A comparison of Fault Trees and the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology for the analysis of FPGA-based safety systems Part 1: Reactor trip logic loop reliability analysis

McNelles, Phillip; Zeng, Zhao Chang; Renganathan, Guna; Lamarre, Greg; Akl, Yolande; Lu, Lixuan

doi:10.1016/j.ress.2016.04.014

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second part is the mainstream analysis technology of DFT analysis at present, 18 The third is the other complementary methods that researchers have found in the continuous exploration, which can help to solve some defects in DFT analysis, including artificial neural network (ANN), Petri network (PN), dynamic uncertain causality graph (DUCG), and so on. 19,20 As shown in Figure 4, these realization methods/analysis techniques are classified, including general analysis techniques and complementary methods. The general analysis technology often transforms the tree structure to simplify the model and facilitate the calculation.…”

Section: The Realization Methods Of Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second part is the mainstream analysis technology of DFT analysis at present, including Markov chain, MC simulation, binary decision diagram (BDD), and Bayesian network (BN) 18 . The third is the other complementary methods that researchers have found in the continuous exploration, which can help to solve some defects in DFT analysis, including artificial neural network (ANN), Petri network (PN), dynamic uncertain causality graph (DUCG), and so on 19,20 …”

Section: The Realization Methods Of Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review on the realization methods of dynamic fault tree

Zhu

Zhang

2022

Quality & Reliability Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic fault tree (DFT) is an extended technology of Fault tree analysis (FTA). It has been widely used in many fields and plays an important role in improving the security performance of the system. Although DFT has developed for many years, new research in recent years is still worthy of attention. In this study, the research status of different realization methods/analysis techniques of DFT is comprehensively reviewed. First, the development and research trend of DFT are described. Second, the research on dynamic gates and components in the analysis techniques is introduced in detail. Third, the mainstream realization methods of DFT, such as Markov chain, Bayesian network (BN) and so on, are summarized. At the same time, the application of other auxiliary analysis techniques is also introduced. Then, based on the research progress of different realization methods, the future development direction and challenges of DFT are prospected. The realization methods of DFT not only need the rigorous theoretical foundation. Moreover, it is also necessary to consider the combination of real‐time data and system modeling technology to realize dynamic assessment and smart system in the future.

show abstract

Section: The Realization Methods Of Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Realization Methods Of Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review on the realization methods of dynamic fault tree

Zhu

Zhang

2022

Quality & Reliability Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Components failures can lead to two types of misoperations: (1) failure on-demand, e.g., failing to trigger protections or execute proper control strategies (when demanded); (2) malfunction, e.g., spurious triggering of protections (e.g., unintentional shutdown) or incorrect execution of control actions. Failures on-demand and malfunctions of both hardware and software components have gained increasing attention in the risk community [3,124].…”

Section: Safety and Security Of Cyber-physical Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The future of risk assessment

Zio

2018

Reliability Engineering & System Safety

282

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TRisk assessment must evolve for addressing the existing and future challenges, and considering the new systems and innovations that have already arrived in our lives and that are coming ahead. In this paper, I swing on the rapid changes and innovations that the World that we live in is experiencing, and analyze them with respect to the challenges that these pose to the field of risk assessment. Digitalization brings opportunities but with it comes also the complexity of cyber-phyiscal systems. Climate change and extreme natural events are increasingly threatening our infrastructures; terrorist and malevolent threats are posing severe concerns for the security of our systems and lives. These sources of hazard are extremely uncertain and, thus, difficult to describe and model quantitatively.Some research and development directions that are emerging are presented and discussed, also considering the ever increasing computational capabilities and data availability. These include the use of simulation for accident scenario identification and exploration, the extension of risk assessment into the framework of resilience and business continuity, the reliance on data for dynamic and condition monitoring-based risk assessment, the safety and security assessment of cyber-physical systems.The paper is not a research work and not exactly a review or a state of the art work, but rather it offers a lookout on risk assessment, open to consideration and discussion, as it cannot pretend to give an absolute point of view nor to be complete in the issues addressed (and the related literature referenced to).

show abstract

“…(2) malfunction, e.g., spurious triggering of protections (e.g., unintentional shutdown) or incorrect execution of control actions. Failures on-demand and malfunctions of both hardware and software components have gained increasing attention in the risk community (Aldemir et al, 2010;McNelles et al, 2016).…”

Section: Hazardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Non-parametric Cumulative Sum Approach for Online Diagnostics of Cyber Attacks to Nuclear Power Plants

Wang

Maio

Zio

2019

Resilience of Cyber-Physical Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Failures and cyber attacks can both compromise the integrity of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs). Cyber attacks manifest themselves in the physical system and, can be misclassified as component failures, leading to wrong control actions and maintenance strategies. In this chapter, we illustrate the use of a non-parametric cumulative sum (NP-CUSUM) approach for online diagnostics of cyber attacks to CPSs. This allows for a prompt recognition of cyber attacks from component failures, and effective actions for CPSs protection. We apply the approach to the Advanced Leadcooled Fast Reactor European Demonstrator (ALFRED) and its digital Instrumentation and Control (I&C) system. For this, an object-oriented model previously developed is embedded within a Monte Carlo (MC) engine that allows injecting into the I&C system both components (stochastic) failures (such as sensor bias, drift, wider noise and freezing) and cyber attacks (such as Denial of Service (DoS) attacks mimicking component failures).

show abstract

A comparison of Fault Trees and the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology for the analysis of FPGA-based safety systems Part 1: Reactor trip logic loop reliability analysis

Cited by 20 publications

References 17 publications

A review on the realization methods of dynamic fault tree

A review on the realization methods of dynamic fault tree

The future of risk assessment

A Non-parametric Cumulative Sum Approach for Online Diagnostics of Cyber Attacks to Nuclear Power Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About