Towards a UML Profile for Maintenance Process and Reliability Analysis

In the field of reliability analysis just few modeling languages became widely recognized by specialists. Being born out of their simplicity, Fault Trees continuously held appeal to both scientists and engineers, which brought them various syntactical extensions as well as analysis software. Although, Fault Trees have proved their usefulness by nontrivial technical problems, we notice their weakness in specification of maintenance processes, which are usually composed of actions taken in accordance with control- and dataflow. For this reason we try merging UML 2.0 Activity Diagrams with Probabilistic Fault Trees with Time Dependencies by expressing events as objects. That in fact requires redefinition of generalization and causal gates of the trees, though lays the foundations for the new language named Reliability-Enhanced Activity Diagram. By taking advantage of the UML 2.0 infrastructure, we design the language’s profile and validate the approach against a model of a computer system’s repair scheme.

[1]  Mohamed Tahar Kimour,et al.  Separating Users' Views in a Development Process for Agile Methods , 2009, 2009 Fourth International Conference on Dependability of Computer Systems.

[2]  S. Rahman.  Reliability Engineering and System Safety , 2011 .

[3]  Jan Magott,et al.  Modeling Fault Trees Using Petri Nets , 1995, SAFECOMP.

[4]  Jan Magott,et al.  Method of time Petri net analysis for analysis of fault trees with time dependencies , 2002 .

[5]  A. Bobbio,et al.  Parametric fault trees with dynamic gates and repair boxes , 2004, Annual Symposium Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 - RAMS.

[6]  Jonathan Billington,et al.  8.3.1 A New Graphical Systems Engineering International Standard: ISO/IEC 15909 for High‐level Petri Nets , 2001 .

[7]  van der Wmp Wil Aalst,et al.  Workflow control-flow patterns : a revised view , 2006 .

[8]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  On the suitability of UML 2.0 activity diagrams for business process modelling , 2006, APCCM.

[9]  Lars Grunske,et al.  Model-Driven safety evaluation with state-event-based component failure annotations , 2005, CBSE'05.

[10]  Luigi Portinale,et al.  Radyban: A tool for reliability analysis of dynamic fault trees through conversion into dynamic Bayesian networks , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[11]  Bernd Bertsche,et al.  Fault Tree Analysis, FTA , 2008 .

[12]  Valeria Vittorini,et al.  Repairable fault tree for the automatic evaluation of repair policies , 2004, International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004.

[13]  Jan Magott,et al.  Time Coordination of Distance Protections Using Probabilistic Fault Trees With Time Dependencies , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.

[14]  Frédéric Mallet,et al.  New Results - Model-Driven Engineering for Embedded Systems: OMG UML profile MARTE , 2010 .

[15]  Salvatore J. Bavuso,et al.  Dynamic fault-tree models for fault-tolerant computer systems , 1992 .