2014
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2014.962114
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Behavioural analysis of a hydroelectric production power plant under reworking scheme

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ram et al (2013a) analyzed various reliability measures of a standby system with the waiting time to repair strategy. Manglik and Ram (2015) analyzed the behavior of hydroelectric power plant with the waiting time to repair strategy. Ram and Manglik (2016) analyzed a multistate system by incorporating imperfect fault coverage.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ram et al (2013a) analyzed various reliability measures of a standby system with the waiting time to repair strategy. Manglik and Ram (2015) analyzed the behavior of hydroelectric power plant with the waiting time to repair strategy. Ram and Manglik (2016) analyzed a multistate system by incorporating imperfect fault coverage.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The availability of the designed power plant can be examined by taking the inverse Laplace transformation of Equation (18) and by putting the value of failure and repair rates as λ G =0.06, λ R =0.11, λ B =0.20, λ GB =0.30, λ C =0.03, λ CSF =0.01, μ =1, ϕ ( x )=1 (Rawal et al , 2015; Manglik and Ram, 2015; Le Gourieres, 2014; Singh et al , 2013). One may get the availability of the power plant as follows: …”
Section: Particular Cases and Their Numerical Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Now varying input parameters one by one at 0.1, 0.2, …, 0.9, respectively, and setting the other failure rates as λ G =0.06, λ R =0.11, λ B =0.20, λ GB =0.30, λ C =0.03, λ CSF =0.01 (Manglik and Ram, 2015; Le Gourieres, 2014; Singh et al , 2013) in Equation (42a), MTTF with the variation in failure rates is signified in Table IV and its graphical representation is presented in Figure 6.…”
Section: Particular Cases and Their Numerical Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 in which ''success criteria analysis'' provides PRA with supportive thermo-hydraulics (TH) calculations. Interested readers are referred to Ram (2013) for further details of a comprehensive PRA and its applications (Manglik and Ram 2015). Techniques such as Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) are also equally effective for evaluating the frequency of occurrence of unsafe events in PRA through system analysis as addressed in Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%