Demonstrates improved maintenance strategies in linear assets, suggesting broader applications for optimization.
Linear assets (LAs), such as conveyor systems, road networks, pipelines, and power transmission lines, are typically maintained through localized, segment-based interventions. While such approaches effectively address spatially heterogeneous degradation, they often neglect the system-level consequences of repeated local actions. In particular, improvements in segment condition may be accompanied by increased structural complexity, leading to reduced reliability and higher lifecycle costs. This paper proposes a unified engineering framework that integrates segment-level condition assessment with system-level structural effects. The framework is based on a dual representation of asset condition, distinguishing between material state (MS) and structural state (SS), which correspond to material aging (MA) and structural aging (SA), respectively. A key contribution is the introduction of the fragmentation penalty (FP), capturing the negative impact of increasing segmentation and interface density on system performance. The framework incorporates multi-threshold decision logic, enabling differentiation between operational, refurbishment, and replacement regimes, and interprets maintenance actions as transformations affecting both condition and structure. A formal model is developed to represent the asset as a dynamic system of segments and interfaces. It provides a basis for future empirical calibration and structure-aware optimization. Although the model is developed using conveyor belt loops as a reference case, its broader relevance is discussed for other classes of linear assets with repeated local intervention and evolving structural heterogeneity. A simple worked example is included to demonstrate the operational meaning of the proposed fragmentation-aware perspective. The results show that maintenance decisions may change when structural side effects are considered together with local condition improvement, and they provide a basis for future empirical calibration and structure-aware optimization of maintenance strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Błażej et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: