New methods to determine the importance measures of initiating and enabling events in fault tree analysis

Abstract Components' importance measures play a very important role in system reliability analysis. They are used to identify the weakest parts of the system for design improvement, failure diagnosis and maintenance. This paper deals with the problem of determining the importance measures of basic events in case of unreliability analysis of binary coherent and non-coherent fault trees. This type of analysis is typical of catastrophic top events, characterised by unacceptable consequences. Since the unreliability of systems with repairable components cannot be exactly calculated via fault tree, the Expected Number of Failures – which is obtained by integrating the unconditional failure frequency – is considered as it represents a good upper bound. In these cases it is important to classify events as initiators or enablers since their roles in the system are different, their sequence of occurrence is different and consequently they must be treated differently. New equations based on system failure frequency are described in this paper for determining the exact importance measures of initiating and enabling events. Simple examples are provided to clarify the application of the proposed calculation methods. Compared with the exact methods available in the literature, those proposed in this paper are easier to apply by hand and are simpler to implement in a fault tree analyser.

[1]  Contini Sergio,et al.  ASTRA 3.0: Logical and Probabilistic Analysis Methods , 2010 .

[2]  Antoine Rauzy,et al.  Efficient algorithms to assess component and gate importance in fault tree analysis , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[3]  Peter S. Jackson On the s-Importance of Elements and Prime Implicants of Non-Coherent Systems , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[4]  L. Camarinopoulos,et al.  Failure frequencies of non-coherent structures , 1993 .

[5]  W. E. Vesely,et al.  A time-dependent methodology for fault tree evaluation , 1970 .

[6]  C. Clarotti,et al.  Limitations of Minimal Cut-Set Approach in Evaluating Reliability of Systems with Repairable Components , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[7]  M. van der Borst,et al.  An overview of PSA importance measures , 2001, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[8]  Vaidas Matuzas,et al.  A novel method to apply Importance and Sensitivity Analysis to multiple Fault-trees , 2010 .

[9]  F. Proschan,et al.  Importance of System Components and Fault Tree Events. , 1975 .

[10]  Qin Zhang,et al.  Element Importance and System Failure Frequency of a 2-State System , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.

[11]  John D. Andrews,et al.  Birnbaum's measure of component importance for noncoherent systems , 2003, IEEE Trans. Reliab..

[12]  Borut Mavko,et al.  Application of the fault tree analysis for assessment of power system reliability , 2009, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[13]  G. G. M. Cojazzi,et al.  On the use of non-coherent fault trees in safety and security studies , 2008, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[14]  John D. Andrews,et al.  Importance measures for noncoherent-system analysis , 2003, IEEE Trans. Reliab..

[15]  Colin Dunglinson,et al.  Interval Reliability for Initiating and Enabling Events , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Reliability.