IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v26y2006i1p277-286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redundancy in Designs

Author

Listed:
  • Ted W. Yellman

Abstract

The author contends that a previous Risk Analysis article overemphasized the pitfalls of incorporating redundancy into designs. Relevant aspects of that article are reviewed and commented upon, then the potentials and pitfalls of redundancy in systems and procedures are more broadly discussed. To provide a solid foundation for that discussion, some definitions for systems risk analysis terminology are presented. It is shown that pairs and larger sets of related failures (the physical causes of shortfalls in redundancy effectiveness) can be divided into two types: (1) cascading/induced failures and (2) common‐external‐cause failures. Each type has its own physical characteristics and implications for mathematical modeling. Service experience with large‐commercial‐airplane jet‐engine propulsion systems is used to illustrate the two types of related failures. Finally, an overview is provided of event‐sequence analysis, an alternative approach to systems risk analysis. When the possibility of related failures of mutually‐redundant system elements must be accounted for, event‐sequence analysis can usually do that better than fault‐tree analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Ted W. Yellman, 2006. "Redundancy in Designs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 277-286, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:1:p:277-286
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00712.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00712.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00712.x?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. Scott D. Sagan, 2004. "The Problem of Redundancy Problem: Why More Nuclear Security Forces May Produce Less Nuclear Security," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 935-946, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gregory Levitin & Liudong Xing & Yuanshun Dai, 2020. "Mission Abort Policy for Systems with Observable States of Standby Components," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 1900-1912, October.

    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. Thorben Kaul & Tobias Meyer & Walter Sextro, 2017. "Formulation of reliability-related objective functions for design of intelligent mechatronic systems," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(4), pages 390-399, August.
    2. Azadegan, Arash & Modi, Sachin & Lucianetti, Lorenzo, 2021. "Surprising supply chain disruptions: Mitigation effects of operational slack and supply redundancy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    3. Jean‐Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra, 2013. "On The Problem Of Prevention," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(3), pages 787-805, August.
    4. Viktoria Gisladottir & Alexander A. Ganin & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Jeremy Kepner & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Resilience of Cyber Systems with Over‐ and Underregulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(9), pages 1644-1651, September.
    5. John Downer, 2014. "Disowning Fukushima: Managing the credibility of nuclear reliability assessment in the wake of disaster," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(3), pages 287-309, September.
    6. Steve Kennedy & Martina K. Linnenluecke, 2022. "Circular economy and resilience: A research agenda," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 2754-2765, September.
    7. Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2008. "How a System Backfires: Dynamics of Redundancy Problems in Security," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1669-1687, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:1:p:277-286. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.