This page has been automatically translate with Google from the Italian language.

Chapter 7 - a model developed in a company of the production field and maintenance radar.

7.1.4 It turns out you of the shape base of the model.

It turns out obtained to you from the model, in the described shape over, are brought back in the following table.

LRU with members characterizes to you from FR=6.

Nome LRU

Critical types

Population

Critics

Requirementses 19

Action

CostoLB/CostoRD

LRU 50

4

95

1

LB

2,20%

LRU 24

3

4

1

LB

1,52%

LRU 19

7

13

1

LB

9,33%

LRU 25

2

3

1

LB

0,66%

LRU 26

4

8

1

LB

12,14%

LRU 49

9

54

1

LB

32,95%

LRU 29

2

4

1

LB

1,31%

LRU 20

3

10

5

LB

1,74%

LRU 41

3

6

1

LB

1,55%

LRU 52

3

8

1

LB

2,63%

LRU 33

9

30

1

LB

2,19%

LRU 51

4

8

1

LB

2,23%

LRU 18

4

37

1

LB

39,18%

LRU 45

2

11

1

LB

1,12%

LRU 3

2

3

41

LB

0,81%

LRU 8

1

4

1

LB

0,05%

LRU 40

3

4

1

LB

0,48%

LRU 7

2

3

5

LB

9,57%

LRU 23

3

18

1

LB

21,75%

LRU 5

3

6

3

LB

11,82%

LRU 35

1

1

1

LB

0,01%

LRU 30

2

5

1

LB

1,25%

LRU 53

2

3

1

LB

2,98%

LRU 37

6

44

17

RD

107,65%

LRU 38

6

29

30

LB

82,91%

LRU 36

6

28

1

LB

90,41%

LRU 31

6

31

1

LB

2,79%

LRU 32

6

28

1

LB

1,10%

LRU with members characterizes to you from FR=5.

Nome LRU

Critical types

Population

Critics

Requirementses 17

Action

CostoLB/CostoRD

LRU 2

1

4

3

LB

0,01%

LRU 50

6

22

1

LB

0,45%

LRU 24

2

2

1

LB

0,80%

LRU 19

3

3

1

LB

0,11%

LRU 26

2

2

1

LB

0,01%

LRU 49

5

9

1

LB

0,09%

LRU 29

3

3

1

LB

0,07%

LRU 20

11

32

4

LB

10,84%

LRU 41

5

7

1

LB

0,04%

LRU 52

6

14

1

LB

1,19%

LRU 33

8

19

1

LB

1,05%

LRU 54

2

3

1

LB

0,28%

LRU 51

6

9

1

LB

2,77%

LRU 18

9

47

1

LB

0,06%

LRU 3

14

23

39

LB

4,17%

LRU 6

8

17

3

LB

9,09%

LRU 8

4

13

1

LB

4,05%

LRU 40

14

31

1

LB

0,59%

LRU 4

2

6

27

LB

1,59%

LRU 7

2

2

5

LB

0,81%

LRU 23

8

25

1

LB

0,04%

LRU 5

3

6

3

LB

0,15%

LRU 35

2

2

1

LB

0,07%

LRU 30

4

4

1

LB

1,54%

LRU 53

10

30

1

LB

4,69%

LRU 37

13

26

16

RD

147,14%

LRU 38

10

21

29

RD

165,79%

LRU 36

1

6

1

LB

0,02%

LRU 31

4

11

1

LB

0,96%

LRU 32

6

25

1

LB

5,71%

LRU with members characterizes to you from FR=4.

Nome LRU

Critical types

Population

Critics

Requirementses 10

Action

CostoLB/CostoRD

LRU 2

2

2

2

LB

0,00%

LRU 19

2

2

1

LB

0,03%

LRU 20

2

8

2

LB

0,13%

LRU 41

2

5

1

LB

0,27%

LRU 33

1

2

1

LB

0,01%

LRU 51

1

2

1

LB

0,01%

LRU 18

2

7

1

LB

0,03%

LRU 6

1

6

1

LB

1,40%

LRU 8

2

14

1

LB

1,11%

LRU 40

3

3

1

LB

0,04%

LRU 23

1

1

1

LB

0,01%

LRU 30

1

1

1

LB

0,10%

LRU 37

1

3

9

LB

0,04%

LRU 38

1

2

16

LB

0,03%

LRU 36

2

95

1

LB

55,06%

LRU 32

1

2

1

LB

0,06%

LRU with members characterizes to you from FR=3.

Nome LRU

Critical types

Population

Critics

Requirementses 5

Action

CostoLB/CostoRD

LRU 3

1

1

11

LB

0,10%

Table 7.1: Resolutive actions of the shape base of the model.

In terms of cash flows, this is illustrates to you in the successive histogram (for the values sends back to the Appendix B pag. 159).


Figure 7.4: Relative cash flows you to the case base of the model.

Following the philosophy proposed in tool the MOCA, the redesign in the time has been tried to improve ulteriorly such result procrastinando, and carrying out of the Bridge Buy, in order to satisfy the necessities of the obsolete members in the wait of the redesign.
The followed method, in other words, has been that one to move the redesign of the LRU interested from such action, year after year, to estimate the total costs of resolution, it aggravates to you from the Bridge Buy, and to confront them with the cost previously obtained.
It turns out obtained in the event to you from the point of view of the saving realized regarding the all in cost of obtained resolution base, without that is Bridge Buy, are brought back in the successive diagram.


Figure 7.5: Economic Saving regarding the case base.

As the saving can be seen more consisting is had for the third hypothesis, that is when it is decided to move the partial redesign of the members with FR=6 in 2010 and of those with FR=5 to 2011; approval from an other perspective, when it is decided to make Bridge Buy for 4 years for the members with FR=6 and 3 years for the members with FR=5. Wanting to outline such modus operandi using a timeline, for one clearer understanding, I obtain turned out following.


Figure 7.6: Logic of the Bridge Buy

Obviously, the result obtained in several the cases, depends on the realized saving not immobilizing the necessary understood one them to the redesign before.
The cash flows of the found optimal solution in this way are brought back in the successive histogram (for the values send back to the Appendix B pag. 159).


Figure 7.7: Relative cash flows you to the optimal case.

 

Top | Summary | < < Previous | Next > >
/en/home.php" TARGET="_blank">>> Home Page <<