Modeling standby redundancies in repairable systems as guarded preemption mechanisms

Piriou, Pierre-Yves; Faure, Jean-Marc; Lesage, Jean-Jacques

doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2015.06.486

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although a few techniques have been extended with more flexible mechanisms (e.g. BDMP), the representation and analysis of dynamic repair scenarios remain a research challenge that we try to address within D3H2.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Cost‐effective Reuse of Components in the Design of Complex Reconfigurable Systems

Aizpurua

Papadopoulos

Muxika

et al. 2017

Quality & Reliability Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design strategies that benefit from the reuse of system components can reduce costs while maintaining or increasing dependability-we use the term dependability to tie together reliability and availability. D3H2 (aDaptive Dependable Design for systems with Homogeneous and Heterogeneous redundancies) is a methodology that supports the design of complex systems with a focus on reconfiguration and component reuse. D3H2 systematizes the identification of heterogeneous redundancies and optimizes the design of fault detection and reconfiguration mechanisms, by enabling the analysis of design alternatives with respect to dependability and cost. In this paper, we extend D3H2 for application to repairable systems. The method is extended with analysis capabilities allowing dependability assessment of complex reconfigurable systems. Analysed scenarios include time-dependencies between failure events and the corresponding reconfiguration actions. We demonstrate how D3H2 can support decisions about fault detection and reconfiguration that seek to improve dependability while reducing costs via application to a realistic railway case study.A high-level function consists of a set of Main Functions (MF), for example, train operating properly = {traction system OK, signalling system OK, braking system OK, air conditioning control OK, . . . }. Main functions are performed in possibly different Physical Locations (PLs), for example, a single air conditioning control implementation may span a whole train car, or each car compartment in a train car may have its own air conditioning control. A main function consists of a set of subfunctions (SF), for example, input, control and output subfunctions. A subfunction may have multiple implementations (#) to carry out the subfunction, and these are ordered with respect to their priority.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Cost‐effective Reuse of Components in the Design of Complex Reconfigurable Systems

Aizpurua

Papadopoulos

Muxika

et al. 2017

Quality & Reliability Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• First, it is possible to model only one reconfiguration strategy: the destination of the trigger is activated as soon as the origin of the trigger fails and is deactived as soon as the origin is repaired. This strategy is not the only one which is used in practice, however [12]. • Second, the models of components (leaves of the fault tree) include only two operation modes: working and standby.…”

Section: From Safety Analysis Of Reconfigurable Systems To Design Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reconfiguration strategy which is chosen for each switch (and whose relevance has to be evaluated before designing a faulttolerant control algorithm) is modeled by a Moore machine, associated with this switch. Three kinds of switches are used in this study case (an exhaustive study of the reconfiguration strategies has been proposed in [12]). Switches of type M3 express a strategy "1 out of 2, latest replacement, latest resumption" (replacement occurs when the main component fails if the spare component is available, and resumption occurs when the spare fails if the main is available -the corresponding Moore machine is given in Figure 3f); switches of type M4 express a strategy "1 out of 2, earliest replacement, earliest resumption" (resumption occurs as soon as the main component is available without waiting for a failure of the spare -the corresponding Moore machine is given in Figure 3g); switches of type M2 express a strategy "2 out of 3, latest replacement, latest resumption" (the corresponding Moore machine is given in Figure 3e).…”

Section: B Gbdmp Model Of the Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

From safety analysis of reconfigurable systems to design of fault-tolerant control strategies

Piriou

Faure

Lesage

2016

2016 3rd Conference on Control and Fault-Tolerant Systems (SysTol)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design of fault-tolerant control strategies requires a perfect knowledge of both the possible reconfigurations of the system and of the behavior of this system when failures occur. In this paper it is shown that the use of a model-based safety analysis (MBSA) framework, able to cope with repairable and reconfigurable phased-mission systems, is helpful for the choice of the best reconfiguration strategies to be implemented in the control system. The core of this approach is based on the integration of a model of the system structure (Fault Tree), a model of the dysfunctional behaviors of the components of the system (Switched Markov Processes) and a model of the reconfiguration mechanisms (Moore Machines). The syntax and semantics of the different models and their integration is first defined. The benefits of this approach for performance evaluation of fault-tolerant control strategies are afterwards illustrated through an application example.

show abstract

“…As the FTP A has better performance than the FTP B, it is reactivated after a failure as soon as it has been repaired, even if the FTP B is operable. That is, the FTP B is deactivated upon the repair of the FTP A (Piriou et al 19 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the given value of parameter k, after expanding the terms (l 1 + m 2 + t) k and (l 1 + t) k involved in (19), a representation in the form of ( 14) is obtained. For an illustration, let k = 2, l 1 = 1, l 2 = 2, m 1 = 4, m 2 = 10.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of the two-unit priority standby system revisited

Eryılmaz

Finkelstein

2021

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with reliability assessment of the repairable two-unit cold standby system when the first, main unit has the better performance level than the second one. Therefore, after its repair, the main unit is always switched into operation. The new Laplace transform representation for the system’s lifetime is obtained for arbitrary operation and repair time distributions of the units. For some particular cases, the Laplace transform of the system is shown to be rational, which enables the use of the matrix-exponential distributions for obtaining relevant reliability indices. The discrete setup of the model is also considered through the corresponding matrix-geometric distributions, which are the discrete analogs of the matrix-exponential distributions.

show abstract

Modeling standby redundancies in repairable systems as guarded preemption mechanisms

Cited by 8 publications

References 4 publications

On Cost‐effective Reuse of Components in the Design of Complex Reconfigurable Systems

On Cost‐effective Reuse of Components in the Design of Complex Reconfigurable Systems

From safety analysis of reconfigurable systems to design of fault-tolerant control strategies

Reliability of the two-unit priority standby system revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About