IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v226y2012i6p635-645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the efficiency of functional decomposition in fault tree analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Vaidas Matuzas
  • Sergio Contini

Abstract

The exact analysis of complex fault trees is a very difficult task. Many methods have been defined to reduce computation time and working memory usage. This problem was recently studied by the authors who proposed an approach based on functional decomposition. A complex fault tree is recursively decomposed into a set of mutually exclusive simpler fault trees until their dimensions are compatible with the available working memory size. Then, the results of the analysis of all generated simpler trees are composed to obtain the results for the original un-decomposed fault tree. Large fault trees, which were impossible to analyse owing to insufficient working memory for the construction of the binary decision diagrams, were successfully analysed by means of the functional decomposition method. Since a fault tree is decomposed with respect to a small subset S of the vector x of basic events, the efficiency of the decomposition process is highly dependent on this subset. Hence the problem is how to select the events of S in order to minimise the fault tree analysis time. This article describes and compares four different algorithms to construct S with the aim of identifying the one for which the decomposition procedure requires the least computational time. Owing to the heuristic nature of this problem, all algorithms have been tested on a number of fault trees of different complexity in order to draw useful indications on the relatively ‘best’ one(s). According to the efficiency measures adopted for comparison purposes, the results showed that the best way to proceed is to set S as a minimal path set of the fault tree to be decomposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Vaidas Matuzas & Sergio Contini, 2012. "On the efficiency of functional decomposition in fault tree analysis," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(6), pages 635-645, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:226:y:2012:i:6:p:635-645
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X12458995
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X12458995
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X12458995?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Contini, Sergio & Matuzas, Vaidas, 2011. "Analysis of large fault trees based on functional decomposition," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 383-390.
    2. Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina & Rauzy, Antoine & Meléndez, Enrique & Nieto, Francisco, 2010. "Hybrid approach for the assessment of PSA models by means of binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(10), pages 1076-1092.
    3. Jung, Woo Sik & Yang, Joon-Eon & Ha, Jaejoo, 2005. "Development of measures to estimate truncation error in fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 30-36.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matuzas, V. & Contini, S., 2015. "Dynamic labelling of BDD and ZBDD for efficient non-coherent fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 183-192.
    2. Contini, Sergio & Matuzas, Vaidas, 2011. "Analysis of large fault trees based on functional decomposition," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 383-390.
    3. S Contini & V Matuzas, 2012. "Coupling decomposition and truncation for the analysis of complex fault trees," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(3), pages 249-261, June.
    4. Duflot, Nicolas & Bérenguer, Christophe & Dieulle, Laurence & Vasseur, Dominique, 2009. "A min cut-set-wise truncation procedure for importance measures computation in probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(11), pages 1827-1837.
    5. Zaitseva, Elena & Levashenko, Vitaly & Rabcan, Jan, 2023. "A new method for analysis of Multi-State systems based on Multi-valued decision diagram under epistemic uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    6. Jung, Woo Sik, 2015. "A method to improve cutset probability calculation in probabilistic safety assessment of nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 134-142.
    7. Santosh B. Rane & Yahya A. M. Narvel, 2016. "Reliability assessment and improvement of air circuit breaker (ACB) mechanism by identifying and eliminating the root causes," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 7(1), pages 305-321, December.
    8. Park, Jinkyun & Jung, Wondea, 2015. "A systematic framework to investigate the coverage of abnormal operating procedures in nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 21-30.
    9. Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina & Rauzy, Antoine & Meléndez, Enrique & Nieto, Francisco, 2010. "A reduction approach to improve the quantification of linked fault trees through binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(12), pages 1314-1323.
    10. Yves Dutuit & Antoine Rauzy, 2014. "Importance factors of coherent systems: A review," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 228(3), pages 313-323, June.
    11. Takeda, Satoshi & Kitada, Takanori, 2023. "Importance measure evaluation based on sensitivity coefficient for probabilistic risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    12. Lu, Ji-Min & Wu, Xiao-Yue & Liu, Yiliu & Ann Lundteigen, Mary, 2015. "Reliability analysis of large phased-mission systems with repairable components based on success-state sampling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 123-133.
    13. Miroslav Kvassay & Vitaly Levashenko & Elena Zaitseva, 2016. "Analysis of minimal cut and path sets based on direct partial Boolean derivatives," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 230(2), pages 147-161, April.
    14. Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina & Rauzy, Antoine & Meléndez, Enrique & Nieto, Francisco, 2010. "Hybrid approach for the assessment of PSA models by means of binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(10), pages 1076-1092.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:226:y:2012:i:6:p:635-645. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.