment by applying the nearest
weighted interval approximation of fuzzy numbers.
Saeidifar (2011) investigated the application of weighting functions to the ranking of
fuzzy numbers. The weighted distance measure for ranking fuzzy numbers is introduced in
this research. This section discusses the nearest weighted interval concept for a fuzzy
number (Saeidifar, 2011):
Definition 1. f ¼ ðf ; f Þ: ð½0; 1; ½0; 1Þ-ðℝ; ℝÞ is the weighting function. Here, f and f
are non-negative and monotone increasing which satisfy the following
normalization process:
Z 1 Z 1
f ðaÞda ¼ 1; f ðaÞda ¼ 1: (24)
0 0

It should be considered that, if g ¼ ðg; gÞ: ð½0; 1; ½0; 1Þ-ðℝ; ℝÞ is non-negative and
monotone increasing, it is possible to consider the following equation:

g ðaÞ g ðaÞ
f ðaÞ ¼ R 1 ; f ðaÞ ¼ R 1 : (25)
0 g ðaÞda 0 g ðaÞda
As an explanation, the f(α) function can be considered as the weighted interval approximation. An integrated
However, interval approximation from fuzzy numbers is more important. In practice, f(α) fuzzy-AHP
function can be selected with regard to actual position: and TOPSIS

Definition 2. Assume that A ∈ F is a fuzzy number with Aa ¼ a ðaÞ; aðaÞ and f ðaÞ ¼ approach
½f ðaÞ; f ðaÞ is a weighting function. Therefore, the nearest weighted interval
approximation from A is calculated as follows:
h i Z 1 Z 1 
f f
NWIAf ðAÞ ¼ C l ; C u ¼ f ðaÞda ¼ 1; f ðaÞda ¼ 1 ; (26)
0 0

Here, the C fL is the nearest lower weighted point approximation

ðNLWPAf ðAÞÞ and C fU is the nearest upper weighted point approximation
ðNLWPAf ðAÞÞ of the fuzzy number of A. Therefore, assume that A ¼ (a, b,
c, d) is a trapezoidal fuzzy number and f ðaÞ ¼ ðf ðaÞ; f ðaÞÞ is a weighting
function. Therefore, for f(α) ¼ (nαn−1, nαn−1) and n ∈ N we have:

aþnb ncþd
NWIAf ðAÞ ¼ ; : (27)
nþ1 nþ1

3.3 Step 3: questionnaire design

As discussed, this study develops an integrated FAHP-interval TOPSIS model for the aim of
maintenance policy selection. Therefore, two different questionnaires are required to
be applied and collect the required data. The first questionnaire is developed based on the
FAHP concept to compare the maintenance policy selection criteria including added-value,
risk and the cost. Therefore, the developed questionnaire of FAHP comprises three
questions to compare the added-value, risk and the cost. The second questionnaire is
developed based on the developed interval TOPSIS model discussed in previous section.
This questionnaire collected the required data to be applied in TOPSIS and determined the
best maintenance policies of molten sulfur ponds, boiler, absorption tower, cooling towers,
converter, heat exchanger and sulfur fuel furnace as the main equipment of the case study.
Both questionnaires are available in the Appendix of this study. The technical specifications
and the characteristics of the considered equipment are discussed as follows:
• Molten sulfur ponds: Molten sulfur is a chemical material used to produce sulfuric
acid. This material is insoluble in the water and releases an odor of rotten eggs. The
molten sulfur ponds are applied in the initial stages of sulfuric acid production.
• Boiler: this equipment makes steam by using the heat energy of the water.
• Absorption tower: this equipment includes a vertical and long column applied for
manufacturing process of sulfuric acid. The process includes the introducing phase
of the gas from the end of column and absorbing of the liquid (regularly the water),
moving through the column to reach its top part and falling down.
• Cooling towers: this equipment is used to decrease the heat in the atmosphere by
decreasing the temperature of a water stream.
• Converter: this equipment is used to change the nature of electrical currents from AC
to DC or vice versa. In addition, this equipment is used to do the same process for
signals or change the electrical current from analogue to digital or vice versa.
IJQRM • Heat exchanger: this equipment is used to transmit the heat among different
fluids. The equipment is used in heating and cooling processes of acid sulfuric
manufacturing.
• Sulfur furl furnace: this equipment is used to blow the dried air to the sulfur burning
furnace. This process is done by the main blower of the manufacturing company
(Louie, 2005).

3.4 Step 4: data collection and expert introduction

As discussed, two different questionnaires are developed and applied in this research.
Normally, sending questionnaire without providing comprehensive explanation on different
sections, aim and contents can waste the time by collecting inaccurate data. In addition,
there are many misunderstandings with regard to different interpretations of decision
makers after reading the questions. Therefore, first, a pilot test was conducted to improve
the readability, contents and reliability of the developed questionnaires. In addition, the
authors of this study aimed to hand out both questionnaires physically and provide
clarifications to decision makers. These explanations included the aim of the research and
contents of the developed questionnaires to assist the decision makers.
The number, education, experiences, background and skillfulness of the experts who
responded to the questionnaires are discussed as follows. Five experts were involved to
fulfill the developed questionnaires of this research. These experts hold at least bachelor
and at most PhD degrees in related fields including industrial engineering, maintenance
engineering, safety engineering, management, etc. These experts have more than five
years of working experience in maintenance engineering or related areas where a
significant portion of their background has been passed in the case study. Therefore, as
an important issue which is considered in the process of data collection, all these experts
were working at the case study providing two important benefits. First, the experts were
familiar with the machinery equipment of the company which is considered to assign
maintenance policies. Second, considering their background and their working experience
in the company, these experts provided constructive and critical comments to improve the
process of data collection, analysis and interpretation of the results.

4. Case study
Maintenance is an important inseparable factor of manufacturing industries. Chemical
manufacturing companies are not an exception. Chemical products are applied in different
sections of different industries and subsequently their consumption rate is increasing.
Sulfuric acid is a high-frequency manufactured product which is used in variety of
different products with regard to its physical and chemical specifications. This acid is a
colorless liquid and is corrosive to metals and tissues. Different types of equipment are
required to produce this acid in manufacturing companies. To improve the availability of
these types of equipment and considering the demanding usage of this acid in different
sections of industries, finding appropriate maintenance policy is very essential for its
manufacturers. Accordingly, as this product is produced using numerous equipment
pieces of a manufacturing company, the failure of one equipment can lead to the stoppage
of production line. Furthermore, it is essential to consider numerous maintenance
strategies for diverse equipment pieces of the manufacturers as they have different
characteristics. A sulfuric acid production company is selected as the case study of this
research. This company is selected to show the applicability and proficiency of the
proposed model. The case study is a famous manufacturer of sulfuric acid which is located
in Zanjan, Iran. According to the interviews conducted with the production managers of
this company, this Sulfuric acid manufacturer aims to improve the performance of the
company by maintaining the availability of its manufacturing equipment. Therefore, a An integrated
maintenance policy selection procedure can be an applicable and practical approach to fuzzy-AHP
achieve this objective. and TOPSIS
5. Results
approach
This research develops a methodology which is applicable for a wide range of maintenance
problems including maintenance planning and risk assessment. In this study, cost factor is
considered as a non-ideal criteria, whereas risk and added-value are considered as ideal
criteria. The process of obtaining results is as follows. An initial investigation of the
collected data was conducted once the data collection process was completed. Following
this, all required equations were formulated in Microsoft Excel software to be applied for the
final calculation. The collected data were inserted to the Excel software and the outputs
were gathered accordingly. The obtained results were Checked by both the authors and the
production managers of the case study to ensure their validity. Table III displays the
considered criteria of maintenance policy selection.
As discussed in research methodology section, the weights of criteria are calculated
using the FAHP method. The obtained weights are applied as the input of the interval
TOPSIS method. Then, the best maintenance policy of each equipment is suggested using
TOPSIS calculations. The FAHP result for the weights of criteria is shown in Table IV. As it
is clear, absorption tower is considered as a representative of all equipment pieces. However,
the selected maintenance policy of all equipment pieces is displayed and comprehensively
discussed at the end of this study.
Following the FAHP calculations, the obtained values are used in the interval TOPSIS
model. The converting process of values to equivalent intervals is adopted from Izadikhah
et al. (2014). According to what discussed in research methodology, it is possible to attain
different intervals using the explained weighting functions. However, this study has applied
the f(α) ¼ (2α, 2α) which is the average of two other functions. As an example, the weighting
function of f(α) ¼ (2α, 2α) and the fuzzy number of (1, 3/2, 2) is equal to the interval of
[4/3, 5/8]. Similarly, other intervals are also calculated and tabulated in Table V.

Index Criteria

C1 Risk Table III.

C2 Added-value Maintenance policy
C3 Cost selection criteria

Criteria Risk Added-value Cost Weight of criteria Table IV.

Criteria pairwise
Risk (1, 1, 1) (1/2, 2/3, 1) (1, 3/2, 2) 0.37 comparison matrix
Added-value (1, 3/2, 2) (1, 1, 1) (1, 3/2, 2) 0.49 regarding the goal
Cost (1/2, 2/3, 1) (1/2, 2/3, 1) (1, 1, 1) 0.12 (absorption tower)

Risk Added-value Cost

CM [1/2, 5/9] [1/3, 1/3] [1/2, 5/9] Table V.

TBM [5/6, 7/6] [3/5, 7/9] [3/5, 7/9] Interval values for
CBM [4/3, 5/3] [3/5, 7/9] [3/5, 7/9] each alternative
SM [1/3, 1/3] [1/3, 1/3] [1/2, 5/9] (absorption tower)
IJQRM Interval and normalized decision matrices are tabulated in Tables VI and VII, respectively.
Following this, the weighted normalized matrix is calculated and tabulated in Table VIII.
Next, the PIS and NIS are determined as follows. For f(α) ¼ (2α, 2α):
þ
A ¼ ½0:189016; 0:201617; 0:026462;


A ¼ ½0:036003; 0:072006; 0:066156:
þ 
The normalized performance of Ai and A and Ai and A are shown in Tables IX and X,
respectively. This comparison shows how the maintenance policies act in comparison

Risk Added-value Cost

Alternative (Policy) X L1j XU
1j X L2j XU
2j X L3j XU
3j
Table VI.
Interval decision CM 1/2 5/9 1/3 1/3 1/2 5/9
matrix for all TBM 5/6 7/6 3/5 7/9 3/5 7/9
alternatives CBM 4/3 5/3 3/5 7/9 3/5 7/9
(absorption tower) SM 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/2 5/9

Risk Added-value Cost

Alternative (policy) nL1j nU
1j nL2j nU
2j nL3j nU
3j

Table VII. CM 0.095053 0.031503 0.018002 0.020162 0.026462 0.031503

Normalized decision TBM 0.047254 0.066156 0.034653 0.044104 0.034653 0.044104
matrix (absorption CBM 0.075606 0.094508 0.047254 0.050404 0.047254 0.066156
tower) SM 0.018002 0.020162 0.018002 0.020162 0.026462 0.031503

Risk Added-value Cost

Alternative (policy) uL1j uU
1j uL2j uU
2j uL3j uU
3j

CM 0.190106 0.063005 0.072006 0.080647 0.026462 0.031503

Table VIII. TBM 0.094508 0.132311 0.138612 0.176415 0.034653 0.044104
Weighted normalized CBM 0.151213 0.189016 0.189016 0.201617 0.047254 0.066156
matrix SM 0.036003 0.040323 0.072006 0.080647 0.026462 0.031503

Table IX. þ þ þ þ
The distance of each d1 d2 d3 d4
alternative from PIS
(absorption tower) 0.134168 0.115705 0.039848 0.203501

Table X. þ þ þ þ
The distance of each d1 d2 d3 d4
alternative from NIS
(Absorption tower) 0.028351 0.14228 0.201604 0.009661
with the best and worst performance of alternatives regarding the criteria. Next, the interval An integrated
weights of normalized decision matrix is calculated. fuzzy-AHP
Lastly, the relative adjacent degree of all alternatives to ideal solution is calculated and and TOPSIS
the alternatives are ranked using the weighting function of f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α) as shown in
Table XI. According to this table, for the weighting function of f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α), the third approach
alternative (CBM) is the best maintenance policy for absorption tower as it has attained the
highest weight (0.7038). This policy is followed by TBM with the weight of 0.5523, CM with
the weight of 0.1870 and the SM with the weight of 0.0392.
As mentioned, the discussed calculations are conducted for the absorption tower. The
same steps are conducted and the best maintenance policies of other 6 equipment pieces of
the case study are selected. Table XII tabulates the obtained results of maintenance policy
selection for all seven equipment pieces. According to this table, CBM policy is suggested for
absorption tower, cooling tower, boiler and molten sulfur ponds which are expensive and
high-risk equipment. Additionally, TBM policy is suggested for converters and heat
exchanger which are expensive and high-risk equipment. Last of all, CM policy is suggested
for sulfur fuel furnace which is an expensive equipment.
As mentioned, due to the intrinsic difficulties linked with fuzzy models, the previous
literature has focused on classic fuzzy MCDM techniques and neglected to develop
integrated approaches. In our previous study, Hemmati et al. (2018), an FANP approach for
maintenance policy selection of the same case study was developed. In that study,
added-value, risk and cost were applied as the main criteria to select the maintenance policy
for different types of equipment of the case study. The maintenance policy included TBM,
CM, SM and CBM. According to Hemmati et al. (2018), the FANP approach selects TBM for
Boiler and SM for Molten sulfur ponds, whereas this research assigns CBM to them.
Comparing the results of both studies can determine two important facts as follows. Firstly,
the FANP results are very sensitive as a small modification can change the results. Second,
as an important finding, the proposed FAHP-Interval TOPSIS model of this research is very
conservative as CBM policy has been selected for many equipment pieces even when the
importance of risk and cost criteria is equal. This is different in the FANP approach, as TBM
is selected when the importance of risk and cost criteria is equal. Finally, CM is a preferred
policy in both methods when the lower risk and higher cost are priority for decision makers.

No. Policy Weighting function Rj

1 CM f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α) 0.1870

2 TBM f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α) 0.5523 Table XI.
3 CBM f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α) 0.7038 Adjacent degree
4 SM f(α, α) ¼ (2α, 2α) 0.0392 (absorption tower)

Equipment number Equipment name Priority of maintenance policies

1 Absorption tower CBMWTBMWCMWSM

2 Cooling tower CBMWTBMWSMW CM
3 Boiler CBMWTBMWCMWSM Table XII.
4 Molten sulfur ponds CBMWTBMWCMWSM Selected maintenance
5 Converters TBMWCBM WCMWSM policies for seven
6 Sulfur fuel furnace CMW TBMWCBM WSM equipment pieces of
7 Heat exchangers TBMWCBM WSMW CM the case study
IJQRM The comparative results between developed Fuzzy-ANP of Hemmati et al. (2018) and the
proposed FAHP-Interval TOPSIS of this research are given in Table XIII. The italic values
of last italic columns show the difference between the obtained results of two studies.

6. Discussion
This section discusses the obtained results of this research with regard to other related and
important topics such as life cycle cost (LCC), fast development of technology, after-sale
service, risk management and ISO 55001.

6.1 Maintenance policies and LCC

There are different decisions which should be made in manufacturing companies. These
decisions are made at different stages of decision making (strategic, tactical and operational)
process and can potentially affect the long-term objectives of manufacturers. As an important
decision, maintenance policy selection of manufacturing equipment can affect the manufacturing
cost. LCC is an important indicator of investigating the products within their life cycle. In other
words, LCC can determine the following or stopping the manufacturing process of a product.
Therefore, this section discusses the relation between maintenance and LCC.
LCC is an important factor which can be considered as the optimality index in
management decisions. In addition, previous studies have applied LCC to minimize the
operational costs and, optimize the management strategies including maintenance policies
(Corotis et al., 2005). In addition to LCC, monitoring maintenance lifecycle (MML) is a tool to
decrease the maintenance-related costs and increase the reliability. MML approaches are
applied to improve the different processes involved in maintenance engineering. All these
activities are conducted in the life cycle of products.
According to El-Akruti et al. (2016), LCC is an essential and critical index applied for
decision making of maintenance engineering. In addition, this is recommended to fit the LCC
analysis with maintenance policies. More related to this study, the best maintenance policy
of each equipment of an acid manufacturer was determined using the discussed
methodology. Sulfuric acid is used in many products with different life cycles. In addition,
this product is used as the raw material of many complex products. Therefore, the quality of
the final products is directly and indirectly affected by the quality of sulfuric acid.
Maintenance policies which are considered for manufacturing equipment of this product
certify the availability of the manufacturing machineries, quality and other production
related issues. Therefore, the LCC of the final products can be significantly decreased by a
proper maintenance plan.

6.2 Maintenance policies and fast development of technology

With the advent of technology and the progress of production methods, manufacturing
machineries are getting more important in production lines. Although the machineries are
being more complicated comparing to previous years, maintenance engineers should update

Equipment number Equipment name Fuzzy-ANP results FAHP-interval TOPSIS results

1 Absorption tower CBM CBM

2 Cooling tower CBM CBM
Table XIII. 3 Boiler TBM CBM
Comparative results 4 Molten sulfur ponds SM CBM
between Fuzzy-ANP 5 Converters TBM TBM
and FAHP-Interval 6 Sulfur fuel furnace CM CM
Topsis 7 Heat exchangers CM TBM
the considered policies to ensure their availability in the production line. A failure in a An integrated
manufacturing machineries can cause the bottleneck and decrease or stop the production fuzzy-AHP
process. Therefore, although the development of the technology has provided advanced and TOPSIS
machineries to production managers, the maintenance engineers should try to solve the
conflicting specification of each machine. In other words, each machine has its specific approach
technical and maintenance necessities which should be handled in maintenance policy
selection process of the companies.

6.3 Maintenance policies and after-sale service

There is a direct relationship among maintenance policies, machine availability, quality of
final products and after-sale services. A proper maintenance policy ensures the availability
of machines. In addition, many maintenance-related activities such as overhauls,
lubrications, oil changing and adjustments improve the function and precision of
production machinery which directly affects the quality of final products. Therefore, as it is
clear, a proper maintenance policy selection can lead to high-quality products.
Consequently, a proper maintenance planning significantly decreases the after-sale costs
of the companies imposed by the poor quality of products, failure and other quality-related
issues complained by customers.

6.4 Maintenance policies and risk assessment

Risk assessment is an important issue of any maintenance engineering. There is a direct
relationship among the failure risk of a machine, required maintenance policy and the
availability of the machine. Maintenance engineers should make a trade-off between all
these issues concurrently. This trade-off is discussed as follows.
Maintenance engineers should consider rigid maintenance policies when the risk of a
machine is very high. In other words, high risk machines should be kept more carefully as
they are more probable to fail and stop the production process. High risk of these machines
have a direct correlation with their availability which should be addressed by a proper
maintenance policy. As another important factor to be considered in risk management, there
are different machines which are involved in the production process of final products.
These machines should be considered as a whole system instead of separate entities.
Therefore, the risk management of these production machineries should be considered in
both single and group perspectives. It should be considered that considering the machines
as single and group entities might be tough as the risk management objectives might be
conflicting. More related to this research, as mentioned before, three factors of added value,
cost and risk are considered to select the best maintenance policy of different types of
equipment of an acid manufacturer. Therefore, in direction with previous studies, risk has
been considered in conjunction with the maintenance management. As an advantage of the
developed model, as three conflicting criteria of risk, added value and cost are considered in
the developed MCDM framework, the selected maintenance policies are justified with regard
to their applicability to be used in other similar studies. In other words, as many managers
aim to decrease the cost of manufacturing, this process has a direct conflict with the added
value and the risk. Having less cost means less attention to some important issues of
manufacturing such as maintenance management which causes a risky production
environment with the direct result of decreasing the equipment’s availability.

6.5 Maintenance Policies and ISO 55001

Physical assets including production machines should be managed economically and also
responsibly during their life cycle. This process includes the design, manufacturing,
IJQRM advertising and other related phases. Therefore, it is very critical to make a balance between
the cost effectiveness and responsibility of the companies.
As an accepted management system, ISO 55001 is an asset management system which
aims to determine the required necessities to use people or organizations which are involved
in the production or management. These obligation was firstly introduced and developed in
2004 by ISO technical committee. As an important application of ISO 55001, this standard
helps companies to maintain a proper balance between cost efficiency and risk management
in decision-making process. As a specific application of this standard, it introduces the
priorities for asset maintenance. In addition, it helps companies to increase their profit
during the life cycle of products, boost the return on investment, etc. So, more related to this
research, it is applicable when the decision makers aim to make a balance between the costs
and the maintenance scheduling of the production machinery. In other words, assume the
maintenance budget of the company is limited and the company aims to determine the
priority to assign this limited budget to its production machines. Although the developed
framework of this research has considered risk, added value and cost within its decision
framework, it would be more fruitful if the decision makers can check/approve their final
decision with the requirements of ISO 55001.

7. Conclusion and future research direction

This section has been divided into two sub-sections of impact upon the society and the
science. Also, some directions are suggested for the future research.

7.1 Impact upon the society

An appropriate maintenance policy certifies the availability of machines and consequently
the operative performance of the companies. In this regard, two major areas are affected
by a proper maintenance policy selection. First, there are many products which are
essential for the society. Subsequently, the shortage of these products can cause many
issues and affect the life quality. As an example, acid manufacturers, which are discussed
in this research, supply their products to different pharmaceutical companies to be
converted to other products. The availability of these products is very important and
should be ensured by the raw materials suppliers. Second, the operative performance of
the companies can significantly affect the economy. In other words, adoption of an
appropriate maintenance policy can certify the workability and the performance of
companies which leads to more production, more income and an improved performance of
economy. Therefore, maintenance policy selection contributes both to society, life quality
and the economy.

7.2 Impact on the science

This research developed an integrated FAHP-TOPSIS approach to choose the best
maintenance policy for an acid manufacturer. The decision hierarchy included three levels
as follows. The first level aimed to choose the best maintenance policy for different types of
equipment of the case study. These equipment pieces included molten sulfur ponds, boiler,
absorption tower, cooling towers, converter, heat exchanger and sulfur fuel furnace. The
second level or decision criteria included added-value, the risk level and cost to evaluate
the alternatives. Finally, TBM, CM, SM and CBM were examined as potential alternatives in
the third level of decision hierarchy. Based on the obtained results, CBM is suggested for
absorption tower, boiler, cooling tower and molten sulfur ponds which are expensive and
high-risk equipment. Next, TBM policy is suggested for converters and heat exchanger
which are expensive and high-risk equipment. Finally, CM policy is suggested for sulfur fuel
furnace which is an expensive equipment.
7.3 Future research direction An integrated
Although this study developed a new MCDM approach for maintenance policy selection of fuzzy-AHP
an acid manufacturer, there are still some issues which can enrich this problem in future and TOPSIS
studies. As a potential direction, the proposed model of this study can be considered with
more criteria and alternatives to check its performance. Additionally, the interval-TOPSIS approach
model can be linked with other fuzzy MCDM tools such as FANP. Finally, other researchers
are encouraged to apply the developed mathematical model of this research to address the
requirements of particular case studies such as fleet of asset for defense (e.g. military
vehicles) where the availability and technology play a significant and relevant role.

References
Afzali, P., Keynia, F. and Rashidinejad, M. (2019), “A new model for reliability-centered maintenance
prioritisation of distribution feeders”, Energy, Vol. 171, pp. 701-709.
Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008), “Total productive maintenance: literature review and directions”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 709-756.
Al-Najjar, B. and Alsyouf, I. (2003), “Selecting the most efficient maintenance approach using fuzzy multiple
criteria decision making”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 85-100.
Arunraj, N.S. and Maiti, J. (2010), “Risk-based maintenance policy selection using AHP and goal
programming”, Safety Science, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 238-247, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.09.005.
Azadivar, F. and Shu, V. (1999), “Maintenance policy selection for JIT production systems”, International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 37 No. 16, pp. 3725-3738.
Azadeh, A. and Abdolhossein Zadeh, S. (2016), “An integrated fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and
fuzzy multiple-criteria decision-making simulation approach for maintenance policy selection”,
Simulation, Vol. 92 No. 1, pp. 3-18.
Baek, J.G. (2007), “An intelligent condition-based maintenance scheduling model”, International Journal
of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 312-327.
Bashiri, M., Badri, H. and Hejazi, T.H. (2011), “Selecting optimum maintenance strategy by fuzzy
interactive linear assignment method”, Applied Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 152-164.
Bertolini, M. and Bevilacqua, M. (2006), “A combined goal programming – AHP approach to maintenance
selection problem”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 91 No. 7, pp. 839-848.
Bertolini, M., Bevilacqua, M., Braglia, M. and Frosolini, M. (2004), “An analytical method for
maintenance outsourcing service selection”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 772-788.
Bevilacqua, M. and Braglia, M. (2000), “The analytic hierarchy process applied to maintenance strategy
selection”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 71-83.
Braglia, M., Castellano, D. and Frosolini, M. (2013), “An integer linear programming approach to
maintenance strategies selection”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
Vol. 30 No. 9, pp. 991-1016.
Braglia, M., Castellano, D. and Gallo, M. (2019), “A novel operational approach to equipment
maintenance: TPM and RCM jointly at work”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 612-634, available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-05-2016-0018
Carazas, F.G. and Souza, G.F.M.D. (2010), “Risk-based decision making method for maintenance policy
selection of thermal power plant equipment”, Energy, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 964-975.
Chan, F.T. and Prakash, A. (2012), “Maintenance policy selection in manufacturing firms using the fuzzy
MCDM approach”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 50 No. 23, pp. 7044-7056.
Chang, D.Y. (1996), “Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 649-655.
Chemweno, P., Pintelon, L., Van Horenbeek, A. and Muchiri, P. (2015), “Development of a risk assessment
selection methodology for asset maintenance decision making: an analytic network process (ANP)
approach”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 170, Part B, pp. 663-676.
IJQRM Corotis, R.B., Hugh Ellis, J. and Jiang, M. (2005), “Modeling of risk-based inspection, maintenance and
life-cycle cost with partially observable Markov decision processes”, Structure and
Infrastructure Engineering, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 75-84.
De Moubray, G. (1991), “Banking is not like selling toothpaste”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 68-74.
Díaz, V.G.P., Gunckel, P.V., Martínez, L.B. and Márquez, A.C. (2018), “AHP method according to a
changing environment”, in Márquez, A.C., González-Prida Díaz, V. and Gómez Fernández, J.F.
(Eds), Advanced Maintenance Modelling for Asset Management, Springer, Cham, pp. 167-189.
Ding, S.H., Kamaruddin, S. and Abdul Azid, I. (2014), “Maintenance policy selection model – a case
study in the palm oil industry”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 415-435.
Dunn, R.L. (1987), “Advanced maintenance technologies”, Plant Engineering, Vol. 41 No. 12, pp. 80-93.
Durán, O. (2011), “Computer-aided maintenance management systems selection based on a fuzzy AHP
approach”, Advances in Engineering Software, Vol. 42 No. 10, pp. 821-829.
Ebrahimipour, V., Najjarbashi, A. and Sheikhalishahi, M. (2015), “Multi-objective modeling for
preventive maintenance scheduling in a multiple production line”, Journal of Intelligent
Manufacturing, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 111-122.
El-Akruti, K., Zhang, T. and Dwight, R. (2016), “Developing an optimum maintenance policy by life
cycle cost analysis – a case study”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 54 No. 19,
pp. 5946-5962.
Endharta, A.J. and Yun, W.Y. (2017), “A preventive maintenance of circular consecutive-k-out-of-n:
F systems”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 752-769.
Galankashi, M.R., Chegeni, A., Soleimanynanadegany, A., Memari, A., Anjomshoae, A., Helmi, S.A. and
Dargi, A. (2015), “Prioritizing green supplier selection criteria using fuzzy analytical network
process”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 26, pp. 689-694, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S2212827114008579
Galankashi, M.R., Helmi, S.A. and Hashemzahi, P. (2016), “Supplier selection in automobile industry: a mixed
balanced scorecard–fuzzy AHP approach”, Alexandria Engineering Journal, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 93-100.
Galankashi, M.R., Moazzami, A., Madadi, N., Roudsari, A.H. and Helmi, S.A. (2013), “Supplier selection for
electrical manufacturing companies based on different supply chain strategies”, Electrical Engineering.
Goossens, A.J. and Basten, R.J. (2015), “Exploring maintenance policy selection using the analytic
hierarchy process: an application for naval ships”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 142,
pp. 31-41, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S095183201500126X
Hemmati, N., Rahiminezhad Galankashi, M., Imani, D.M. and Farughi, H. (2018), “Maintenance policy
selection: a fuzzy-ANP approach”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 29
No. 7, pp. 1253-1268.
Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981), “Methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey”, Multiple
Attribute Decision Making, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 191pp.
Ilangkumaran, M. and Kumanan, S. (2009), “Selection of maintenance policy for textile industry using
hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 1009-1022.
Izadikhah, M., Saeidifar, A. and Roostaee, R. (2014), “Extending TOPSIS in fuzzy environment by using
the nearest weighted interval approximation of fuzzy numbers”, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy
Systems, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 2725-2736.
Jaderi, F., Ibrahim, Z.Z. and Zahiri, M.R. (2019), “Criticality analysis of petrochemical assets using risk
based maintenance and the fuzzy inference system”, Process Safety and Environmental
Protection, Vol. 142 No. 2015, pp. 31-41.
Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H. and Davoodi, A.R. (2009), “Extension of TOPSIS for decision-making
problems with interval data: interval efficiency”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 49
Nos 5-6, pp. 1137-1142.
Khan, F.I. and Haddara, M.M. (2003), “Risk-Based Maintenance (RBM): a quantitative approach for An integrated
maintenance/inspection scheduling and planning”, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process fuzzy-AHP
Industries, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 561-573.
and TOPSIS
Kumar, G. and Maiti, J. (2012), “Expert systems with applications modeling risk based maintenance
using fuzzy analytic network process”, Expert Systems With Applications, Vol. 39 No. 11, approach
pp. 9946-9954, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.01.004.
Labib, A.W. (2004), “A decision analysis model for maintenance policy selection using a CMMS”,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 191-202.
Lee Cooke, F. (2000), “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance: some organisational barriers”,
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 9, pp. 1003-1016.
Luce, S. (1999), “Choice criteria in conditional preventive maintenance”, Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 163-168.
Louie, D.K. (2005), Handbook of Sulphuric Acid Manufacturing, DKL Engineering, Inc.
Luxhøj, J.T. (2000), “An intelligent decision support system (IDSS) prototype for aviation safety
analysis”, Advances in Aviation Safety Conference & Exposition, SAE Technical Paper 2000-01-
2106, Rutgers University, 13pp., available at: https://doi.org/10.4271/2000-01-2106
Maletič, D., Maletič, M., Lovrenčić, V., Al-najjar, B. and Gomišček, B. (2014), “An application of analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) and sensitivity analysis for maintenance policy selection”,
Organizacija, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 177-188, doi: 10.2478/orga-2014-0016.
Nikulin, C., Gonzalez-prida-Diaz, V., Barbera-Martinez, L. and Carreño, C. (2017), “Enhancing the
decision making process: integration of Otsm-Triz and AHP proposal”, DYNA, Vol. 92 No. 1,
pp. 18-21, available at: www.revistadyna.com/search/enhancing-the-decision-making-process-
integration-of-otsm-triz-and-ahp-proposal
Oke, S.A. and Charles-Owaba, O.E. (2006), “An approach for evaluating preventive maintenance scheduling
cost”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 847-879.
Phogat, S. and Gupta, A.K. (2019), “Expected maintenance waste reduction benefits after
implementation of Just In Time ( JIT) philosophy in maintenance (a statistical analysis)”,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 25-40.
Rahiminezhad Galankashi, M. and Helmi, S.A. (2016), “Assessment of hybrid Lean-Agile (Leagile) supply
chain strategies”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 470-482.
Saaty, T.L. (2008), “Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process”, International Journal of
Services Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 83-98.
Sadeghi, A. and Manesh, R.A. (2012), “The application of fuzzy group analytic network process to
selection of best maintenance strategy-a case study in Mobarakeh steel company, Iran”,
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 62 No. 24, pp. 1378-1383, available at: www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042812036774
Saeidifar, A. (2011), “Application of weighting functions to the ranking of fuzzy numbers”, Computers
& Mathematics with Applications, Vol. 62 No. 5, pp. 2246-2258.
Seiti, H. and Hafezalkotob, A. (2019), “Developing the R-TOPSIS methodology for risk-based preventive
maintenance planning: a case study in rolling mill company”, Computers & Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 128, February, pp. 622-636, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0360835219300142
Shankar, G. and Sahani, V. (2003), “Reliability analysis of a maintenance network with repair and
preventive maintenance”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 20
No. 2, pp. 268-280.
Sharabi, M. (2014), “Today’s quality is tomorrow’s reputation (and the following day’s business
success)”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 25 Nos 3-4, pp. 183-197.
Shyjith, K., Ilangkumaran, M. and Kumanan, S. (2008), “Multi-criteria decision-making approach to
evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 375-386.
IJQRM Siew-Hong, D. and Kamaruddin, S. (2012, July), “Selection of optimal maintenance policy by using fuzzy
multi criteria decision making method”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial
Engineering and Operations Management Istanbul, Istanbul, pp. 3-6.
Singh, G., Kumar, T.C.A. and Naikan, V.N.A. (2019), “Efficiency monitoring as a strategy for cost
effective maintenance of induction motors for minimizing carbon emission and energy
consumption”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 184, April, pp. 193-201.
Wang, L., Chu, J. and Wu, J. (2007), “Selection of optimum maintenance strategies based on a fuzzy analytic
hierarchy process”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 107 No. 1, pp. 151-163.
Wijesinghe, D. and Mallawarachchi, H. (2019), “A systematic approach for maintenance performance
measurement: apparel industry in Sri Lanka”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 41-53.
Yang, L., Ye, Z.S., Lee, C.G., Yang, S.F. and Peng, R. (2019), “A two-phase preventive maintenance
policy considering imperfect repair and postponed replacement”, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 274 No. 3, pp. 966-977.
Yazdi, M., Nedjati, A. and Abbassi, R. (2019), “Fuzzy dynamic risk-based maintenance investment
optimization for offshore process facilities”, Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,
Vol. 57, January, pp. 194-207, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0950
423018306296
You, M.Y. (2017), “A predictive maintenance system for hybrid degradation processes”, International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 1123-1135.
Zadeh, L.A. (1965), “Fuzzy sets”, Information and Control, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 338-353.
Ziaei, F., Baniani, A.M., Galankashi, M.R., Ghashami, S.S. and Nargesi, Z.R. (2013), “Application of
Minimax, Minsum and analytical hierarchy process for facility location problem”, Australian
Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, Vol. 7 No. 14, pp. 237-245.
Zhang, C., Gao, W., Yang, T. and Guo, S. (2019), “Opportunistic maintenance strategy for wind turbines
considering weather conditions and spare parts inventory management”, Renewable Energy, Vol. 133,
April, pp. 703-711, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148118312606

Further reading
Abaza, K. and Ashur, S. (1999), “Optimum decision policy for management of pavement maintenance
and rehabilitation”, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, Vol. 1655 No. 1, pp. 8-15.
Carnero, M.C. (2005), “Selection of diagnostic techniques and instrumentation in a predictive
maintenance program. A case study”, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 539-555.
Chan, F.T.S., Lau, H.C.W., Ip, R.W.L., Chan, H.K. and Kong, S. (2005), “Implementation of total
productive maintenance: a case study”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 95
No. 1, pp. 71-94.
Dargi, A., Anjomshoae, A., Galankashi, M.R., Memari, A. and Tap, M.B.M. (2014), “Supplier selection: a
fuzzy-ANP approach”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 31, pp. 691-700, available at: www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050914004943
Durango, P.L. and Madanat, S.M. (2002), “Optimal maintenance and repair policies in infrastructure
management under uncertain facility deterioration rates: an adaptive control approach”,
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 36 No. 9, pp. 763-778.
Faccio, M., Persona, A., Sgarbossa, F. and Zanin, G. (2014), “Industrial maintenance policy development:
a quantitative framework”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 147, Part A,
pp. 85-93, available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527312003660
González-Prida Díaz, V., Viveros Gunckel, P., Barberá Martínez, L. and Crespo Márquez, A. (2018), “AHP
method according to a changing environment”, in Crespo Márquez, A., González-Prida Díaz, V.
and Gómez Fernández, J. (Eds), Advanced Maintenance Modelling for Asset Management,
Springer, Cham, available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-58045-6_7
Gupta, S., Maiti, J., Kumar, R. and Kumar, U. (2009), “A control chart guided maintenance policy selection”, An integrated
International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 216-226. fuzzy-AHP
Hilber, P., Miranda, V., Matos, M.A. and Bertling, L. (2007), “Multiobjective optimization applied to and TOPSIS
maintenance policy for electrical networks”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 22 No. 4,
pp. 1675-1682. approach
Ilgin, M.A. and Tunali, S. (2007), “Joint optimization of spare parts inventory and maintenance policies
using genetic algorithms”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,
Vol. 34 Nos 5-6, pp. 594-604.
Lai, X., Chen, Z. and Bidanda, B. (2019), “Optimal decision of an economic production quantity model
for imperfect manufacturing under hybrid maintenance policy with shortages and partial
backlogging”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 57 No. 19, pp. 1-25.
Liu, B., Xu, Z., Xie, M. and Kuo, W. (2014), “A value-based preventive maintenance policy for multi-
component system with continuously degrading components”, Reliability Engineering and
System Safety, Vol. 132, December, pp. 83-89, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2014.06.012, available at: www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0951832014001422
Liu, Q., Dong, M., Chen, F.F., Lv, W. and Ye, C. (2019), “Single-machine-based joint optimization of
predictive maintenance planning and production scheduling”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated
Manufacturing, Vol. 55, pp. 173-182.
Louit, D.M., Pascual, R. and Jardine, A.K.S. (2009), “A practical procedure for the selection of
time-to-failure models based on the assessment of trends in maintenance data”, Reliability
Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 94 No. 10, pp. 1618-1628, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2009.04.001.
Márquez, A.C., Díaz, V.G.P. and Fernández, J.F.G. (2018), “Advanced maintenance modelling for
asset management”.
Shafiee, M. and Finkelstein, M. (2015), “An optimal age-based group maintenance policy for multi-unit
degrading systems”, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 134, February, pp. 230-238,
available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0951832014002324
Waeyenbergh, G. and Pintelon, L. (2002), “A framework for maintenance concept development”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 299-313.
Yoon, K.P. and Hwang, C.L. (1995), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Vol. 104,
Sage Publications.
Zavadskas, E.K. and Vilutienė, T. (2006), “A multiple criteria evaluation of multi-family apartment
block’s maintenance contractors: I – Model for maintenance contractor evaluation and the
determination of its selection criteria”, Building and Environment, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 621-632.

Appendix. FAHP and TOPSIS questionnaire

Dear Respondents,
Following questionnaire is designed to select the best maintenance policy of an acid manufacturing
company. This questionnaire includes two set of questions as follows. Section A includes three
questions to make the pairwise comparison of main criteria including added-value, risk and cost to be
applied in FAHP. Section B includes 12 questions to be applied in TOPSIS. Please apply the following
scale to fill Section A (Table AI).

Judgment Assigned number

Similarly same 1
Slightly more important 2
Moderately more important 3
More important 4
Much more important 5 Table AI.
Significantly more important 6 Preference value
IJQRM P/S please note that you have to fill this questionnaire for each equipment separately. In other words,
seven sets of this questionnaire should be filled for all seven equipment pieces of the company.
 An integrated
fuzzy-AHP
and TOPSIS
approach

Corresponding author
Masoud Rahiminezhad Galankashi can be contacted at: Masoud.rahiminejad@yahoo.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com