Advertisement

Efficient Simulation Approaches for Reliability Analysis of Large Systems

  • Edoardo PatelliEmail author
  • Geng Feng
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 610)

Abstract

Survival signature has been presented recently to quantify the system reliability. However, survival signature-based analytical methods are generally intractable for the analysis of realistic systems with multi-state components and imprecisions on the transition time. The availability of numerical simulation methods for the analysis of such systems is required. In this paper, novel simulation methods for computing system reliability are presented. These allow to estimate the reliability of realistic and large-scale systems based on survival signature including parameter uncertainties and imprecisions. The simulation approaches are generally applicable and efficient since only one estimation of the survival signature is needed while Monte Carlo simulation is used to generate component transition times. Numerical examples are presented to show the applicability of the proposed methods.

Keywords

Reliability analysis Survival signature Monte Carlo simulation 

References

  1. 1.
    Alvarez, D.A.: Infinite random sets and applications in uncertainty analysis. Ph.D. thesis, Arbeitsbereich für Technische Mathematik am Institut für Grundlagen der Bauingenieurwissenschaften. Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria (2007) https://sites.google.com/site/diegoandresalvarezmarin/RSthesis.pdf
  2. 2.
    Alvarez, D.A., Hurtado, J.E.: An efficient method for the estimation of structural reliability intervals with random sets, dependence modelling and uncertain inputs. Comput. Struct. 142, 54–63 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aslett, L.J.M. : MCMC for Inference on Phase-type and Masked System Lifetime Models. Ph.D. thesis, Trinity College Dublin (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aslett, L.J.M.: Reliabilitytheory: Tools for structural reliability analysis. r package (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beer, M., Patelli, E.: Editorial: Engineering analysis with vague and imprecise information. Structural Safety Special Issue: Engineering Analyses with Vague and Imprecise Information 52, Part B(0), 143 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Butler, J., Jia, J., Dyer, J.: Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 103(3), 531–546 (1997)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coolen, F.P.A., Coolen-Maturi, T.: Generalizing the signature to systems with multiple types of components. In: Zamojski, W., Mazurkiewicz, J., Sugier, J., Walkowiak, T., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) Complex Systems and Dependability. AISC, vol. 170, pp. 115–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coolen, F.P.A., Coolen-Maturi, T.: Modelling uncertain aspects of system dependability with survival signatures. In: Zamojski, W., Sugier, J. (eds.) Dependability Problems of Complex Information Systems. AISC, vol. 307, pp. 19–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Arthur, P.: Dempster.: Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Annal. Math. Stat. 38, 325–339 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feng, G., Patelli, E., Beer, M., Coolen, F.: Imprecise system reliability and component importance based on survival signature. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 150, 116–125 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kołowrocki, K., Kwiatuszewska-Sarnecka, B.: Reliability and risk analysis of large systems with ageing components. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 93(12), 1821–1829 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Modarres, M.: What Every Engineer Should Know About Reliability and Risk Analysis, vol. 30. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Patelli, E., Alvarez, D.A., Broggi, M., de Angelis, M.: Uncertainty management in multidisciplinary design of critical safety systems. J. Aerosp. Inf. Syst. 12, 140–169 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patelli, E., Broggi, M., de Angelis Marco, M.B.: OpenCossan: An efficient open tool for dealing with epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. In: Vulnerability, Uncertainty, and Risk, pp. 2564–2573. American Society of Civil Engineers, June 2014Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rubinstein, R.Y.: Optimization of computer simulation models with rare events. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 99(1), 89–112 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Samaniego, F.J.: System Signatures and Their Applications in Engineering Reliability, vol. 110. Springer Science & Business Media, New York (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., Dublish, S.: Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 107(3), 507–529 (1998)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zio, E., Baraldi, P., Patelli, E.: Assessment of the availability of an offshore installation by Monte Carlo simulation. Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip. 83(4), 312–320 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Risk and UncertaintyUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations