Energy 249 (2022) 123613

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Developing an exhaustive optimal maintenance schedule for offshore

wind turbines based on risk-assessment, technical factors and cost-
effective evaluation
Thi-Anh-Tuyet Nguyen a, b, *, Shuo-Yan Chou a, b, Tiffany Hui-Kuang Yu c
a
Department of Industrial Management, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No 43 Section 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 10607, Taiwan, ROC
b
Taiwan Building Technology Center, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No 43 Section 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 10607, Taiwan, ROC
c
Department of Public Finance, Feng Chia University, 100 Wen-Hwa Rd., Seatwen, Taichung, 40724, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Maintenance scheduling is one of the most challenging issues of offshore wind system, because the
Received 2 August 2021 maintenance decision may impact greatly to cost-effectiveness. The process of maintenance decision
Received in revised form making is confronting with uncertainties, including economic, technical, safety and environmental un-
4 February 2022
certain that make conventional maintenance optimization insufficient. The conventional maintenance
Accepted 27 February 2022
Available online 10 March 2022
optimization in the existing studies only consider factors related to technical and economic aspects in
maintenance optimization. No existing study analyzes the effects of health and safety risks of the
technicians and the environmental risks of the maintenance activities under the impacts of the complex
Keywords:
Renewable energy
weather conditions in the marine environment. The occurrence of environmental and safety risks causes
Offshore wind system catastrophic consequences, especially in harsh weather condition, that make the conventional mainte-
Maintenance optimization nance techniques insufficient. This paper proposes an approach to optimize maintenance schedule that is
Maintenance schedule designed to maximize the cost-effectiveness while minimizing the environmental and safety risks. The
Risk assessment proposed model utilizes fuzzy probabilities to assess the environmental and safety risks. This paper also
Cost-effective maintenance presents a mathematical model to derive the optimal individual maintenance schedule and group
maintenance schedule for various components by considering a number of impacted factors. The results
demonstrated that the number of maintenance activities when considering environmental and safety
risks is higher than that without considering environmental and safety risks. For example, the number of
maintenance activities with and without considering the environmental and safety risks at the location
of 25 km of distance to shore is 75 and 86 activities respectively. The effect of risk-assessment model was
more apparent for vulnerable components and was less apparent for the durable components.
© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Energy is indispensable for social and economic development.
Substantial growth in population, industrialization, and living
standards has rapidly exacerbated energy demand, energy security
challenges, and environmental problems such as global warming
and greenhouse gas emission. The International Energy Agency
* Corresponding author. Department of Industrial Management, National Taiwan
University of Science and Technology, No 43 Section 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 10607,
Taiwan, ROC.
E-mail addresses: anhtuyet213@gmail.com, anhtuyet34k7@gmail.com
(T.-A.-T. Nguyen), sychou@mail.ntust.edu.tw (S.-Y. Chou), hkyu@mail.fcu.edu.tw
(T.H.-K. Yu).
estimated that between 2017 and 2018, the global electricity de-
mand increased by 4%. The global electricity demand is estimated
to continually increase by 2% per year from 2019 until 2040 [1].
Consequently, the global gross electricity consumption is expected
to increase from 24,765 billion kWh in 2018 to 42,321 billion kWh
in 2040 [1]. In 2017, the global electricity generation was 3.1% (or
789 TWh) more than that in 2016 with the worldwide increase in
electricity demand. For example, in 2017, the worldwide electricity
generation was 25,570 TWh, of which 37% originated from coal, 23%
from gas, 4% from oil, 10% from nuclear power, and 25% from
renewable energy [2]. Electricity generation from conventional
energy resources accounted for 65% of worldwide gross electricity
production. However, conventional energy sources have the high-
est carbon dioxide emissions per kW of generated electricity as well

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123613
0360-5442/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu
as high levels of other pollutants [3].
To substitute the conventional energy sources, offshore wind
energy has emerged as one of the most promising renewable en-
ergy sources and attracted increased attention globally as an
inexhaustible clean energy source. Offshore wind energy has
experienced rapid growth in recent decades, however, with a
contribution of 12%e30% in the total lifecycle cost [4], the operation
and maintenance costs have become an impediment to achieve
better cost-effectiveness and enhance the market competitiveness.
The reduction of operation and maintenance cost plays a significant
role in decreasing the cost of energy generated by offshore wind
system, which can be realized through better design of mainte-
nance schedule. To achieve better cost-effectiveness and enhance
the market competitiveness of offshore wind energy, it is necessary
to develop an efficient exhaustive maintenance schedule that
considers all the relevant influencing factors.
In an attempt to improve the effectiveness of offshore wind
system maintenance, many studies have focused on maintenance
optimization. The maintenance analysis methods commonly
include preventive maintenance [5e13], corrective maintenance
[14e17], opportunistic maintenance [18e22], continuous moni-
toring [23e25] and condition-based maintenance [26e33]. Zhang
et al. [34] proposed an opportunistic maintenance strategy for wind
turbines considering stochastic weather conditions and spare parts
management. Their results showed that the operation and main-
tenance cost can be reduced by 10.9%e18.3% in comparison with a
static opportunistic maintenance strategy. Zhong et al. [13]
extended the study of preventive maintenance scheduling problem
for offshore wind farms in a fuzzy setting utilizing modelling and
optimization techniques. Pareto-optimal solutions of the schedules
are obtained to form the trade-off between the reliability maxi-
mization and cost minimization objectives. Zhu et al. [35] devel-
oped a two-level maintenance policy considering both periodic
maintenance planning and reactive maintenance. They considered
logistic delay and weather condition for performing maintenance
activities. Song et al. [31] integrated layout design and two-stage
optimization to minimize maintenance cost of offshore wind
farm. Zhou and Yin [36] proposed a condition-based maintenance
strategy for offshore wind farm based on predictive analytics by
considering the varying maintenance lead time. Their results show
that the annual maintenance cost can be reduced by 39.2%e32.46%.
Zafar and Vatn [37] optimized group maintenance for offshore wind
turbines. However, they did not consider production losses, main-
tenance duration, or the time value of money. Hartman and Murphy
[38] investigated the time value of money and economic life of
wind systems to optimize a finite-horizon replacement schedule.
However, reliability of the system was not considered in their pa-
per. Byon [39] presented a tractable approximation of dynamic
decision-making for wind turbine operation and maintenance that
accounted for weather conditions and assumed that losses of rev-
enue do not depend on the system's condition. Kerres et al. [40] and
Martin et al. [41] estimated the maintenance cost on the basis of the
failure rate, but neither determined an optimal maintenance
schedule with respect to the time value of money.
Another focus of researches in maintenance optimization of
offshore wind system concerns maintenance routing and vessel
fleet analysis of maintenance activities [42e46]. Shafiee [47]
reviewed the state-of-the-art maintenance logistics used in
offshore wind energy involving three categorize of strategic,
tactical and operational decision-making. Their results indicated
that the strategic decisions of maintenance logistics have received
2
Energy 249 (2022) 123613
the most attention in the maintenance routing and logistics field.
Irawan et al. [45] developed an algorithm based on Dantzig-Wolfe
decomposition method to generated all feasible routs and main-
tenance schedule for the vessels. Fan et al. [48] extended a routing
and scheduling problem with discrete window time and multiple
logistic bases. The results provide both the optimized cost and
detailed routing used in the maintenance schedule.
The maintenance optimization procedures considering risk-
analysis have also proposed recently [49e54]. Kolios and Smolka
[51] assessed the failure risks of critical components to assign in-
spection and monitoring practices. Leonardi et al. [52] designed a
risk-based maintenance to identify the plant elements to inspect at
minimizing production losses. The risk evaluation is strictly related
to the healthiness of the power plant itself. Carla and Shafiee [54]
analyzed the risk of maintenance ship collision with wind turbines
between corrective maintenance tasks and preventive mainte-
nance tasks. Khan and Haddara [55] proposed a methodology for
risk-based maintenance to minimize the probability of the failure
and its consequences in the heating, ventilation and air-
conditioning (HVAC) system. Arunraj and Maiti [56] reviewed the
literature on risk-analysis and risk-based maintenance. They
showed that the concept of risk-based maintenance was developed
in the literature to provide a tool for maintenance decision making
to reduce the probability of failure of equipment and the conse-
quences of failure. Weber et al. [57], also reviewed 200 specific
references in the risk-analysis and maintenance application among
a database with 7000 Bayesian network references. Their finding
demonstrated that although the existing studies have considered
the impact of system safety, economic and environmental aspects
on the risk-analysis approach, the risk-analysis and risk-based
maintenance in the existing studies have only focused on
analyzing the failure probability and risk associated to a system
situation and safety of systems. In general, the studies considered
risk-analysis have only evaluated the risks related to reliability of
the system, or the risks related to collision ship on the maintenance
schedule.
In general, the existing studies mainly focus on: (i) maintenance
schedule itself in different types of maintenance such as preventive
maintenance, corrective maintenance, opportunistic maintenance,
condition-based maintenance; (ii) maintenance routing and vessel
fleet analysis of maintenance activities; (iii) risk-analysis to deter-
mine the maintenance schedule, mainly related to the impact of
operation condition risks to the power plant itself or the risks of
maintenance ship collision. The various maintenance decisions and
methods have been considered and studied, and their economic
advantage is obvious and clear. However, the existing studies only
consider economic aspects (cost-effectiveness) and/or technolog-
ical aspects (such as reliability analysis) in determining the optimal
maintenance schedules, without assessing the effects of the health
and safety risks of the technicians and the environmental risks of
the maintenance activities under the impacts of the complex
weather conditions in the marine environment. The impacts of
external environmental conditions are not only on the power
generation of wind system, power generation lost during mainte-
nance activities, and failure probability of system, but also the
health and safety risks of the technicians and the environmental
risks of the maintenance activities. Therefore, the environmental
risk and safety risk, especially under impact of the external envi-
ronmental conditions, should be regarded as an important decision
variable in the optimal maintenance schedule decision-making. To
the best of our knowledge, no model has been proposed in the
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu
literature that considers all three factors related to cost-
effectiveness, system reliability, and assessments of environ-
mental and safety risks of maintenance activities of offshore wind
system.
1.1. Problem and objective
One of the problems of the maintenance techniques in the lit-
eratures is that they do not assess the effects of risks involving
environmental and safety risks in the process of optimizing the
maintenance schedule of offshore wind system. However, the
maintenance activities of an offshore wind system may involve
many potential risks and hazards to the technicians and environ-
ment during the journey from the shore to the turbine and during
the maintenance of the wind turbine. The safety risks in this
manuscript refer to the risks and hazards to the technicians such as
motion sickness, vibration-induced illnesses, slipping, tripping and
falling hazards during the maintenance. In addition, since the
maintenance of the offshore wind systems will require the tech-
nicians to be exposed to the marine environment for an extended
period of time, the impacts of the weather conditions (especially
the harsh weather conditions) to the risks and hazards of the
technicians are significant. In harsh weather conditions like storms,
hurricanes and extremely strong waves, the technicians may have
to face with fatal risks and hazards. For example, the extreme
temperature (too cold or too hot) may induce the breathing diffi-
culty, muscular stiffness, frost bite, lowered metabolism, hypo-
thermia, bulky clothing, stiffness of suits impairing movement, and
slippery surfaces. The fog effect may reduce visibility of the tech-
nicians and vessels operators. Typhoons, storms and hurricanes
may cause collision of maintenance vessels to the wind turbines
and other fatal risks to human health and safety. The collision of
maintenance vessels and major failure of offshore wind system
hinder major release of chemical to the environment. Heavy raining
and strong wind may increase the hazards of slipping, tripping and
falling during the maintenance activities. Therefore, the environ-
mental and safety risk-assessments is critical and should be
considered in process of optimizing the maintenance schedule for
offshore wind systems, because the risks, once occurring, may
cause catastrophic consequences to human safety and the envi-
ronment. The consequences of the environmental and safety risks
may be even worse for offshore wind system whose the mainte-
nance activities are complicated, costly and highly dependent on
many uncertain factors such as weather conditions, system failure,
and transportation. As such, the maintenance techniques that do
not involve risk-assessment is not comprehensive and not suitable
for applications in real life offshore wind projects.
The objective of this paper is to propose an optimal maintenance
schedule that considers all three factors related to cost-
effectiveness, system reliability and assessment of environmental
and safety risks in maintenance activities of offshore wind system.
The proposed model includes a coarse assessment model and a fine
assessment model, in which the fine assessment model (also
referred to as risk-assessment model) based on fuzzy probabilities
is used to assess the effects of the environmental and safety risks on
maintenance scheduling. The coarse assessment model is used to
assess the technical and economic factors in maintenance sched-
uling. The coarse assessment model is designed to evaluate the
effect of factors including a rejuvenation parameter, system reli-
ability, lost power generation during maintenance, maintenance
duration, government subsidies, the time value of money, and
distance to shore on the optimal maintenance schedule. The risk
3
Energy 249 (2022) 123613
assessment model is designed to refine the maintenance decision
to the optimization of the maintenance scheduling based on the
risks caused by the weather condition, system failure, trans-
portation, environmental risk and safety risk. Furthermore, indi-
vidual maintenance schedule (IMS) which considers once
maintenance activity of each component at a time and group
maintenance schedule (GMS) that determines the possibility of
grouping multiple maintenance activities as a single maintenance
activity are derived to optimize the maintenance strategy. As such,
the optimal maintenance schedule model in this paper is coupling
the system reliability (considering the risks related to the failure
rate of system), cost-effectiveness (considering technical, eco-
nomic, environmental aspects), and evaluate the health and safety
risks of the technicians and the environmental risks of the main-
tenance activities under the impacts of the complex weather con-
ditions in the marine environment together to provide an
exhaustive optimal maintenance schedule for offshore wind
turbines.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section two
presents the proposed methodology including a risk-assessment
model and an optimal maintenance schedule model. Section 3
presents the application that describes the input data of eco-
nomic aspect and technical aspect, weather condition data, and
input data of risk-assessment model. Section 4 describes the results
and discussion. Finally, section 5 draws conclusions and summa-
rizes the findings of this paper.
2. Methodology
This paper proposes an approach for determining the optimal
maintenance schedule for offshore wind system such that the
maintenance cost and the effects of environmental and safety risks
are minimized.
Similar to our former studies [58,59], this study evaluate the
cost-effectiveness based on a number of technical and economic
factors such as system reliability, cost-effectiveness, weather con-
ditions, maintenance duration, market electricity price, offshore
wind system location, a rejuvenation parameter, lost power gen-
eration during maintenance, government subsidies and the time
value of money. In addition, the study in this paper develops and
extends the study proposed in our former papers [58,59] by further
executing a risk assessment that evaluate the effects of environ-
mental and safety risks on maintenance scheduling. As presented
in Fig. 1, the risk assessment is performed when result of the coarse
assessment is the “maintenance” decision. The environmental and
safety risks are assessed based on fuzzy probabilities to model the
uncertainties in different aspects including the weather conditions,
system failure, and transportation of the maintenance activity.
According to the fuzzy theory, the fuzzy variables regarding the
weather condition, the system failure, the transportation of the
maintenance activity, the environmental risk and the safety risk are
denoted by linguistic terms. For example, the fuzzy variables of the
weather condition are denoted by the terms “very bad weather
condition”, “bad weather condition”, “medium weather condition”
and “good weather condition” (detail description is shown in
Table 4). The safety risk includes three scenarios: (1) no harmful
consequences (there is no potential for injuries to technicians, and
no effect on safety systems); (2) minor system damage but no cause
injury to technician (there are some limited effects on safety sys-
tems, and/or minor potential injuries requiring medical treatment
but there is no serious personal injuries); and (3) injury to tech-
nician (there is a high potential for serious personnel injuries or
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu
Fig. 1. Research framework.
fatality). The environmental risk consists of three scenarios: (1) no
harmful consequence (no impact to environment); (2) minor
release of chemical to the environment (contained release of
chemical requiring only simple clean up, no need for reporting to
local environmental agencies); and (3) major release of chemical to
the environment (Impairment of ecosystems function, uncontained
release, and need to be reported to local environmental agencies).
The fine assessment model aggregates the environmental and
safety risk-assessments to output the “maintenance” decision (MD)
or “not maintenance” decision (ND). The output of the fine
assessment model is recorded for each of the major component i in
each time point t. The iterative process is performed until all major
components of the wind turbine and all the time points are eval-
uated, and the optimal sequence of time points for maintenance
decision is determined. The determination of the optimal sequence
of time points for maintenance decision of the component in one
…
~ …
V, p~, …
~
q
Interval value neutrosophic numbers (IVN)
TV ðxÞ Truth membership function
IV ðxÞ Indeterminacy membership function
FV ðxÞ Falsity membership function
DV ðxÞ Deneutrosophication function of an IVN number
PRaðiÞ Probability of the aggregate risk assessment of scenario i
PRSðiÞ Probability of the safety risk of scenario i
PREðiÞ Probability of the environmental risk of scenario i
x Empirical scaling parameters of the safety risk-assessment
y Empirical scaling parameters of the environmental risk-assessment
4
Energy 249 (2022) 123613
wind turbine is considered as the individual maintenance schedule
(IMS).
As presented in Fig. 1, the proposed approach in this paper
further includes group maintenance schedule (GMS) model. The
GMS model is utilized to group multiple maintenance activities as a
single maintenance activity, so as to optimizing the maintenance
cost.
2.1. Risk-assessment model
Risk-analysis as referred in the literature studies is a technique
for identifying and evaluating critical event occurrence related to
the system reliability. However, the impacts of external environ-
mental conditions are not only on the system reliability, but also on
the power generation of offshore wind system, power generation
lost during maintenance activities, and especially on the health and
safety risks of the technicians and the environmental risks of the
maintenance activities. Therefore, the Risk-assessment model in
this section aims to identify the safety risk and environmental risk
of maintenance activity by identifying the probability of the future
occurrence and its consequences. The risk-assessment of environ-
mental risk and safety risk, especially under impact of the external
environmental conditions, is a crucial factor when deciding on the
maintenance actions to be performed of offshore wind system. The
decision has to be made on two possible alternatives: do nothing,
and perform maintenance. The alternatives will be assessed by the
risk assessment of two criteria: safety and environment. Both
criteria will be evaluated by their risk and then aggregated on the
one risk assessment.
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

This study assesses safety risk and environmental risk of

maintenance activities under impact of weather condition. Because Y
n
PðX1 ; X2 ; …; Xn Þy PðXi \ParentsðXi ÞÞ (7)
the weather condition is uncertain, fuzzy probability is out- i¼1
performance to solve with uncertain of weather condition. There-
fore, this study uses interval value neutrosophic (IVN) probability to Fuzzy Joint probability
deal with uncertain in risk assessment model. To formulate the


risk-assessment model, the following notations are introduced: P Y ¼ yj ; X ¼ xi y PðX ¼ xi Þ5P Y ¼ yj \X ¼ xi (8)
Based on fuzzy sets, Smarandache [60] added indeterminacy
membership function in the IVN, with the truth membership Fuzzy Marginalization rule
function and falsity membership function of intuitionistic fuzzy
 X

sets to handle incomplete, indeterminate and inconsistent infor- P Y ¼ yj y PðX ¼ xi Þ 5 P Y ¼ yj \X ¼ xi (9)
mation in real situations. i
…~ … ~
An IVN V (V ¼ ð½TVL ðxÞ; TVU ðxÞ; ½IVL ðxÞ; IVU ðxÞ; ½FVL ðxÞ; FVU ðxÞÞ) in a Fuzzy Bayes Rule
universe of discourse (X) is defined by a truth membership function

(TV ðxÞ), an indeterminacy membership function (IV ðxÞ), and a falsity

PðX ¼ xi Þ5P Y ¼ yj \X ¼ xi
membership function (FV ðxÞ) for each x2X (X ¼ fx1 ; x2 ; …; xn g) P Y ¼ yj \X ¼ xi y
 (10)
P Y ¼ yj
[61]. The arithmetic operation rules between two IVN numbers
~ ¼ ð½T L ; T U ; ½I L ; I U ; ½F L ; F U Þ and …
…
p ~ ¼ ð½T L ; T U ; ½I L ; I U ; ½F L ; F U Þ are
q
p p p p p p q q q q q q The probability of each scenario of the safety risk assessment
derived using Eqs. (1)e(6). and the environmental risk assessment are evaluated by Eqs. 1e10.
After evaluating the probability of each scenario of the safety risk
…
h i h i
…
~ ~ TpL þ TqL  TpL TqL ; TpU þ TqU  TpU TqU ; IpL IqL ; IpU IqU ; and the environmental risk, an aggregate risk assessment is
p 4q¼
h i executed to assess finely the optimal maintenance model. The
FpL FqL ; FpU FqU (1) aggregate risk assessment is calculated based on the probability of
each scenario and the empirical scaling parameters of the safety

h i h i risk-assessment (x), and the environmental risk-assessment (y),
… …
p 5 q~ ¼ TpL TqL ; TpU TqU ; IpL þ IqL  IpL IqL ; IpU þ IqU  IpU IqU ;
~ and derived as in Eq. (11).
h i
FpL þ FqL  FpL FqL ; FpU þ FqU  FpU FqU (2) PRaðiÞ ¼ xPRSðiÞ þ yPREðiÞ (11)

h
n
n i h
n
n i where PRaðiÞ is the probability of the aggregate risk assessment of

…
~
np¼ 1 1  TpL
;1 1  TpU ; IpL ; IpU ; scenario i, PRSðiÞ is the probability of the safety risk of scenario i and
h
n
n i PREðiÞ is the probability of the environmental risk of scenario i.
FpL ; FpU for n > 0 (3) Although the environmental risk and safety risk are evaluated
independently, and then they are aggregated into one aggregate
" # " # " #! risk using the probability of each scenario and the empirical scaling
…
~
p TpL TpU IpL  IqL IpU  IqU FpL  FqL FpU  FqU parameters, there is a relationship between them because both of
… ¼ ; ; ; ; ; (4)
~
q TqL TqU 1  IqL 1  IqU 1  FqL 1  FqU the environmental risk and safety risk are evaluated under the
same weather condition in each period. For example, when the

h
n
n i h
n
n i weather condition is “very bad weather condition”, the probability
…
~n of “major release of chemical to the environment” (environment
p ¼ TpL ; TpU ; 1  1  IpL ; 1  1  IpU ;
h
n
n i risk assessment) is very high. Meanwhile, the probability of “injury
1  1  FpL ; 1  1  FpU for n > 0 (5) to technician” (safety risk assessment) is also very high.

The deneutrosophication function of an interval-valued neu-

…
~ 2.2. Optimal maintenance schedule
trosophic number V ¼ ð½TVL ðxÞ; TVU ðxÞ; ½IVL ðxÞ; IVU ðxÞ; ½FVL ðxÞ; FVU ðxÞÞ is
expressed as Eq. (6). This study developed a mathematical model for determining the
h i optimal maintenance schedule of offshore wind systems that is
!
TVL ðxÞ þ TVU ðxÞ
IVL ðxÞ þ IVU ðxÞ designed to maximize the cost-effectiveness and system reliability
DV ðxÞ ¼ þ 1  IVU ðxÞ while minimizing the environmental and safety risks. Similar to our
2 2
! (6) former studies [58,59], to determine whether the MD or the ND
FVL ðxÞ þ FVU ðxÞ
U
 decision should be made, this study evaluate the cost-effectiveness
  1  FV ðxÞ based on a number of technical and economic factors such as sys-
2
tem reliability, cost-effectiveness, weather conditions, mainte-
The risk-assessment methods are based on Bayes Fuzzy Proba- nance duration, market electricity price, offshore wind system
bility theorem, and can be grouped in several categories, including location, a rejuvenation parameter, lost power generation during
fuzzy conditional independence, fuzzy joint probability, fuzzy maintenance, government subsidies and the time value of money.
marginalization and fuzzy Bayes rule. Each possible state of j of In addition, the study in this paper develops and extends the study
independent variable (X) out of n possible states of dependent proposed in our former papers by further executing a risk assess-
variable (Y) can be determined by Eqs. 7e10. ment that evaluate the effects of environmental and safety risks on
Fuzzy Conditional independence: optimal maintenance scheduling. To formulate the optimal

5
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

and overheating as well as mechanical failures related to vibration

x Rejuvenation rate and electrical faults related to isolation such as low magnetization-
kw
i;j
New virtual age of the component after maintenance activity demagnetized, magnet detachment, loss of insulation in the
kol Age of the component before maintenance activity winding, electrical failure of winding and insufficient cooling.
i;j
Fi;j Failure rate of component i in wind turbine j Moreover, the corrosive damages such as general corrosion, pitting
Fi;j ðThhÞ Threshold of failure rate corrosion, crevice corrosion and galvanic corrosion also contribute
ε Shape parameter of Weibull distribution to the degradation process of all components in wind turbines.
s Scale parameter of Weibull distribution The failure rate of each component in the wind turbines is
k ðtÞ
Zi;j Cost of owning component i period t to period T
increasing with the increase of age of the components. The wind
Cg ðtm Þ Production lost cost turbines can only perform a normal operation under a maximum
e ðtÞ
Ci;j Equipment cost
allowed failure rate. When the failure rate of wind turbines exceeds
Cl ðtÞ Labor cost
the threshold, the wind turbines will be failed and a maintenance
Ctr ðtÞ Transportation cost
vðkÞ Operation cost activity is necessary to maintain the operation of wind turbines.
ui;j ðkw
i;j Þ
Trade-off value The failure rate is changed under impacting of many factors, in
PPR Turbine capacity which the rejuvenation rate (x) of maintained components has a
ui;j Percentage of cost sharing of component i significate influence on the failure rate of wind turbines. The
l
Ni;j Number of labors rejuvenation parameter indicates the efficiency of maintenance
d
Ni;j Number of working days required for maintenance activities activity. The rejuvenation rate impacts on the new virtual age of the
Lr ðtÞ Fixed daily labor rate component after maintenance activity (kw i;j ) compared to the pre-
CT=D Transportation cost per unit distance
D Distance from the coastline to offshore wind farm
vious age of the component (kol
i;j ) [58], and derived by Eq. (12).
bt Government financial subsidy
tm Maintenance duration kw
i;j
Pop Generated electricity x¼1  (12)
Cp Power coefficient kol
i;j
z0 Roughness length
h Altitude above sea level In each period, under impacting of the rejuvenation rate (x), the
href Reference height
failure rate of components in wind turbines are estimated by
vref Wind speed
Weibull distribution followed with two parameters named shape
4 Air pressure
h1 h2 , h3 Efficiency of gearbox, generator, electric
parameter (ε) and scale parameter (s), and can be derived by Eq.
R Length of wind turbine blades (13) [55].
at Electricity price on the market in year t
t
k w ε
ε
Real time utilization of offshore wind system
 
 w
i;j
j  st
Installed capacity
Fi;j t ki;j ¼ 1  e s (13)
Ctrm Transmission charges per unit installed capacity
Cins ðkÞ Insurance cost per unit installed capacity
Cc ði; jÞ Corrective maintenance cost At period t, our former studies [55,56] considered the failure
e Market value of equity rate, and comparison between MD cost and ND cost to determine
d Market value of debt whether each component should be maintained at period t. How-
ke Return of equity ever, the proposed approach in this paper develops and extends the
kd Cost of debt
study proposed on our former papers by further executing a risk
Rinfl Inflation adjustment
WisR Weight of waste material collected from component i assessment that evaluate the effects of environmental and safety
Sas ðkÞ Salvage value per ton of material of type s risks in optimization of maintenance scheduling. In particularly, at
ti* Individual maintenance time points period t, the aggregate risk probability of each scenario (PRaðiÞ ) of the
tG* u Grouping maintenance time points safety risk and the environmental risk is performed. There are three
r Discount rate scenarios of aggregate risk assessment are considered: (1) scenario
t Time period (t ¼ ð1; …; TÞ) 1 (PRað1Þ ) includes “no harmful consequence” of the safety risk-
assessment and the environmental risk-assessment; (2) scenario
2 (PRað2Þ ) includes “minor system damage but no cause injury to
maintenance schedule, the following notation is introduced:
technical” consequence of the safety risk-assessment and “minor
The wind turbines will degrade increasingly in its life cycle. The
release of chemical to the environment” consequence of the envi-
gradual degradation of wind turbines comes from availability
ronmental risk-assessment; (3) scenario 3 (PRað3Þ ) includes “injury to
declining with age and a gradual reduction in component effi-
technician” consequence of the safety risk-assessment and “major
ciencies such as gearbox, bearing, generator. The older turbines fail
release of chemical to the environment” consequence of the envi-
more frequently and more seriously. The mechanical damages and
ronmental risk-assessment.
corrosive damages could be attributed to gradual degradation of all
At period t, if PRað3Þ  Max½PRað1Þ ; PRað2Þ , no maintenance activity is
components in wind turbine. For example, the mechanical damages
of rotor system include fatigue fracture of raceways and ball, wear performed due to the high risk of safe assessment and environmental
of ball and cages, wear of raceways, loss of structural integrity. The assessment. Otherwise, if PRað3Þ < Max½PRað1Þ ; PRað2Þ , the failure rate of
mechanical damages of bearing system related to material failures each component is considered. If the failure rate of component i

that show a time dependency: fatigue and wear. The mechanical 
(Fi;j ðt kw
i;j Þ) exceeds the endurable threshold of failure rate (Fi;j ðThhÞ),
damages of gearbox include different fatigue and wear processes as
a MD decision should be made. If PRað3Þ < Max½PRað1Þ ; PRað2Þ  and
well as various temperature related effects such as wear of race- 

ways and roller, blockage, cracks in gear and insufficient oil cooling. Fi;j ðt kw
i;j Þ < Fi;j ðThhÞ, the comparison of cost-effectiveness between
The mechanical damages of generator include material degradation MD and ND decision are made to determine whether the component

6
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

2


x2 Ci;j
e
ðtÞ þ Cl ðtÞ þ Ctr ðtÞ þ Cg ðtm Þ þ v kw w
i;j  ui;j ki;j
kw
Zi;j ðt þ 1Þ
6 þ
6
6 ð1 þ rÞt ð1 þ rÞtþ1
k
Zi;j ðtÞ ¼ Min 6
6 (14)
6 kþ1
Zi;j ðt þ 1Þ
4 t
ð1 þ rÞ vðkÞ þ
ð1 þ rÞtþ1

should be maintained at period t. Equation (14) shows the objective sharing of component i in turbine j (ui;j ), rental percentage
k ðtÞ is the cost of owning component
function of the study, in which Zi;j ([2ð0; 1Þ), electricity price on the market in year t (at ), real time
i, which has just reached age k, in turbine j from period t to period T. utilization of offshore wind system (t), installed capacity (j),
transmission charges per unit installed capacity (Ctrm ) and insur-
ance cost per unit installed capacity (Cins ðkÞ).
The objective function consists of many detailed constituent  
costs including production lost cost (Cg ðtm Þ), equipment cost vðkÞ ¼ ui;j [at Pop t þ jCtrm þ jCins ðkÞ (20)
e ðtÞ), labor cost (C ðtÞ), transportation cost (C ðtÞ), operation cost
(Ci;j l tr The maintenance cost is decreased by trade-off value (ui;j ðkw
i;j Þ)
(vðkÞ), trade-off value (ui;j ðkw
i;j Þ), and discount rate (r). One of the caused by a superior performance of a maintained component in
main goal of optimization model is to minimize the overall main- the MD decision. The trade-off value is calculated based on the
tenance cost. Therefore, an accurate estimation of maintenance cost expected number of failures of component i in interval ½0; kw i;j 
is important for optimizing maintenance schedule. The mainte- R kwi;j
nance cost is thoroughly investigated in this paper. Equation (15) ( 0 Fi;j ðyÞdy) and the corrective maintenance cost (Cc ði; jÞ), and
formulates the equipment cost of component i in turbine j at derived by Eq. (21).
e ðtÞ) [56].
period t (Ci;j
kw !
!ε
ð
i;j 1  x


 i;j
kol
e
Ci;j ðtÞ ¼ ui;j  mðtÞ  3  106 lnðPPR Þ  662:4  103 (15) ui;j kw c
i;j ¼ Ci;j 
c
Fi;j y dy ¼ Ci;j  (21)
s
0

where PPR is the turbine capacity and ui;j is the percentage of cost The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) method is used to
sharing of component i. account for the discount factor (r) for the time value of money
Equation (16) is used to calculate the labor cost (Cl ðtÞ) based on factor based on market value of equity (e), market value of debt (d),
l ), number of working days required for
the number of labors (Ni;j return of equity (ke ) and cost of debt (kd ), as represented by Eq. (22).
d ) and fixed daily labor rate (US$/day/
maintenance activities (Ni;j Equation (22) is also used to integrate the inflation adjustment
(Rinfl ) and discount of cash flows according to the Fisher equation
person) (Lr ðtÞ)
[63].
l d
Cl ðtÞ ¼ Ni;j  Ni;j  Lr ðtÞ (16) e k þ d k
1 þ eþd e eþd d
r¼ 1 (22)
The transportation cost of maintenance activities is estimated 1 þ Rinfl
based on the transportation cost per unit distance (US$/km) (CT=D )
The constraints of the objective function (Eq. (14)) include: (1)
and the distance from the coastline to offshore wind farm (D), and
The aggregated risk probability of scenario 3 is lower than the
derived by Eq. (17)
aggregated risk probability of scenarios 1e2 (PRað3Þ < Max½PRað1Þ ;
Ctr ðtÞ ¼ 2D  CT=D (17) PRað2Þ ); (2) The failure rate does not exceed the endurable threshold


of failure rate (Fi;j ðt kw
i;j Þ < Fi;j ðThhÞ); (3) The rejuvenation rate falls in
The production lost cost (Cg ðtm Þ) contributes a large portion in
maintenance cost. There are many impact factors influencing on the the interval [0,1] (0  x  1); (4) The failure rate has independent
production lost cost, including government financial subsidy (bt ), increments (Fi;j ðtÞ < Fi;j ðt þ DtÞ); (5) There is a salvage value at the
maintenance duration (tm ) and generated electricity (Pop ). The end of the component's life cycle, and derived by Eq. (23)
production lost cost is calculated by Eq. (18).
X
S
k
Cg ðtm Þ ¼ bt Pop tm (18) Zi;j ðT þ 1Þ ¼  WisR  Sas ðkÞ (23)
s¼1
The generated electricity (Pop ) using to estimate the production
lost cost is calculated based on technical parameters and environ- where WisR is the weight of waste material collected from compo-
mental conditions instead of taking data directly from manufac- nent i, and Sas ðkÞ is salvage value per ton of material of type s
turers, and is derived by Eq. (19) [62]. (Sas ðkÞ).
The Eqs. 1e24 is used to optimize the IMS for each component.
0 13
After obtaining the IMS, the GMS is integrated to group many
B ln h C
gh
4GTe maintenance activities of the IMS into one maintenance activity. By
1 B C
Pop ¼ Cp h1 h2 h3 Bvref  hz0 C pRðR þ 2Rr Þ (19) the GMS, maintenance cost can be saved by saving the set-up cost
2 @ ln zref0 A GTe
(transportation cost and labor cost) and the production lost cost. In
the IMS, each component has a sequence of optimal maintenance
The operation cost is estimated by Eq. (20), based on cost time points. To integrate the sequence of optimal maintenance time
7
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

points of each component into the sequence of optimal mainte- Table 2

nance time points of many components, the tentative maintenance Scale parameter and shape parameter of six major components.

intervals ½tvb ;tve , in which there is no component is maintained more Major component Cost sharing Scale parameter Shape parameter
than once in each tentative interval, are considered [59]. A penalty Rotor system 22.20% 3 3000
cost function is applied to determine whether the IMS should be Gearbox 14.91% 3 2400
grouped to the GMS, and derived by Eqs. 24 and 25. Generator 8.44% 2 3300
Bearing 1.22% 2 3750


   Electrical system 8.60% 2 3600
g1 ¼ ðCs þ Cl Þ  ci tG* u  ci ti* (24) Transmission cable 28% 2 2000

  
g2 ¼ ðCs þ Cl Þ  ci tG* u  ci ti*  Caccess (25)
transmission cable. The scale parameter and shape parameter to
In Eqs. 24 and 25, the penalty cost is a trade-off value between estimate failure rate of each component is given as in Table 2
[65e67].
the cost savings achieved by the GMS and the additional cost
caused by shifting the maintenance activity from the individual It is assumed that a maintenance activity requires six techni-
cians in which the cost of each technician is US$132/person/day
maintenance time points ðti* Þ to the grouping maintenance time
that is based on an average cost of technicians in Taiwan [68]. The
points ðtG* u Þ. The cost savings includes saving of transportation cost transportation cost is US$30/km that includes the crane cost and
and labor cost (set-up cost Cs ), and the production lost cost (Cl ). driver cost. The electricity price in Taiwan increases 3% per year
There is an additional assess cost in Eq. (25) when many turbines [69,70] with an average price of US$0.092/kWh. The financial
are considered. subsidies for offshore wind energy is set annually by the Taiwanese
The efficiency of the GMS is evaluated by the cost saving func- government, and the subsidy rate are obtained from ministry of
tion for each group Gu of u components, and shown in Eqs. 26 and economic affairs (MOEA) [71].
27.
X

   3.2. Weather condition data
SoGu ¼ ðu  1Þ  ðCs þ Cl Þ  ci tG* u  ci ti* (26)
i2Gu
Harsh weather conditions not only impact on the offshore wind
X

   system's reliability, but also significantly hinder the accessibility of
Sm
Gu ¼ ðu  1Þ  ðCs þ Cl Þ  uCaccess  ci tG* u  ci ti* maintenance activities. Delay or postponement of maintenance
i2Gu activities may result in increasing of failure rate. Meanwhile, the
(27) maintenance activities under the unsupported weather conditions
cause catastrophic consequences for human and environment due
to the occurrence of environmental and safety risks. Therefore, this
paper optimizes the maintenance schedule considering the envi-
3. Application ronmental and safety risks caused by the harsh weather conditions
such as temperature, wind speed, wave height, snowfall, low visi-
3.1. Input data of economic aspect and technical aspect bility, typhoon and remoteness. Fig. 2 shows data of the weather
conditions in the investigated location in Taiwan by month
10 Vestas V90-3 MW offshore horizontal wind turbines are collected from Central Weather Bureau in Taiwan and Weather
considered to apply the proposed approach of this study as a case Spark service.
study. The turbines are located at 8 km, 25 km and 40 km of dis- This study has collected and analyzed data of 130 historical
tance to shore, and at 25 m deep of sea level with a monopole typhoon events from 1979 to 2021. Table 3 shows representative
structural foundation. Table 1 shows the technical specifications of data of historical typhoon from 2000 to 2021, including impact
investigated offshore wind turbines [64]. duration, wind speed during typhoon and typhoon type of tracks as
There are six major components in each turbine, including defined by the Taiwan Central Weather Bureau.
bearing, generator, gearbox, rotor system, electrical system and To reduce the uncertainties of the expert judgment elicitation
procedure, the harsh weather conditions is evaluated and scored
based on a weighted summation of the weather parameters and a
Table 1
The technical specifications of investigated offshore wind turbines.
preliminary metric to assess the harshness of the environment
where offshore wind system is located. The harsh weather condi-
Technical specifications tions score is used to consider the impact of weather condition on
Rotor Diameter 90 m the environmental and safety risks. Table 4 illustrates the summary
Rotor swept area 6362 m2 of stressors (factors that mostly affect the human performance in
Tower-Hub heights 80 m
operations in harsh weather conditions), external factors and
Nacelle- height for transport 4m
Length of nacelle 9.65 m penalty system for scoring the harsh weather conditions adapted
Width of nacelle 3.65 m by Landucci et al., [72]. The ranges of the parameters are derived
Length of blade 44 m from literature survey and modified according to the regulations of
Max. weight of blade per unit for transportation 70 tones Taiwan Central Weather Bureau.
Rated Power 3000 kW
Cut-in wind speed 3.5 m/s
Cut-out wind speed 25 m/s 3.3. Input data of risk-assessment model
Operating temperature range standard turbine 20  Ce40  C

Weather condition data are used to assess the safety risk and

8
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu
Fig. 2. Weather condition in investigated location in Taiwan (Average data of period 2013e2021).
environmental risk of maintenance activities in this study. Because
the weather condition is uncertain, IVN probability is proposed to
solve with uncertain of weather condition, and the possible IVN
probabilities are derived in Table 5.
To assess the weather conditions data, a preliminary step is
conducted to address the characterization of the weather condi-
tions through the calculation of scoring harsh weather conditions.
Meteorological data are collected from Taiwan Central Weather
Bureau and Weather Spark service (shown in Fig. 2 and Table 3).
Applying the rules showed in Table 4, a penalty is assigned to each
weather condition in each investigated period. A weight is attrib-
uted to each weather parameter depending on the relative impor-
tance of each factor. For example, because there is no snowfall in
the investigated location, a weight of snowfall is 0. Meanwhile, the
impact of typhoon and fog effect on the risk assessment is high, a
weight equal 0.25 is associated to the effect of typhoon and fog.
P
Equation u ¼ M m¼1 wm Sm is used to aggregate the harsh weather
condition score (HWS) based on the weight and penalty. The harsh
weather condition score is used to rank the weather condition in
each period as the good weather condition (GWC), Medium
weather condition (MWC), Bad weather condition (BWC), and Very
bad weather condition (VBC). Table 6 shows the description of
9
Energy 249 (2022) 123613
weather conditions defined by Taiwan Central Weather Bureau. For
example, the good weather condition (GWC) is no extreme tem-
perature below 12 , no extreme wind speed above 50 km/h, and
HWS ¼ ½0; 0:4Þ. When there is no extreme temperature below 8
and no extreme wind speed above 80 km/h with no damage to
structures and buildings, and HWS ¼ ½0:4; 0:6Þ, the weather con-
dition is categorized into medium weather condition group (MWC).
Bad weather condition (BWC) is in severe weather conditions with
considerable damage to piers, poorly structures and many smaller
structures near coast destroyed, and HWS ¼ ½0:6; 0:8Þ. Very bad
weather condition (VBC) is in severe weather conditions with
major damage to structures, and HWS ¼ ½0:8; 1Þ.
Under impact of weather conditions, the conditional probabili-
ties of system failure and transportation are evaluated and derived
as in Table 7 and Table 8. For example, under GWC, the conditional
probability of “no system failure” state and “Low loading” state is
very high and very low respectively, with a linguistic variable are
([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) and ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]),
respectively.
Procedure of assessing the conditional probability with a lin-
guistic variable is conducted based on the expert judgements. In
this study, we have invited the experts from the operation and
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

Table 3
Typhoons information in Taiwan from 2000 to 2021.

Year Typhoon Impact duration Type of tracks Maximum wind speed (m/s)

2000 Bilis 8/21e8/23 3 53

2001 Trami 7/10e7/11 4 23
2001 Toraji 7/28e7/31 3 38
2001 Lekima 9/23e9/28 4 35
2003 Morakot 8/02e8/04 4 23
2005 Haitang 7/16e7/20 3 55
2005 Talim 8/30e9/01 3 53
2005 Longwang 9/30e10/03 3 51
2006 Bilis 7/12e7/15 2 25
2006 Kaemi 7/23e7/26 3 38
2006 Bopha 8/07e8/09 4 23
2007 Pabuk 8/06e8/08 4 28
2007 Wutip 8/08-8/09 3 18
2007 Sepat 8/16e8/19 3 53
2007 Krosa 10/04e10/07 2 51
2008 Kalmaegi 7/16e7/18 2 33
2008 Jangmi 7/26e7/29 2 43
2008 Sinlaku 9/11e9/16 2 51
2008 Fung-Wong 9/29e9/29 3 53
2009 Morakot 8/05e8/10 3 40
2010 Fanapi 9/17e9/20 4 45
2011 Nanmadol 8/27e8/31 4 53
2012 Saola 7/30e8/03 2 38
2013 Soulik 7/11e7/13 2 51
2014 Matmo 7/21e7/23 3 38
2015 Soudelor 8/06e8/09 3 48
2015 Dujuan 9/27e9/29 2 51
2016 Megi 9/28e9/28 3 45
2016 Nida 7/29e8/03 2 42
2016 Malakas 9/11e9/23 3 49
2017 Nesat 7/25e7/30 2 43
2018 Mangkhut 9/06e9/17 4 79
2018 Maria 7/03e7/12 4 75
2018 Trami 9/20e10/8 4 72
2019 Lingling 8/31e9/08 3 61
2021 Chanthu 9/05e9/20 4 79
2021 Choi-wan 5/29e6/06 1 24

maintenance department of our funding companies to give their
evaluations. The expert judgements follow the safety instructions
on maintenance activity (regulatory framework), and the SOP
(Standard Operating Procedure) for a maintenance task which are
provided by the funding companies for this study. Moreover, the
preliminary step of preprocessing the meteorological data through
the calculation of scoring harsh weather conditions is used to assess
the weather condition in each period, thereby assisting the experts
to make judgments more accurate judgements in assigning the
linguistic variable.
Table 9 describes the safety risk and environmental risk. And
consequence of safety and environment risk is expressed in nu-
merical grades as shown in Table 9. The safety risk includes: (i) no
harmful consequence, (ii) minor system damage but no cause
injury to technician, (iii) injury to technician. The environment risk
includes: (i) no harmful consequence, (ii) minor release of chemical
to the environment, (iii) major release of chemical to the
environment.
“No harmful consequence” means the maintenance team
correctly performs maintenance activities in a required time period
and weather condition over that time period, and there is no po-
tential for injuries to technicians and no effect on safety systems or
environment. “Minor system damage but no cause injury to tech-
nician” means the external weather factors such as temperature,
wind speed, low visibility and typhoon influence on offshore wind
system and cause some minor failure of system and release of
chemical to the environment. The level of harsh weather conditions
in this case may impact on maintenance vessels and hinder minor
release of chemical to the environment. However, the level of harsh
weather conditions in this case doesn't impose serious stresses on
technician.
However, in very harsh weather conditions, the physical and
cognitive performance of technicians is affected significantly. For
example, the abnormally temperature (too cold or too hot) may
induce the breathing difficulty, muscular stiffness, frost bite, low-
ered metabolism, hypothermia, bulky clothing, stiffness of suits
impairing movement, and slippery surfaces [73]. The fog effect may
reduce visibility. Typhoon may cause collision of maintenance
vessels. As a result, the level of harsh weather condition in
“consequence 3” makes technicians more susceptible to physical
injuries, and increase the collision of maintenance vessels. The
collision or overthrow of maintenance vessels and major failure of
offshore wind system hinder major release of chemical to the
environment.
The threshold limit associated to external temperature follows
API standard 581 [74]. Beaufort wind scale proposed by Shaw and
Austin [75] is considered to account of threshold limit of wind
speed. The guidelines of Taiwan Central Weather Bureau are
adopted to set a trigger value for waves heights and typhoon. The
threshold limit of snowfall, low visibility is identified by Kunkel
et al. [76] and DOA-Department of Army [77] respectively.
Conditional probability of consequences of the safety and
environment risk is derived in Table 10. For example, the proba-
bility of “no harmful consequence” of safety risk and environmental

10
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

Table 4 risk in case of no system failure and low loading of transportation

Summary of scoring the harsh weather conditions adapted. are VH and H, respectively.
Stressor External weather Range Penalty
factor

Coldness (1) Environmental >45 0.4

4. Results and discussions
temperature (oC) 4 to 45 0
4 to 4 0.2 To assess the effects of safety-risk assessment and
10 to 4 0.6 environmental-risk assessment on the optimal maintenance
30 to 10 0.8
schedule and maintenance cost, this study evaluated the mainte-
< 30 1
Combined weather (2) Extreme wind 0 to 3.3 0 nance schedule with conventional maintenance schedule (CMS)
effect speed (m/s) 3.3 to 5.5 0.2 and proposed approach (PAS). Each maintenance schedule in the
5.5 to 8 0.4 CMS and PAS was estimated for three distances to shore: 8 km,
8 to 10.8 0.6
25 km, and 40 km.
10.8 to 13.9 0.8
>13.9 1
Table 11 depicts the first IMS of CMS and PAS in different loca-
(3) Waves height <0.1 0 tions for major components of offshore wind system in Taiwan.
(m) 0.1 to 0.6 0.2 Table 11 shows that when considering the safety risk assessment
0.6 to 1.5 0.4 and environmental risk assessment, the optimal maintenance
1.5 to 2.5 0.6
schedule is changed. For example, with CMS, six main components
2.5 to 4 0.8
>4 1 including rotor system, gearbox, generator, bearing, electrical sys-
(4) Snow (snowfall 0 to 0.125 0 tem and transmission cable in a distance to shore of 8 km should be
(m/year) 0.125 to 0.5 0.2 maintained for the first time at the age of 85, 20, 14, 15, 10 and 21
0.5 to 1.25 0.4 months respectively. However, the periods 10, 20, 21 are in high
1 to 1.5 0.6
1.5 to 2 0.8
risk of safety and environment, the gearbox, electrical system and
>2 1 transmission cable should be maintained at the age of 22, 13, 23
Low visibility (5) Fog/Snow effect <50 1 months to minimize the safety risk and environmental risk. Simi-
(minimum visibility 50 to 200 0.8 larly, in a location with distance to shore of 25 km, the gearbox and
distance (m)) 200 to 500 0.6
generator should to maintained at the age of 22 and 16 months,
500 to 1000 0.4
1000 to 2000 0.2 respectively, instead of the age of 20 and 15 months to minimize
>2000 0 the safety risk and environmental risk. In a location with distance to
Damage/Injury (6) Typhoon Type 1 0 shore of 40 km, the generator and bearing should be maintained at
Type 2 0.2 the age of 16 and 22 months, respectively, instead of the age of 15
Type 3 0.6
Type 4 1
and 18 months to minimize the safety risk and environmental risk.
Remoteness (7) Distance from Low 0 Table 12 shows the total number of maintenance activities for
shore (fear of Medium 0.5 six main components of offshore wind turbine in 240 months in
unknown) High 1 different locations of CMS and PAS in Taiwan. The total number of
maintenance activities in the location with distance to shore of
8 km is higher than that in the locations with distance to shore of
Table 5 25 km and 40 km. For example, in PAS, the total number of main-
IVN probabilities.
tenance activities in the location with distance to shore of 8 km
Linguistic variables Notation IVN probability number during 240 months is 92 times. This number in the locations with
Very high probability VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) distance to shore of 25 km and 40 km are 86 times and 82 times,
High probability H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4]) respectively.
Medium probability M ([0.4, 0.5], [0.5, 0.6], [0.4, 0.5]) As shown in Table 12, the total number of maintenance activities
Low probability L ([0.3, 0.4], [0.6, 0.7], [0.5, 0.6]) in PAS is higher than CMS. The high safety risk and environmental
Very low probability VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7])
risk defer the maintenance activities and cause the higher number
of maintenance activities of PAS. Particularly, when considering the

Table 6
Description of weather condition.

Weather condition Description

Good weather condition Good weather condition, no extreme temperature below 12 , no extreme wind speed above 50 km/h HWS ¼ ½0; 0:4Þ.
(GWC)
Medium weather condition No extreme temperature below 8 , no extreme wind speed above 80 km/h. No real damage to structures and buildings. HWS ¼ ½0:4; 0:6Þ.
(MWC)
Bad weather condition Severe weather conditions, extreme temperature below 4 , and/or extreme wind speed above 155 km/h. Considerable damage to piers,
(BWC) poorly structures and many smaller structures near coast destroyed. HWS ¼ ½0:6; 0:8Þ
Very bad weather condition Severe weather conditions, Extreme temperature below 0 , and/or extreme wind speed above 211 km/h. Major damage to structures. HWS ¼
(VBC) ½0:8; 1Þ

11
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

Table 7
Conditional probability of failure.

Weather No system failure Minor system failure Major system failure

GWC VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]) VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7])
MWC L ([0.3, 0.4], [0.6, 0.7], [0.5, 0.6]) M ([0.4, 0.5], [0.5, 0.6], [0.4, 0.5]) VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7])
BWC VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]) H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4]) H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4])
VBC VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]) VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2])

Table 8
Conditional probability of transportation.

Weather High loading Medium loading Low loading

GWC VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4]) VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7])
MWC H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4]) VH ([0.7, 0.8], [0.2, 0.3], [0.1, 0.2]) M ([0.4, 0.5], [0.5, 0.6], [0.4, 0.5])
BWC L ([0.3, 0.4], [0.6, 0.7], [0.5, 0.6]) M ([0.4, 0.5], [0.5, 0.6], [0.4, 0.5]) H ([0.6, 0.7], [0.4, 0.5], [0.3, 0.4])
VBC VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]) VL ([0.1, 0.2], [0.7, 0.8], [0.6, 0.7]) L ([0.3, 0.4], [0.6, 0.7], [0.5, 0.6])

Table 9
Consequences of safety and environment.

Consequence Safety Environment

1 No harmful consequence (There is no potential for injuries to technician, and
no effect on safety systems)
2 Minor system damage, but no cause injury to technician (There are some
limited effects on safety systems, and/or minor potential injuries requiring
medical treatment but there is no serious personal injuries)
3 Injury to technician (There is a high potential for serious personnel injuries or
fatality)
No harmful consequence (No impact to environment)
Minor release of chemical to the environment (Contained release of
chemical requiring only simple clean up, no need for reporting to local
environmental agencies)
Major release of chemical to the environment (Impairment of ecosystems
function, uncontained release, and need to be reported to local
environmental agencies)

Table 10 maintenance activities without considering the safety risk and

Conditional probability of consequences of safety and environment risk. environmental risk (CMS) is 75 activities. However, when consid-
Failure Transportation Safety risk Environmental
ering the safety risk and environmental risk (PAS), this number is
risk 86 activities. The vulnerable components (for example, generator
and electrical system), are impacted more apparently by the risk-
No system failure High loading VL L VL VL VL L
Medium loading L L VL VL L L assessment model. In contrast, the durable components (rotor
Low loading VH H VL H M L system) are influenced less apparently by the risk-assessment
Minor system failure High loading VL L L L VL VL model. For example, the maintenance activities number of rotor
Medium loading M H L M H VL
system is almost the same in three scenarios of different locations.
Low loading VH H VL H M L
Major system failure High loading VH L VH H L H
Meanwhile, the maintenance activities number of generator is
Medium loading H M H M L M changed significantly from 16 activities to 19 activities when
Low loading L L H L VL M considering Risk-assessment model (PAS).
Fig. 3 shows the admissible groups of GMS during first 60 pe-
riods of CMS and PAS in different locations (such as locations with
safety risk and environmental risk, the MD in high risk periods will distance to shore of 8 km, locations with distance to shore of 25 km,
be deferred to next low risk periods. The deferred maintenance and locations with distance to shore of 40 km). As presented in
may cause significant influences on the system reliability of Fig. 3, the optimal grouping schedule when considering safety risk
offshore wind turbine. As a result of reducing system reliability, the and environmental risk (PAS) is different from CMS approach
number of MD of offshore wind system when considering the (without considering safety risk and environmental risk). For
safety risk and environmental risk is higher than that without example, in locations with distance to shore of 8 km in CMS
considering safety risk and environmental risk. For example, at the approach, the maintenance activities of components 2, 3, 5, 6 could
locations of 25 km of distance to shore, the total number of be grouped to a grouping maintenance activity at the 40th month
(C 2;3;5;6 ), the maintenance activities of components 4, 5 could be

Table 11
The first maintenance activity of conventional maintenance schedule (CMS) and proposed individual maintenance schedule (PAS).

Component D ¼ 8 km D ¼ 25 km D ¼ 40 km

CMS Proposed model CMS Proposed model CMS Proposed model

Rotor system (C1) 85 85 86 86 89 89

Gearbox (C2) 20 22 20 22 22 22
Generator (C3) 14 14 15 16 15 16
Bearing (C4) 15 15 17 17 18 22
Electrical system (C5) 10 13 11 11 13 13
Transmission Cable (C6) 21 23 23 23 24 24

12
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu
Table 12
Total number of maintenance activities at different location of CMS and PAS.
Component D ¼ 8 km
CMS Proposed model
1
Rotor system (C ) 2 2
Gearbox (C2) 12 14
Generator (C3) 17 18
Bearing (C4) 16 18
Electrical system (C5) 24 27
Transmission Cable (C6) 11 13
Total maintenance activity 82 92
Fig. 3. Grouping maintenance schedule of CMS and proposed model (PAS).
grouped to a grouping maintenance activity at the 45th month
(C 4;5 ). However, when considering safety risk and environmental
risk (PAS approach), these optimal maintenance activities are
changed. Particularly, the optimal grouping maintenance activities
C 2;3;5;6 and C 4;5 at the month 40th and 45th are changed to C 3;6 ,
C 2;4;6 , C 2;4;5 at the 39th, 45th, and 52nd respectively.
By saving of setup cost (transportation cost and labor cost) and
production lost cost, the maintenance cost of GMS is decreased
significantly in comparison with the IMS. For example, the total
saving maintenance cost in the CMS and PAS is 5.3% and 9.7%
respectively. The maintenance cost in case of considering the safety
risk and environmental risk (PAS) is higher than maintenance cost
of CMS approach 2.08%. The reason of this higher rate is the effect of
deferring the maintenance activities on system reliability when
considering the safety risk and environmental risk, causing the
total number of individual maintenance activities in PAS is higher
than CMS. Although maintenance cost in case of considering the
safety risk and environment risk in PAS is higher than CMS
approach, the deferred maintenance schedule due to risk-
assessment model is inevitable.
5. Conclusions
This study proposed an approach for evaluating the effects
environmental and safety risks through fuzzy probabilities for
optimizing maintenance schedule of offshore wind system. The
proposed approach includes a coarse assessment model and a fine
assessment model (risk assessment model), in which the coarse
assessment model is designed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
the offshore wind system based on factors related to technical and
economic aspects, and the fine assessment model is designed to
13
Energy 249 (2022) 123613
D ¼ 25 km D ¼ 40 km
CMS Proposed model CMS Proposed model
2 3 2 3
12 14 10 12
16 19 16 19
14 15 13 15
21 23 18 20
10 12 10 13
75 86 69 82
evaluate the effects of environment and safety risks. In other words,
the fine assessment model is designed to refine the “maintenance”
decision of the coarse assessment model based on evaluation of the
environment and safety risks. The proposed approach determines
optimal sequence of time points for maintenance decision in term
of maximizing the cost-effectiveness and minimizing the effects of
risks to the maintenance activities of the offshore wind system. This
paper also proposes GMS model that evaluate the grouping of
multiple maintenance activities as a single maintenance activity, so
as to optimizing the maintenance cost of multiple wind turbines in
one or more wind farms.
The results of this paper indicates that the risks including
environmental and safety risks should be evaluated in optimization
of the maintenance scheduling for offshore wind system. In addi-
tion, the models proposed in this paper may assist the investors and
owners of offshore wind system to optimize the maintenance ac-
tivities in term of maximizing the cost-effectiveness and mini-
mizing the effects of risks to the maintenance activities. The results
of this paper may serve as a consultant documents for potential
investors who plan to invest in offshore wind energy and the
governments and policy makers who establish the policy regarding
the offshore wind energy. The proposed approach in this paper may
be applied widely for different countries and locations as long as
the data related to the weather conditions and technical and eco-
nomic data of the locations and countries are specified.
Credit author statement
Nguyen Thi Anh Tuyet: Conceptualization, formal analysis,
methodology, software, data curation, validation, visualization,
writing (original draft), writing (review and editing). Shuo-Yan
Chou: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, project administra-
tion, supervision, validation, visualization, writing (review and
editing). Tiffany Hui-Kuang Yu: Formal analysis, data curation,
validation, writing (review and editing).
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This study was financially supported by the Taiwan Building
Technology Center from the Featured Areas Research Center Pro-
gram within the framework of the Higher Education Sprout Project
by the Ministry of Education in Taiwan under Project No. 107P011. It
was also supported by the Department of Industrial Management of
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

References Energy Rev 2016;56:368e79.

[28] May A, McMillan D. Condition based maintenance for offshore wind turbines:
the effects of false alarms from condition monitoring systems. ESREL; 2013.
[1] PowerTech V. Facts and figures: electricity generation 2019/2020. 2020.
[29] Ramírez JGR, Sørensen JD. In: Maintenance planning of offshore wind turbine
https://www.vgbe.energy/news/vgb-gets-vgbe/?from¼en/data_
using condition monitoring information. Conference maintenance planning of
powergeneration. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
offshore wind turbine using condition monitoring information. Proceeding of
[2] Agency IE. Global Energy & CO2 Status Report 2019: the lastest trends in
the 28th international conference on ocean, offshore and arctic engineering.
energy and emissions. 2019. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-co2-
American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2009.
status-report-2019. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
[30] Salameh JP, Cauet S, Etien E, Sakout A, Rambault L. Gearbox condition
[3] Evans A, Strezov V, Evans T. Assessment of sustainability indicators for
monitoring in wind turbines: a review. Mech Syst Signal Process 2018;111:
renewable energy technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13(5):
251e64.
1082e8.
rquez AC, Castellano E, Ferna
ndez JG. A dynamic opportunistic [31] Song S, Li Q, Felder FA, Wang H, Coit DW. Integrated optimization of offshore
[4] Erguido A, Ma
wind farm layout design and turbine opportunistic condition-based mainte-
maintenance model to maximize energy-based availability while reducing the
nance. Comput Ind Eng 2018;120:288e97.
life cycle cost of wind farms. Renew Energy 2017;114:843e56.
[32] Tautz-Weinert J, Watson S. Using SCADA data for wind turbine condition
[5] Amiri S, Honarvar M. Providing an integrated model for planning and
monitoringea review. IET Renew Power Gener 2016;11(4):382e94.
scheduling energy hubs and preventive maintenance. Energy 2018;163:
[33] Walgern J, Peters L, Madlener R. Economic evaluation of maintenance stra-
1093e114.
tegies for offshore wind turbines based on condition monitoring systems.
[6] Davoodi A, Peyghami S, Yang Y, Dragi cevi
c T, Blaabjerg F. A preventive
2017.
maintenance planning approach for wind converters. Conference A preventive
[34] Zhang C, Gao W, Yang T, Guo S. Opportunistic maintenance strategy for wind
maintenance planning approach for wind converters. 2020 5th IEEE workshop
turbines considering weather conditions and spare parts inventory manage-
on the electronic grid (eGRID). IEEE, p. 1-8.
ment. Renew Energy 2019;133:703e11.
[7] Dui H, Si S, Yam RC. A cost-based integrated importance measure of system
[35] Zhu W, Castanier B, Bettayeb B. A dynamic programming-based maintenance
components for preventive maintenance. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2017;168:
model of offshore wind turbine considering logistic delay and weather con-
98e104.
dition. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2019;190:106512.
[8] Kang J, Li M, Sun L, Wang M. Preventative maintenance optimization for
[36] Zhou P, Yin P. An opportunistic condition-based maintenance strategy for
offshore wind turbine gearbox. Conference Preventative maintenance opti-
offshore wind farm based on predictive analytics. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
mization for offshore wind turbine gearbox. The 27th International Ocean and
2019;109:1e9.
Polar Engineering Conference.
[37] Hameed Z, Vatn J. Role of grouping in the development of an overall main-
[9] Raza A, Ulansky V. Optimal preventive maintenance of wind turbine compo-
tenance optimization framework for offshore wind turbines. P I Mech Eng O-J
nents with imperfect continuous condition monitoring. Energies 2019;12(19):
Ris. 2012;226(O6):584e601.
3801.
[38] Hartman JC, Murphy A. Finite-horizon equipment replacement analysis. IIE
[10] Wang J, Zhang X, Zeng J, Zhang Y. Optimal dynamic imperfect preventive
Trans 2006;38(5):409e19.
maintenance of wind turbines based on general renewal processes. Int J Prod
[39] Byon E. Wind turbine operations and maintenance: a tractable approximation
Res 2020;58(22):6791e810.
of dynamic decision making. IIE Trans 2013;45(11):1188e201.
[11] Zheng R, Zhou Y, Zhang Y. Optimal preventive maintenance for wind turbines
[40] Kerres B, Fischer K, Madlener R. Economic evaluation of maintenance stra-
considering the effects of wind speed. Wind Energy 2020;23(11):1987e2003.
tegies for wind turbines: a stochastic analysis. IET Renew Power Gener
[12] Zhong S, Pantelous AA, Beer M, Zhou J, Processing S. Constrained non-linear
2015;9(7):766e74.
multi-objective optimisation of preventive maintenance scheduling for
[41] Martin R, Lazakis I, Barbouchi S, Johanning L. Sensitivity analysis of offshore
offshore wind farms. Mech Syst Signal Process 2018;104:347e69.
wind farm operation and maintenance cost and availability. Renew Energy
[13] Zhong S, Pantelous AA, Goh M, Zhou J, Processing S. A reliability-and-cost-
2016;85:1226e36.
based fuzzy approach to optimize preventive maintenance scheduling for
[42] Dalgic Y, Lazakis I, Turan O. Investigation of optimum crew transfer vessel
offshore wind farms. Mech Syst Signal Process 2019;124:643e63.
fleet for offshore wind farm maintenance operations. Wind Eng 2015;39(1):
[14] Nachimuthu S, Zuo MJ, Ding Y. A decision-making model for corrective
31e52.
maintenance of offshore wind turbines considering uncertainties. Energies
[43] Halvorsen-Weare EE, Gundegjerde C, Halvorsen IB, Hvattum LM, Nonås LM.
2019;12(8):1408.
€ Vessel fleet analysis for maintenance operations at offshore wind farms. En-
[15] Ozgür-Ünlüakın D, Türkali B, Aksezer SÇ. Cost-effective fault diagnosis of a
ergy Proc 2013;35:167e76.
multi-component dynamic system under corrective maintenance. Appl Soft
[44] Han X, Leira BJ, Sævik S. Vessel hydrodynamic model tuning by discrete
Comput 2021;102:107092.
Bayesian updating using simulated onboard sensor data. Ocean Eng 2021;220:
[16] Seyr H, Muskulus M. Use of Markov decision processes in the evaluation of
108407.
corrective maintenance scheduling policies for offshore wind farms. Energies
[45] Irawan CA, Ouelhadj D, Jones D, Stålhane M, Sperstad IB. Optimisation of
2019;12(15):2993.
maintenance routing and scheduling for offshore wind farms. Eur J Oper Res
[17] Yu T, Zhu C, Chang Q, Wang J. Imperfect corrective maintenance scheduling
2017;256(1):76e89.
for energy efficient manufacturing systems through online task allocation
[46] Stålhane M, Halvorsen-Weare EE, Nonås LM, Pantuso G. Optimizing vessel
method. J Manuf Syst 2019;53:282e90.
fleet size and mix to support maintenance operations at offshore wind farms.
[18] Lubing X, Xiaoming R, Shuai L, Xin H. An opportunistic maintenance strategy
Eur J Oper Res 2019;276(2):495e509.
for offshore wind turbine based on accessibility evaluation. Wind Eng
[47] Shafiee M. Maintenance logistics organization for offshore wind energy:
2020;44(5):455e68.
current progress and future perspectives. Renew Energy 2015;77:182e93.
[19] Sarker BR, Faiz TI. Minimizing maintenance cost for offshore wind turbines
[48] Fan D, Ren Y, Feng Q, Zhu B, Liu Y, Wang Z. A hybrid heuristic optimization of
following multi-level opportunistic preventive strategy. Renew Energy
maintenance routing and scheduling for offshore wind farms. J Loss Prev
2016;85:104e13.
renguer CJRE, Safety S. An opportunistic Process Ind 2019;62:103949.
[20] Shafiee M, Finkelstein M, Be
[49] Biehl F, Lehmann E. Collisions of ships with offshore wind turbines: calcula-
condition-based maintenance policy for offshore wind turbine blades sub-
tion and risk evaluation. Offshore wind energy: Springer; 2006. p. 281e304.
jected to degradation and environmental shocks. Reliab Eng Syst Saf
[50] Dai L, Ehlers S, Rausand M, Utne IB. Risk of collision between service vessels
2015;142:463e71.
and offshore wind turbines. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2013;109:18e31.
[21] Yang L, Zhao Y, Peng R, Ma X. Opportunistic maintenance of production
[51] Kolios AJ, Smolka U. Risk-based maintenance strategies for offshore wind
systems subject to random wait time and multiple control limits. J Manuf Syst
energy assets. Conference Risk-based maintenance strategies for offshore
2018;47:12e34.
wind energy assets. 2020 Annual Reliability and Maintenance Symposium
[22] Zhang C, Gao W, Guo S, Li Y, Yang T. Opportunistic maintenance for wind
(RAMS). IEEE, p. 1-6.
turbines considering imperfect, reliability-based maintenance. Renew Energy
[52] Leonardi F, Messina F, Santoro C. A risk-based approach to automate pre-
2017;103:606e12.
ventive maintenance tasks generation by exploiting autonomous robot in-
[23] Ciani L, Bartolini A, Guidi G, Patrizi G. Condition monitoring of wind farm
spections in wind farms. IEEE Access 2019;7:49568e79.
based on wireless mesh network. Conference condition monitoring of wind
[53] Moulas D, Shafiee M, Mehmanparast A. Damage analysis of ship collisions
farm based on wireless mesh network. Proceeding of the 16th IMEKO TC10
with offshore wind turbine foundations. Ocean Eng 2017;143:149e62.
conference, p. 39-44.
[54] Presencia CE, Shafiee M. Risk analysis of maintenance ship collisions with
[24] Li M, Kang J, Sun L, Wang M. Application. Development of optimal mainte-
offshore wind turbines. Int J Sustain Energy 2018;37(6):576e96.
nance policies for offshore wind turbine gearboxes based on the non-
[55] Khan FI, Haddara MM. Risk-based maintenance (RBM): a quantitative
homogeneous continuous-time Markov process. J Mar Sci Appl 2019;18(1):
approach for maintenance/inspection scheduling and planning. J Loss Prev
93e8.
Process Ind 2003;16(6):561e73.
[25] Nabati EG, Thoben K-D. Data driven decision making in planning the main-
[56] Arunraj N, Maiti J. Risk-based maintenancedtechniques and applications.
tenance activities of off-shore wind energy. Procedia CIRP 2017;59:160e5.
J Hazard Mater 2007;142(3):653e61.
[26] Asgarpour M, Sørensen JD. Bayesian based diagnostic model for condition
[57] Weber P, Medina-Oliva G, Simon C, Iung B. Overview on Bayesian networks
based maintenance of offshore wind farms. Energies 2018;11(2):300.
applications for dependability, risk analysis and maintenance areas. Eng Appl
[27] de Azevedo HDM, Araújo AM, Bouchonneau N. A review of wind turbine
Artif Intell 2012;25(4):671e82.
bearing condition monitoring: state of the art and challenges. Renew Sustain
[58] Nguyen TAT, Chou S-Y. Improved maintenance optimization of offshore wind

14
T.-A.-T. Nguyen, S.-Y. Chou and T.H.-K. Yu Energy 249 (2022) 123613

systems considering effects of government subsidies, lost production and salary/job/operations-and-maintenance-technician/taiwan. [Accessed 2
discounted cost model. Energy 2019;187:115909. January 2022].
[59] Nguyen TAT, Chou S-Y. Maintenance strategy selection for improving cost- [69] BOE. Energy statistical annual reports. Ministry of Economic Affairs; 2018.
effectiveness of offshore wind systems. Energy Convers Manag 2018;157: Available at: https://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/ECW/english/content/
86e95. ContentLink.aspx?menu_id¼1540. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
[60] Smarandache F. Neutrosophic set-a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy [70] C-E K.. Electricity rates scheduled to rise an average of 3%. 2018. https://news.
set. Int J Pure Appl Math 2005;24(3):287. ltn.com.tw/news/focus/breakingnews/2367973. [Accessed 2 January 2022].
[61] Wang H, Smarandache F, Sunderraman R, Zhang Y-Q. Interval neutrosophic [71] MOEA. Feed-in-tariffs rates fore renewable energy announced. Ministry of
sets and logic: theory and applications in computing: theory and applications Economic Affairs; 2021. 2021.
in computing: infinite Study. 2005. [72] Landucci G, Bonvicini S, Cozzani V. A methodology for the analysis of domino
[62] Nguyen TAT, Chou S-Y. Impact of government subsidies on economic feasi- and cascading events in Oil & Gas facilities operating in harsh environments.
bility of offshore wind system: implications for Taiwan energy policies. Appl Saf Sci 2017;95:182e97.
Energy 2018;217:336e45. [73] Musharraf M, Khan F, Veitch B, MacKinnon S, Imtiaz S. Human factor risk
[63] Cooper R, John A. The Fisher equation: nominal and real interest rates. Theor assessment during emergency condition in harsh environment. Conference
Appl Macroecon 2012;1.0. Human factor risk assessment during emergency condition in harsh envi-
[64] VWS A/S. Vestas V90-3MW brochure. 2020. https://pdf.archiexpo.com/pdf/ ronment, vol. vol. 55331. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p.
vestas/vestas-v90-30-mw/88087-134421.html. [Accessed 2 January 2022]. V02BTA004.
[65] Ding F, Tian Z. Opportunistic maintenance for wind farms considering multi- [74] Institute AP. Risk-based inspection base resource decument, vol. 581. API
level imperfect maintenance thresholds. Renew Energy 2012;45:175e82. Publication; 2000.
[66] Sarker BR, Ibn Faiz T. Minimizing maintenance cost for offshore wind turbines [75] Shaw N, Austin E. Manual of meteorology. In: Comparative meteorology.
following multi-level opportunistic preventive strategy. Renew Energy University Press; 1942.
2016;85:104e13. [76] Kunkel KE, Palecki MA, Hubbard KG, Robinson DA, Redmond KT,
[67] Tian Z, Jin T, Wu B, Ding F. Condition based maintenance optimization for Easterling DR. Trend identification in twentieth-century US snowfall: the
wind power generation systems under continuous monitoring. Renew Energy challenges. J Atmos Ocean Technol 2007;24(1):64e73.
2011;36(5):1502e9. [77] DOA FM. 6-16-2 Tables for artillery meteorology (visual) ballistic type 3 and
[68] Expert S. Operations & mainatenance technician: average base salary in computer messages and limited surface observations. US Department of
taiwan salary expert. 2021. Available at: https://www.salaryexpert.com/ Army; 1982.

15