An Options Approach for Decision Support of Systems With Prognostic Capabilities

Safety, mission, and infrastructure critical systems are adopting prognostics and health management, a discipline consisting of technologies and methods to assess the reliability of a product in its actual life-cycle conditions to determine the advent of failure and mitigate system risks. The output from a prognostic system is the remaining useful life of the system; it gives the decision-maker lead-time and flexibility to manage the health of the system. This paper develops a decision support model based on options theory, a financial derivative tool extended to real assets, to valuate maintenance decisions after a remaining useful life prediction. We introduce maintenance options, and develop a hybrid methodology based on Monte Carlo simulations and decision trees for a cost-benefit-risk analysis of prognostics and health management. We extend the model, and combine it with least squares Monte Carlo methods to valuate one type of maintenance options, the waiting options; their value represents the cost avoidance opportunities and revenue obtained from running the system through its remaining useful life. The methodologies in this paper address the fundamental objective of system maintenance with prognostics: to maximize the use of the remaining useful life while concurrently minimizing the risk of failure. We demonstrate the methodologies on decision support for sustaining wind turbines by showing the value of having a prognostics system for gearboxes, and determining the value of waiting to perform maintenance. The value of the waiting option indicates that having the system available throughout the predicted remaining useful life is more beneficial than having downtime for maintenance, even if there is a high risk of failure.

[1]  Lin Li,et al.  Option model for joint production and preventive maintenance system , 2009 .

[2]  Michael Pecht,et al.  Guaranteeing high availability of wind turbines , 2011 .

[3]  Sankalita Saha,et al.  Requirements Specification for Prognostics Performance - An Overview , 2010 .

[4]  Michael G. Pecht,et al.  Sensor Systems for Prognostics and Health Management , 2010, Sensors.

[5]  W. J. Padgett,et al.  Accelerated Degradation Models for Failure Based on Geometric Brownian Motion and Gamma Processes , 2005, Lifetime data analysis.

[6]  Mohammed Kishk,et al.  The Selection of a Suitable Maintenance Strategy for Wind Turbines , 2006 .

[7]  Sankalita Saha,et al.  Requirements Specifications for Prognostics: An Overview , 2010 .

[8]  M.G. Pecht,et al.  Prognostics and health management of electronics , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Components and Packaging Technologies.

[9]  Selwyn Piramuthu,et al.  Real option valuation on grid computing , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  M. Schweizer,et al.  Classical solutions to reaction-diffusion systems for hedging problems with interacting Ito and point processes , 2005, math/0505208.

[11]  Walter Musial,et al.  Book Review: Offshore Wind Power , 2010 .

[12]  Peter Sandborn,et al.  Using PHM to meet availability-based contracting requirements , 2011, 2011 IEEE Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.

[13]  Peter Sandborn,et al.  A Methodology for Determining the Return on Investment Associated With Prognostics and Health Management , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[14]  T. Chang,et al.  Evaluation of monthly capacity factor of WECS using chronological and probabilistic wind speed data: A case study of Taiwan , 2007 .

[15]  Francis A. Longstaff,et al.  Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least-Squares Approach , 2001 .

[16]  Lars Stentoft,et al.  Convergence of the Least Squares Monte Carlo Approach to American Option Valuation , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[17]  L. Trigeorgis Real options and interactions with financial flexibility , 1993 .

[18]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  Real Options for a Wind Farm in Wapakoneta, Ohio: Incorporating Uncertainty into Economic Feasibility Studies for Community Wind , 2008 .

[19]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  Flexibility in Engineering Design , 2011 .

[20]  Chanseok Park,et al.  Stochastic degradation models with several accelerating variables , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[21]  Chan S. Park,et al.  ECONOMIC ANALYSIS IN THE MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND OVERHAUL INDUSTRY: AN OPTIONS APPROACH , 2004 .

[22]  Adam Borison,et al.  Real Options Analysis: Where Are the Emperor's Clothes? , 2005 .

[23]  P. Glasserman,et al.  Classical solutions to reaction-diffusion systems for hedging problems with interacting Ito and point processes , 2004, math/0505208.

[24]  P.P. Bonissone,et al.  Domain Knowledge and Decision Time: A Framework for Soft Computing Applications , 2006, 2006 International Symposium on Evolving Fuzzy Systems.

[25]  Vladan Babovic,et al.  An Evolutionary Real Options Framework for the Design and Management of Projects and Systems with Complex Real Options and Exercising Conditions , 2010, Decis. Support Syst..

[26]  Salman Kahrobaee,et al.  Risk-based Failure Mode and Effect Analysis for wind turbines (RB-FMEA) , 2011, 2011 North American Power Symposium.

[27]  Michael Pecht,et al.  Using real options to manage condition-based maintenance enabled by PHM , 2011, 2011 IEEE Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.

[28]  Yong Jin Kim,et al.  Strategic actions in information technology investment based on real option theory , 2002, Decis. Support Syst..