Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, University of Applied Science and Technology, Yazd, Iran.
2
Master of Industrial Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering, Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, Science and Arts University, Yazd, Iran.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Technology and Engineering, Science and Arts University, Yazd, Iran.
4
Master of Professional health engineering, Department of Occupational Health, Esfarayen Faculty of Medical Sciences, Esfarayen, Iran.
10.48308/jimp.15.3.195
Abstract
Introduction: Optimal maintenance decision‑making is one of the most critical managerial processes in industrial organizations. Well‑designed maintenance strategies keep risk at an acceptable level through measures such as elimination, substitution, engineering and managerial controls, and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). Depending on the context, this can be achieved through run‑to‑failure maintenance (RTFM), preventive maintenance (PM), condition‑based maintenance (CBM), or reliability‑centered maintenance (RCM). Selecting the most appropriate strategy for a given asset requires weighing multiple criteria including cost, safety, time, added value, reliability, and sustainability. Because sustainability considerations directly support HSE requirements, they can drive accident rates toward zero while minimizing total cost. Against this backdrop, the present study identifies critical safety‑related assets and selects their maintenance strategies at the Eefaceram tile factory.
Methods: The study is descriptive analytical in design and applied in purpose. Data were gathered through library research, field observations, and documentation. A panel of ten experts completed a structured questionnaire. Based on the literature, three principal criteria cost, safety, and sustainability were adopted. Indicators extracted from previous studies were first screened via the Delphi method; an integrated approach combining ANP, DEMATEL, and TOPSIS was then used for prioritization.
Results and Discussion: All ten experts (managers and senior HSE specialists) were male; %10 held associate degrees, %70 bachelor’s degrees, and %20 postgraduate degrees. Most respondents fell into the 31–40 age bracket. A three‑level analytic network was built: the study goal at level 1, the three main criteria at level 2, and ten Delphi‑validated sub‑criteria at level 3. DEMATEL was employed to map inter‑criteria influences; the resulting network was modeled in Super Decisions to derive ANP weights. Finally, TOPSIS was applied to rank candidate maintenance strategies. Cost emerged as the most influential criterion, while safety was the most influenced and had the greatest overall interaction. The sub‑criterion “health and human safety” ranked first among all sub‑criteria. Among the alternative strategies, RTFM, PM, CBM, and RCM proved to be the most suitable options for the plant, in that order.
Conclusions: Cost ranked first, safety second, and sustainability third among the main criteria. Cost exerted the strongest causal influence, whereas safety and sustainability were the most receptive and interactive. “Material and consumable costs” and “labor costs” were the top two cost sub‑criteria. Within the safety dimension, “health and human safety” took precedence over “equipment safety.” For sustainability, “energy consumption” ranked highest, while “environmental management system” ranked lowest. Overall, run‑to‑failure maintenance was identified as the top strategy, followed by preventive maintenance, condition‑based maintenance, and reliability‑centered maintenance. Practical recommendations are offered to the Eefaceram tile factory to enhance human health and safety, reduce production costs, and maintain a safer work environment.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)