Maximising profit is an important target for industries in a competitive world and it is possible to achieve this by improving the system availability. Engineers have employed many techniques to improve systems availability, such as adding redundant devices or scheduling maintenance strategies. However, the idea of using such techniques simultaneously has not received enough attention. The authors of the present paper recently studied the simultaneous optimisation of system design and maintenance strategy in order to achieve both maximum availability and minimum cost: the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) was coupled with Discrete Event Simulation in a real encoding environment in order to achieve a set of non-dominated solutions. In this work, that study is extended and a thorough exploration using the above-mentioned Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm is developed using an industrial case study, paying attention to the possible impact on solutions as a result of different encodings, parameter configurations and chromosome lengths, which affect the accuracy levels when scheduling preventive maintenance. Non-significant differences were observed in the experimental results, which raises interesting conclusions regarding flexibility in the preventive maintenance strategy.

When projecting and building new industrial facilities, getting integrated design alternatives and maintenance strategies are of critical importance to achieve the physical assets optimal performance, which is needed to be competitive in the actual global markets. Coupling Evolutionary Algorithms with Discrete Event Simulation has been explored both in relation to systems design and their maintenance strategy. However, it was not simultaneously considered when both the corrective and the preventive maintenance—consisting of achieving the optimum period of time to carry out a preventive maintenance activity—are taken into account before being considered by the authors of the present paper. This work couples Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms with Discrete Event Simulation in order to enhance the knowledge and efficiency of the methodology presented, which consists of exploring and optimizing simultaneously systems design alternatives and their preventive maintenance strategies. The aim consists of finding the best set of non-dominated solutions by using the system availability (first maximized objective function) with taking into consideration associated operational cost (second minimized objective function), while automatically selecting the system devices. Each solution proposed by the Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm is analyzed by using Discrete Event Simulation in a procedure that looks at the effect of including periodic preventive maintenance activities all along the mission time. An industrial application case study is solved, and a comparison of the performance of five state-of-the-art and three more recently developed Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms is handled; moreover, the gap in the literature reviewed about the analysis regarding the effect of the discrete event simulation sampling size is faced with useful insights about the synergies of Multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithms and Discrete Event Simulation. Finally, the methodology is expanded to more complex systems which are successfully solved.

Substation automation systems (SAS) are critical infrastructures whose design and maintenance must be optimised to guarantee a suitable performance. In order to provide a collection of solutions that balance availability and cost, this paper explores the optimisation of the design and maintenance of a section of SAS. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms are combined with discrete event simulation while the performance of two state‐of‐the‐art multiobjective evolutionary algorithms is studied. On the one hand, the nondominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA‐II), and on the other hand, the S‐metric selection evolutionary multiobjective optimisation algorithm (SMS‐EMOA). Such a problem is solved from 2 and 3‐objective approaches by attending to the multiobjectivisation concept. The robustness of the methodology is brought to light, and benefits were observed from the multiobjectivisation approach. Decision‐makers can employ this knowledge to make informed decisions based on economic and reliability criteria.