Building Simulation Arena Model by Arena - Essay Example

? Building Simulation Arena Model by Arena to Optimize Airplane C3 Check Maintenance Presented by Presented to Table of Contents 0Introduction 3 2.0 Goal 4 3.0 Literature Review 4 3.1 Aircraft Maintenance System 6 3.2 Type Of Maintenance Check 8 4.0 Methodology 11 4.1 Data Collection 12 4.2 Flow Process Chart 14 References list 16 Glossary 18 1.0 Introduction Aviation is the field of maintaining Air planes, making them Airworthy to fly and flying them within the international authority standard and safety. Aircrafts (ACFT) must have a scheduled maintenance programs that keep track of time of each plane and once it is maintenance check is due it is good to be taken out of service (O.O.S). Sometimes, due maintenance check are extended under engineering’s restrictions (ER) and rarely practiced. Once ACFT is taken O.O.S different specialty are responsible to accomplish the specified check that it is due for and make an agreed commitment to bring the ACFT back in service (B.I.S) on a specific date and time (Mcgarvey 2009). However, there are so many specialties working to achieve this goal. Therefore, effort on making good utilization and excellent planning must be considered to make sure communication and coordination are applied and insuring all this is not easy. For Instance Airframe is one of the biggest departments that cover under its umbrella many ATA chapters such as fuel, hydraulics, landing gears, flight controls, water and waste, cargo compartment, ice and rain, fire systems as well as empennage, fuselage and wings which belongs to Airframe department. Therefore, we are interested on it and as we imitate and mimic its system we will have a very good picture the maintenance system with specialties other than airframe (Brady & Hillestad 1995). There are power plant, avionics, inspection, cabin and structure or they call tem sheet metal departments. All these specialties attack the plane once it is arrived in the Hanger for heavy maintenance do their best to have back on the pre-selected date and time. A myriad of human factors challenges associated with aircraft maintenance exist. Maintenance and inspection are essential to ensure continuing airworthiness on the aging fleet. New advanced technology procedures for aircraft further complicate the aviation maintenance system. The human is a critical component of the maintenance -system. Therefore, research and development must address a variety of issues affecting the human in maintenance. In order to plan well and have an actual picture of the system shortcomings and high performance areas within the system we will have to simulate that particular system. Simulation is a tool that gives us the chance to mimic any system with data available, analyzed and entered in any program such as Arena which is one of the popular and powerful computer programs (Charlotte 2009). Since we have so many specialties, multiple maintenance scheduled check types as well as many different ACFT types that are owned by Saudi Arabian airlines, the simulation process will get complex, thus, we will mimic only one type of airplane-747-400, one type of maintenance scheduled checks which is C- check (Kinnison 2004). Keywords: Hanger Maintenance, C-Check, Scheduling, Human Component in Maintenance, Simulation. 2.0 Goal The goal of this report is to build a simulation model for Aircraft Maintenance departments’ activities that will allow us to capture each and every process in order to optimize the manpower utilization and reduce maintenance time by eliminating delays especially when bottle necks confront. 3.0 Literature Review The aircraft is the fastest method of transport that can quickly transport people and cargo over longer distances, but incur high costs and energy use. For short distances or in inaccessible places helicopters can be used. According to Friend (1992), growth of population explosion in world has raised the air transportation sector; in 2010 it accounts 19% of passenger, and 48% of cargo of whole transportation in world. In 2009, Saudi Arabia's 26 airports handled a total of over 41.70 million passengers and 530,600 tons of cargo and mail. Population increases and the growth of the middle class in developing countries have contributed to increased demand for air travel and freight movement; it assumed a total capacity of 70-80 million passengers a year by 2035. With the Increase in demand of passenger and cargo in aircraft, a significant role is played by Maintenance department to do maintenance of Aircraft in due time (Saudi Gazette n.d). The hierarchy of Saudi Aerospace Engineering industry with different department and Hunger Maintenance sub practice is itemized below: Figure 1: The hierarchy of Saudi Aerospace Engineering industry 3.1 Aircraft Maintenance System Aircraft maintenance is a highly dynamic and regulated industry characterized, for example, by complex and interdependent systems and technologies, detailed and legally binding task procedures and documentation, highly publicized accident rates and highly regulated management systems to ensure reliability, efficiency and safety at all times (Corrigan 2002). Task analysis has revealed aircraft maintenance activity to be a complex socio-technical system requiring sustained coordination, communication and cooperation between different work groups and teams including aircraft maintenance engineers (AMEs), crew managers, inspectors and hangar managers, various other subsystems, such as planning and commercial, stores, quality and engineering and external bodies, such as the regulators, the manufacturer, the customer and the airline, in order to ensure efficient and effective operations (Drury & Linn 1990; Bazargan 2010). Four of the key aspects of aircraft maintenance are as follows. 1. The regulations – aircraft maintenance is a highly regulated industry where maintenance organizations are continually subjected to audits and approvals by aviation authorities covering both quality and operational requirements. 2. Other external bodies – the manufacturer, customers, vendors and the airline also play a key role in influencing operational matters. 3. Internal functions – a number of key functions continually support pre-check aspects of aircraft maintenance (e.g. contract negotiation, personnel selection, personnel training, etc. 4. Maintenance production system – this is where the work is actually carried out, either aircraft or shop overhaul (base or heavy maintenance) or line (light) maintenance, all of which is continually supported by engineering, planning and commercial and quality departments. The maintenance philosophy currently used in the design of present aircraft maintenance programs is called Maintenance Steering Group 3 (Air Transport Association). The MSG committee decides which system and components will require maintenance. They use a decision tree to aid in answering a series of logical questions on the consequences of a failure. From this, a list of maintenance significant items (MSIs) and structural significant items (SSIs) are identified and the required maintenance is specified, such as lubrication and servicing, inspections, functional checks, etc. A document is then issued called the Maintenance Review Board (MRB) report, which outlines the initial maintenance requirements for the new aircraft type. The MRB is made up of the manufacturers and the aviation authorities, in consultation with the airlines and maintenance organization’s, to ensure the continuous maintenance needs of the aircraft are met. Maintenance planning data (MPD) is produced by the manufacturer and provides only a general guidance to operators of current production aircraft for developing an individual scheduled maintenance program. The final responsibility lies with the individual operator (2008 ATRS World Conference 2008). This literature review will focus, in order, on three subjects relevant to the Study: (1) Aircraft maintenance; (2) Maintenance staffing; (3) Personnel scheduling. Recent studies emphasize the role of human factors and training in improving maintenance crew effectiveness. Ivaturi et al. (1995) developed a framework to analyse, identify, and evaluate team training strategies to improve teamwork effectiveness in aircraft inspection and maintenance operations. According to Dors (2010), human factors to have a significant effect in 101maintenance-related aircraft accidents that he studied. Shepherd and Kraus (1997) described guidelines for human factors training of maintenance personnel in order to reduce human error in aircraft maintenance. Aircraft maintenance tasks are divided into Categories – ‘line’/‘transit’, ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ (from lightest to heaviest) – enabling aircraft operators to plan regular inspections. Although the required maintenance tasks and the number of engineers assigned will vary between aircraft type and maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) company, Table summaries typical checks. The periodic maintenance checks have to be done after a certain amount of time or usage. The most common checks are: - A Check – due every month/ each 500 flight hours; done overnight at the airport gate. - B Check – due every 3 months; also done overnight at the gate. - C Check – due every 18 months or each 9000 flight hours; performed at a maintenance base or at a hangar and takes about 4 weeks. 3.2 Type Of Maintenance Check Check Location Description Duration Line/ Transit At Gate Daily (before first flight or at each stop when in transit). Visual inspection; fluid levels; tyres and brakes; emergency Equipment. 1 hour “A” At Gate Routine light maintenance; engine inspection. ?10 hours (whole shift) / overnight “B” At Gate If carried out, similar to ‘A’ check but with different tasks (may occur between consecutive ‘A’ checks) 10 hours to 1 Day “C” Hanger Major structural inspection of airframe after paint removal; engines, landing gear and flaps removed; instruments, electronic and electrical equipment removed; interior fittings (seats and panels) removed; hydraulic and pneumatic components removed 30 Days Table 1: Aircraft maintenance checks The maintenance staffing objectives include minimum cost, maximum availability, maximum reliability, or a combination of these measures. Zubaidi and Christer (1997) developed a method to determine the optimal structure of a maintenance workforce, and used it to maximize aircraft sortie generation subject to a limit on maintenance staffing cost. Moreover, they constructed a maintenance manpower simulation model to estimate the costs of different manpower management and operational procedures. Duffuaa and Al-Sultan (1997) proposed mathematical programming approaches for planning and scheduling maintenance resources, including manpower, equipment, and parts. Aircraft maintenance functioning requirements are affected by the following factors: Different types of aircraft; Continuous coverage (seven days a week, 24 hours a day); Training requirements; Manufacturer service bulletins; Aircraft age and condition. Aircraft maintenance requirements can be broadly classified as follows. 1. Scheduled maintenance: including pre-flight, post-flight, daily and phase checks, calendar time changes, time limited component changes, in Aircraft maintenance addition to A, B, and C checks (periodic aircraft PM/inspection programs of increasing intensity). 2. Unscheduled maintenance: to handle unplanned problems reported by flight or maintenance crews. As a rule of thumb, aviation department estimates unscheduled maintenance workload to be 50 per cent of scheduled maintenance workload. 3. Special maintenance: as required to satisfy special instructions or directives by the manufacturer, FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), or aviation management. Maintenance workload is expected to significantly increase due to several factors. The purchase of additional aircraft. More frequent inspections due to changes in the maintenance program, i.e. doubling the frequency of A and C checks. Personal scheduling interest have been grown with the accelerating growth of the industry and increasing cost of labour .There have been numerous studies aimed at optimizing the workforce in light of a variety of considerations. These include non-homogenous workforce in terms of skill, cost and efficiency measures, various labour requirements such as maximum work stretches, break definitions, days off and weekends off policies. Labour scheduling problems are traditionally classified into three types: (1) Shift, or time-of-day, scheduling, (2) days-off, or days-of- week, scheduling, (3) Tour scheduling, which is a combination of the first two? Shateri (2011) provided a detailed review of literature on all types of labour scheduling problems. This survey focuses on recent approaches to employee days-off scheduling, especially in relation to maintenance workforce scheduling. Several approaches have been developed for the (5, 7) problem in that each employee is assigned five consecutive work day per week. Burns and Carter (1985) used workforce size lower bounds as additional constraints in a linear programming model. Caprara et al. (2003) presented a two-step algorithm to solve a days-off staff scheduling problem in which the durations (in days) of the work and rest periods are specified in advance for each employee. The objective is to determine the sequence of this work and rest periods to satisfy daily labour demands with the minimum number of employees 4.0 Methodology The following steps are steps included Collection of good literature about Maintenance of aircraft, Impact of labor hours on the work. Data collection from Maintenance Hanger Department for ‘C’ check only, Reliability Department, Using weekly planning schedules from Saudi Airlines. Study the Hunger Department Process for ‘C’ check of Saudi Airlines Find out the major key Process in the department. Studying the task and the manpower needed in hunger maintenance sub process. Identifying Key major Issue. Defining optimize man power in each Process. Defining optimum Time consumption for each task. Build a Simulation model The Flow process chart gives the detail about the type of plane arrival, type of selection check. I focus on the Hunger Maintenance Department. The check condition is for the hunger department. If perform finish release off or the process or diverted to the Hunger maintenance process listed in the chart. A discrete event simulation, using ARENA®, was used to model the various maintenance approaches. The simulation modeled a Boeing 747- /400 aircraft entity, for the “c-check”. Model highlighting on the optimum operating time on each process and the operating manpower to complete that process. 4.1 Data Collection Saudi airlines planners were contracted to undertaken hanger production maintenance and I asked them for the data I needed after we introduced our project. Information on aircraft maintenance processes and policies was obtained by interviewing the concerned people, gaining insights and experience-based points of view on problems and possible solutions. For each shift, data were collected on the current schedule, current workforce size, and average overtime hours per month. Information was also gathered on each shift's daily manpower requirements, relation to the flight schedule, and relation to the other shift. Other relevant statistics were also collected. In addition to interviews, sources of data included: Weekly flight schedules; Weekly maintenance planning schedules; Weekend work schedules; Yearly maintenance projections; Employee time sheets; Maintenance work log books; and Company manual on work schedules (Saudi Airlines, 2010). The most important step in data collection was determining the daily labor demands for each shift for each day of the week. In addition, the actual workload (from the work logbook) was considered for a sample of several typical weeks. The reliability maintenance personnel assisted in collecting some very useful information about the schedule times of ACFT arrivals that are based on tracking systems since the plane is purchase until the phase out time when becomes an aging ACFT. The Hunger Maintenance foremen were asked to estimate the number of workers that would be needed to satisfy the labor requirements of both the flight schedule and actual work recorded in the logbook. The average labor demands was determined for each shift during the work week is shown in Table II [3] (please note that the weekend in Saudi Arabia is Thursday and Friday). I also looked at O.O.S and B.I.S history only of a C3 check for 747-400 ACFT. Table 2: 4.2 Flow Process Chart References list Bazargan, M. 2010. Airline operations and scheduling (2nd ed.). Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate. Brady, S. D., & Hillestad, R. J. 1995. Modeling the external risks of airports for policy analysis. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. Burns, R. N. and Koop, G. J. 1987. “A Modular Approach to Optimal Multiple-Shift Manpower Scheduling” Operations Research 35: 100-110. Caprara, A. et al. 2004. Models and Algorithms for a staff scheduling problem. Retrieved from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/search?q=Models+and+algorithms+for+a+staff+scheduling+problem&submit=Search&ic=1&sort=rlv&t=doc Charlotte, A. 2009. Aviation Maintenance Magazine Understanding MSG-3. Retrieved from: http://www.aviationtoday.com/am/repairstations/Understanding-MSG- 3_33062.html Dors, J. 2010. Analytical and strategic troubleshooting system in aircraft maintenance. Morriston, ON: Maintenance Synergies. Drury, K., & Linn, B. 1990. Newfoundlands. Neptune City: T.F.H. Duffuaa, S.O. and Al-Sultan, K.S. 1997. ``Mathematical programming approaches for the Management of maintenance planning and scheduling'', Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 3, pp. 163. Friend, C. H.1992. Aircraft Maintenance Management, Longman Scientific & Technical, Harlow. Kinnison, H. A. 2004. Aviation maintenance management. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kobbacy, K. A. H., & Murthy, D. N. P. 2008. Complex system maintenance handbook. London, Springer. McGarvey, R. G. 2009. Analysis of the Air Force logistics enterprise evaluation of global repair network options for supporting the F-16 and KC-135. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Saudi Gazette. (n.d.). Saudi Gazette. Retrieved May 14, 2013, from: http://www.saudigazette.com.sa Shateri, M. 2011. Task optimization and workforce scheduling. Waterloo, Ont.: University of Waterloo. Shepherd, W. T. and Kraus, D. C. 1997. ``Human factors training in the aircraft maintenance environment'', Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,Vol. 2,pp. 1152-3. 2008 ATRS World Conference. (2008). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Air Transport Research Society. Glossary ACFT - Aircraft O.O.S - Taken out of service B.I.S - Back in service AF - Airframe AMEs - Aircraft maintenance engineers MSIs - Maintenance signi?cant items SSIs - Structural signi?cant items MRB - Maintenance Review Board MPD - Maintenance planning data FAA - Federal Aviation Administration Read More