Sustainability Indices and RAM Analysis for Maintenance Decision Making Considering Environmental Sustainability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

As a first approach, this research work is interesting because it presents a methodology to support the decision process based on sustainability indices. At the same time, this methodology allows the results to be deconstructed in order to allow the identification of specific environmental dimensions that can be the target of improvements. RAM analysis allows the decomposition of environmental impact into the discrete contributions of individual components. Therefore, consider the model of informed decision-making towards the ideal allocation of internal resources to effectively achieve the company's objectives in parallel with impact mitigation.

 

I think that the advance is truly important because the application of the methodology in a Proof of Concept (PoC) made it possible to verify that the holistic and systemic approach effectively supports sustainable maintenance. In this sense, the authors carried out the holistic approach using environmental dimensions and sustainability indices, while the systemic approach involved incorporating the environmental impact of the equipment at the system level through the application of RAM analysis. I think that the joint and discriminated use of the two approaches was an exercise in intelligence and scientific reasonableness that allows us to obtain a tool and an instrument of added value.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The text is well written or translated. Improvements in text intelligibility are always possible, but do not seem necessary to me.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the eviewer for reviewing the manuscript and raising constructive comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

The strength of your manuscript is in the design of the proof-of-concept methodology. A simple yet powerful research instrument which was applied to the under-represented research topic 'Sustainable Maintenance' making use of some commonly used tools, namely Sustainability Indices, Ram Analysis, Reliability Block Diagrams and Muti-Criteria Decision Analysis.

The motivation and method are sound. Assumptions are mostly clear and justified but the case study lacks some finesse. What are the circumstances around the need for travel (both the technician and inspector)? Typically, both would be working in a fly-in fly-out regime. There would be no decision about the mode of transport to site and both would be on site as part of their working roster. Perhaps a sentence or two explaining the context of the travel arrangements would assist the reader.

Kind regards.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer for reviewing the manuscript, and raising constructive comments.

Regarding the mode of transportation, it is important to note that only the inspector is required to travel from Bogotá, as the technician is already on-site. To avoid any confusion regarding the technician's location, this sentence has been added at line 547:

A single on-site technician, with a salary of 15 USD per hour, was required for the replacement operation.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors propose a methodology entrenched on Sustainability Indices and RAM analysis in order to support decision-making in sustainable maintenance practices. A Proof of Concept has been demonstrated that the proposed approach enables 9the evaluation of both the environmental and economic impacts of different maintenance activities. The paper is suitable to the Journal’s readership, but the authors need to clarify/expand some elements that are discussed below.

 

It is strongly recommended to discuss how the proposed approach could be integrated in an overall Asset Management (AM) and Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) in AM. This relationship is not clearly identified. Both may contribute to the systematic and holistic approach discussed in the paper.

Author Response

The authors would like to thank the reviewer for reviewing the manuscript, and raising constructive comments.

The integration of the approach within Asset Management (AM) and Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) in AM was included in the following parts:

- Section 6.3. Limitations and areas for improvement: "From the standpoint of Asset Management, it is imperative to integrate all phases of the asset’s lifecycle, encompassing the identification of requirements or opportunities, asset acquisition or creation, operations and maintenance, and eventual renewal or disposal [71]. In this context, the adoption of the proposed tool would facilitate the simulation of various scenarios, thereby supporting risk-informed decision-making."

- Section 7. Conclusion and future work: "Asset Management: while this study concentrated on evaluating the environmental sustainability of maintenance activities, it is essential to integrate all phases of the asset’s lifecycle. This includes identifying requirements or opportunities, asset acquisition or creation, operations and maintenance, and eventual renewal or disposal."