Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fault Tree Analysis

  • Chapter
Handbook of Performability Engineering

Abstract

In this chapter, a state-of-the-art review of fault tree analysis is presented. Different forms of fault trees, including static, dynamic, and non-coherent fault trees, their applications and analyses will be discussed. Some advanced topics such as importance analysis, dependent failures, disjoint events, and multistate systems will also be presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Watson HA. Launch control safety study. Bell Telephone Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, USA, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Vesely WE, Goldberg FF, Roberts NH, Haasl DF. Fault tree handbook. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Auda DJ, Nuwer K. Effective failure mode effects analysis facilitation. Tutorial Notes of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Alexandria, VA.; Jan. 24–27, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rausand M, Hoyland A. system reliability theory: models, statistical methods, and applications (2nd Edition). Wiley Inter-Science, New York, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bowles JB, Bonnell RD. Failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis. Tutorial Notes of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrews JD, Dunnett SJ. Event-tree analysis using binary decision diagrams. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2000; 49(2): 230–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. IEC61078, Analysis techniques for dependability — Reliability block diagram method. International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dugan JB, Doyle SA. New results in fault-tree analysis. Tutorial Notes of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  9. NASA, Fault tree handbook with aerospace applications, NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, Washington DC, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Henley EJ, Kumamoto H. Probabilistic risk assessment. IEEE Press, New York, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Coppit D, Sullivan KJ, Dugan JB. Formal semantics of models for computational engineering: A case study on dynamic fault trees. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering 2000; 270–282.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Relex software, www.relex.com

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pham H. Optimal design of a class of noncoherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1991; 40(3): 361–363.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Amendola A, Contini S. About the definition of coherency in binary system reliability analysis. In: Apostolakis G, Garribba S, Volta G, Editors. Synthesis and analysis methods for safety and reliability studies. Plenum Press, New York, 1978; 79–84.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jackson PS. Comment on probabilistic evaluation of prime implicants and top-events for noncoherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1982; R-31: 172–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jackson PS. On the s-importance of elements and implicants of non-coherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1983; R-32: 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson BD, Matthews RH. Non-coherent structure theory: a review and its role in fault tree analysis. UKAAE, SRD R245, 1983; October.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wolfram S. Mathematica — A system for doing mathematics by computer. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Twigg DW, Ramesh AV, Sandadi UR, Sharma TC. Modeling mutually exclusive events in fault trees. Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 2000; 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Twigg DW, Ramesh AV, Sharma TC. Modeling event dependencies using disjoint sets in fault trees. Proceedings of the 18th International System Safety Conference 2000; 275–279.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Misra KB. Reliability analysis and prediction: a methodology oriented treatment. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1992.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Bobbio A, Franceschinis G, Gaeta R, Portinale L. Exploiting Petri nets to support fault tree based dependability analysis. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Petri Nets and Performance Models 1999; 146–155.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dugan JB, Trivedi KS, Sometherman MK, Geist RM. The hybrid automated reliability predictor. AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics 1991; 9(3): 554–563.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dugan JB, Bavuso SJ, Boyd MA. Fault trees and Markov models for reliability analysis of fault tolerant systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1993; 39: 291–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hura GS, Atwood JW. The use of Petri nets to analyze coherent fault trees. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1988; R-37: 469–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Malhotra M, Trivedi KS. Dependability modeling using Petri nets. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1995; R-44: 428–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Coudert O, Madre JC. Fault tree analysis: 1020 prime implicants and beyond. Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 1993; 240–245.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Doyle SA, Dugan JB. Analyzing fault tolerance using DREDD. Proceedings of the 10th Computing in Aerospace Conference 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sinnamon R, Andrews JD. Fault tree analysis and binary decision diagrams. Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 1996; 215–222.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gulati R, Dugan JB. A modular approach for analyzing static and dynamic fault trees. Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sahner R, Trivedi KS, Puliafito A. Performance and reliability analysis of computer systems: an example-based approach using the SHARPE software package. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1996.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Misra KB. New trends in system reliability evaluation. Elsevier, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Shooman ML. Probabilistic reliability: an engineering approach (2nd Edition). McGraw-Hill, New York, 1990.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Brace K, Rudell R, Bryant R. Efficient implementation of a BDD package. Proceedings of the 27th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference 1990; 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Bryant R. Graph based algorithm for boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers 1986; 35: 677–691.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Chang YR, Amari SV, Kuo SY. OBDD-based evaluation of reliability and importance measures for multistate systems subject to imperfect fault coverage. IEEE Transactions Dependable and Secure Computing 2005; 2(4): 336–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kuo S, Lu S, Yeh F. Determining terminal-pair reliability based on edge expansion diagrams using OBDD. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1999; 48(3): 234–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Xing L, Dugan JB. Analysis of generalized phased-mission systems reliability, performance and sensitivity. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2002; 51(2): 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Xing L. Fault-tolerant network reliability and importance analysis using binary decision diagrams. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Los Angeles, CA, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Yeh F, Lu S, Kuo S. OBDD-based evaluation of k-terminal network reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2002; 51(4): 443–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zang X, Sun H, Trivedi KS. A BDD-based algorithm for reliability analysis of phasedmission systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1999; 48(1): 50–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zang X, Wang D, Sun H, Trivedi KS. A bddbased algorithm for analysis of multistate systems with multistate components. IEEE Transactions on Computers 2003; 52(12): 1608–1618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bouissou M, Bruyere F, Rauzy A. BDD based fault-tree processing: a comparison of variable ordering heuristics. Proceedings of ESREL Conference 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Coudert O, Madre JC. Metaprime, an interactive fault-tree analyzer. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1994; 43(1): 121–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Xing L. Dependability modeling and analysis of hierarchical computer-based systems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Virginia, 2002; May.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Xing L, Dugan JB. Generalized imperfect coverage phased-mission analysis. Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Seattle, WA, 2002; 112–119

    Google Scholar 

  47. Zang X., Sun H., and Trivedi KS. Dependability analysis of distributed computer systems with imperfect coverage. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing 1999; 330–337.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Caldarola L. Coherent systems with multistate components. Nuclear Engineering and Design 1980; 58: 127–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Miller DM, Drechsler R. Implementing a multiplevalued decision diagram package. Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Multiplevalued Logic 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Xing L. Dugan JB. Dependability analysis using multiple-valued decision diagrams. Proceedings of the 6th International Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, Puerto Rico 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Xing L, Dugan JB. A separable TDD-based analysis of generalized phased-mission reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2004; 53(2): 174–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Xing L. Efficient analysis of systems with multiple states. Proceedings of the IEEE 21st International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, Niagara Falls, Canada 2007; 666–672.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gulati R. A modular approach to static and dynamic fault tree analysis. M. S. Thesis, Electrical Engineering, University of Virginia, August 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Sune V, Carrasco JA. A method for the computation of reliability bounds for nonrepairable fault-tolerant systems. Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Symposium on Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computers and Telecommunication System 1997; 221–228.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Sune V, Carrasco JA. A failure-distance based method to bound the reliability of non-repairable fault-tolerant systems without the knowledge of minimal cutsets. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2001; 50(1): 60–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Dutuit Y, Rauzy A. A linear time algorithm to find modules of fault trees. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1996; 45(3): 422–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Manian R, Dugan JB, Coppit D, Sullivan KJ. Combining various solution techniques for dynamic fault tree analysis of computer systems. Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International High-Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium 1998; 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Inagaki T, Henley EJ. Probabilistic evaluation of prime implicants and top-events for non-coherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1980; 29(5): 361–367.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Amari SV. Computing failure frequency of noncoherent systems. International Journal of Performability Engineering 2006; 2(2): 123–133.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Dutuit Y, Rauzy A. Efficient algorithm to assess component and gate importance in fault tree analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2001; 72: 213–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Xing L. Maintenance-oriented fault tree analysis of component importance. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2004; 534–539

    Google Scholar 

  62. Andrews JD, Beeson S. Birnbaum’s measure of component importance for noncoherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2003; 52(2): 213–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Beeson S, Andrews JD. Importance measures for non-coherent-system analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2003; 52(3): 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Birnbaum ZW. On the importance of different components in a multicomponent system. In: Krishnaiah P, Editor. Multivariate analysis. Academic Press, New York, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Fussell J. How to hand calculate system reliability characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1975; R-24: 169–174.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Barlow RE, Proschan F. Importance of system components and fault tree events. Stochastic Processes and Their Applications 1975; 3: 153–173.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  67. Vesely WE. A time dependent methodology for fault tree evaluation. Nuclear Engineering and Design 1970; 13: 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Andrews JD, Moss TR. Reliability and risk assessment. Longman Scientific and Technical, Essex, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Anne A. Implementation of sensitivity measures for static and dynamic subtrees in DIFtree. M.S. Thesis, University of Virginia, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Chang Y, Amari SV, Kuo S. Computing system failure frequencies and reliability importance measures using OBDD. IEEE Transactions on Computers 2004; 53(1): 54–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Papoulis A. Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes (3rd Edition). McGraw-Hill Series in Electrical Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Xing L. Reliability importance analysis of generalized phased-mission systems. International Journal of Performability Engineering 2007; 3(3): 303–318.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Frank PM. Introduction to system sensitivity. Academic Press, New York, 1978.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  74. NUREG/CR-4780, Procedure for treating common-cause failures in safety and reliability studies. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, 1988; Vols. I and II.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Tang Z, Dugan JB. An integrated method for incorporating common cause failures in system analysis. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 610–614, Los Angeles, CA, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Mitra S, Saxena NR, McCluskey EJ. Commonmode failures in redundant VLSI systems: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2000; 49(3): 285–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Vaurio JK. An implicit method for incorporating common-cause failures in system analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1998; 47(2): 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Bai DS, Yun WY, Chung SW. Redundancy optimization of k-out-of-n systems with commoncause failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1991; 40(1): 56–59.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  79. Pham H. Optimal cost-effective design of triplemodular-redundancy-with-spares systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1993; 42(3): 369–374.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  80. Anderson PM, Agarwal SK. An improved model for protective-system reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1992; 41(3): 422–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Chae KC, Clark GM. System reliability in the presence of common-cause failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1986; R-35: 32–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Fleming KN, Mosleh N, Deremer RK. A systematic procedure for incorporation of common cause events into risk and reliability models. Nuclear Engineering and Design 1986; 93: 245–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Dai YS, Xie M, Poh KL, Ng SH. A model for correlated failures in n-version programming. IIE Transactions 2004; 36(12): 1183–1192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Fleming KN, Mosleh A. Common-cause data analysis and implications in system modeling. Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Safety Methods and Applications 1985; 1: 3/1–3/12, EPRI NP-3912-SR.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Amari SV, Dugan JB, Misra RB. Optimal reliability of systems subject to imperfect faultcoverage. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1999; 48(3): 275–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Vaurio JK. Common cause failure probabilities in standby safety system fault tree analysis with testing — scheme and timing dependencies. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2003; 79(1): 43–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Xing L. Reliability modeling and analysis of complex hierarchical systems. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering 2005; 12(6): 477–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Dobson I., Carreras BA, Newman DE. A loading-dependent model of probabilistic cascading failure. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences 2005; 19(1): 15–32.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  89. Huang J, Zuo M. Dominant multi-state systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2004; 53(3): 362–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Li W, Pham H. Reliability modeling of multi-state degraded systems with multi-competing failures and random shocks. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2005; 54(2): 297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Levitin G, Dai YS, Xie M, Poh KL. Optimizing survivability of multi-state systems with multilevel protection by multi-processor genetic algorithm. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2003; 82(1): 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Tang Z, Dugan JB. BDD-based reliability analysis of phased-mission systems with multimode failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2006; 55(2): 350–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Galileo Dynamic Fault Tree Analysis Tool, http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~ftree/.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Fault Tree Analysis Software, http://www.faulttree.net/software.html.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Sullivan KJ, Coppit D, Dugan JB. The Galileo fault tree analysis tool. Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Madison, Wisconsin, June 15–18, 1999: 232–235.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, USA

    Liudong Xing

  2. Relex Software Corporation, Greensburg, USA

    Suprasad V. Amari

Authors
  1. Liudong Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suprasad V. Amari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. RAMS Consultants, 71 Vrindaban Vihar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan), 302019, India

    Krishna B. Misra (Principal Consultant) (Principal Consultant)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Xing, L., Amari, S.V. (2008). Fault Tree Analysis. In: Misra, K.B. (eds) Handbook of Performability Engineering. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-131-2_38

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-131-2_38

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84800-130-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84800-131-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation