Protection Survivability Importance in Systems with Multilevel Protection

Corresponding Author

Gregory Levitin

[email protected]

The Israel Electric Corporation Ltd., Reliability and Equipment Department, New Office Building, P.O. Box 10, Haifa 31000, Israel

The Israel Electric Corporation Ltd., Reliability and Equipment Department, New Office Building, P.O. Box 10, Haifa 31000, Israel===Search for more papers by this author

Gregory Levitin,

Corresponding Author

Gregory Levitin

[email protected]

The Israel Electric Corporation Ltd., Reliability and Equipment Department, New Office Building, P.O. Box 10, Haifa 31000, Israel

The Israel Electric Corporation Ltd., Reliability and Equipment Department, New Office Building, P.O. Box 10, Haifa 31000, Israel===Search for more papers by this author

First published: 25 October 2004

https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.592

Citations: 12

About

PDF

Tools

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

This paper considers systems that can have different states corresponding to different combinations of available elements constituting the system. Each state can be characterized by a performance rate, which is the quantitative measure of a system's ability to perform its task. Both the impact of external factors (attack) and internal causes (failures) affect system survivability, which is determined as the probability of meeting a given demand. In order to increase the system's survivability a multilevel protection is applied to its subsystems. This means that a subsystem and its inner level of protection are in turn protected by the protection of an outer level. This double-protected subsystem has its outer protection and so forth. In such systems, the protected subsystems can be destroyed only if all of the levels of their protection are destroyed. Each level of protection can be destroyed only if all of the outer levels of protection are destroyed. In such systems, different protections play different roles in providing for the system's survivability. The evaluation of the relative influence of the protections' survivability on the survivability of the entire system provides useful information about the importance of these protections. The protection survivability importance index is introduced in order to evaluate this influence and an algorithm for evaluating the index is presented. The relevancy of protection is also considered. Illustrative examples are presented. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

REFERENCES

1Barbacci M. Survivability in the age of vulnerable systems. Computer 1996; 29(11): 8.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Malakhoff A, Klinkhamer D, McKesson C. Analysis of the impact of reliability, availability and maintainability on ship survivability. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on High Speed Marine Craft, September 1998. Norwegian Society of Chartered Engineers, 1998. http://www.hurricane.net/˜chrism/availability.htm [16 September 2003].
Google Scholar
3Parfenov U. Reliability, Survivability and Effectiveness of Ship Electric Power Systems. Russian Naval Academy: Leningrad, 1989 (in Russian).
Google Scholar
4Apostolakis G. The effect of a certain class of potential common mode failures on the reliability of redundant systems. Nuclear Engineering and Design 1976; 36: 123–133.
10.1016/0029-5493(76)90149-7
Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Vesely W. Estimating common-cause failure probabilities in reliability and risk analyses: Marshall-Olkin specializations. Nuclear Systems Reliability Engineering and Risk Assessment, J Fussell, G Burdick (eds.). Society of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 1977; 314–341.
Google Scholar
6Chae K, Clark G. System reliability in the presence of common-cause failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1986; 35: 32–35.
10.1109/TR.1986.4335336
Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Page L, Perry J. Model for system reliability with common-cause failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1989; 38: 406–410.
10.1109/24.46447
Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Bai D, Yun W, Chung S. Redundancy optimization of k-out-of-n systems with common-cause failures. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1991; 40: 56–59.
10.1109/24.75334
Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Anderson P, Agarwal S. An improved model for protective-system reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1992; 41: 422–426.
10.1109/24.159812
Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Dhillon B, Anude O. Common-cause failures in engineering systems: A review. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering 1994; 1: 103–129.
10.1142/S0218539394000106
Google Scholar
11Vaurio J. The theory and quantification of common-cause shock events for redundant standby systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1994; 43: 289–305.
10.1016/0951-8320(94)90034-5
Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Vaurio J. An implicit method for incorporating common-cause failures in system analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1998; 47: 173–180.
10.1109/24.722285
Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Marseguerra M, Padovani E, Zio E. Impact of the operating environment on the design of redundant configurations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1998; 63: 155–160.
10.1016/S0951-8320(98)00034-9
Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Levitin G. Incorporating common-cause failures into series-parallel multi-state system analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 2001; 50(4): 380–388.
10.1109/24.983398
Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Levitin G, Lisnianski A. Optimal separation of elements in vulnerable multi-state systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2001; 73: 55–66.
10.1016/S0951-8320(01)00027-8
Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Levitin G, Lisnianski A. Survivability maximization for vulnerable multi-state system with bridge topology. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2000; 70: 125–140.
10.1016/S0951-8320(00)00052-1
Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Levitin G, Lisnianski A. Optimizing survivability of vulnerable series-parallel multi-state systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2002; 79: 317–329.
Google Scholar
18Levitin G. Maximizing survivability of acyclic transmission networks with multi-state retransmitters and vulnerable nodes. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2002; 77: 189–199.
10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00040-6
Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Birnbaum L. On the importance of different components in a multicomponent system. Multivariate Analysis, vol. 2. Academic Press: New York, 1969.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Lisnianski A, Levitin G. Multi-state System Reliability. Assessment, Optimization and Applications. World Scientific: Singapore, 2003.
10.1142/5221
Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Ushakov I. Optimal standby problems and a universal generating function. Soviet Journal of Computer and Systems Science 1987; 25: 79–82.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Levitin G, Lisnianski A, Beh-Haim H, Elmakis D. Redundancy optimization for series-parallel multi-state systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1998; 47: 165–172.
10.1109/24.722283
Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Fussell JB. How to calculate system reliability and safety characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1975; 24(3): 169–174.
10.1109/TR.1975.5215142
Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Meng FC. Comparing the importance of system elements by some structural characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1996; 45(1): 59–65.
10.1109/24.488917
Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Meng FC. Some further results on ranking the importance of system elements. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1995; 47: 97–101.
10.1016/0951-8320(94)00046-Q
Web of Science® Google Scholar
26Elsayed EA. Reliability Engineering. Addison-Wesley Longman: Reading, MA, 1996.
Google Scholar
27Høyland A, Rausand M. System Reliability Theory: Models and Statistical Methods. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1994.
Web of Science® Google Scholar
28Hong JS, Lie CH. Joint reliability-importance of two edges in an undirected network. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1993; 42(1): 17–23.
10.1109/24.210266
Web of Science® Google Scholar
29Armstrong MJ. Joint reliability-importance of elements. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1995; 44(3): 408–412.
10.1109/24.406574
Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Cheok MC, Parry GW, Sherry RR. Use of importance measures in risk informed applications. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1998; 60: 213–226.
10.1016/S0951-8320(97)00144-0
Web of Science® Google Scholar
31Vasseur D, Llory M. International survey on PSA figures of merit. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1999; 66: 261–274.
10.1016/S0951-8320(99)00011-3
Web of Science® Google Scholar
32van der Borst M, Shoonakker H. An overview of PSA importance measures. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2001; 72(3): 241–245.
10.1016/S0951-8320(01)00007-2
Web of Science® Google Scholar
33Borgonovo E, Apostolakis GE. A new importance measure for risk-informed decision making. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2001; 72: 193–212.
10.1016/S0951-8320(00)00108-3
Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume20, Issue8

December 2004

Pages 727-738

Protection Survivability Importance in Systems with Multilevel Protection

Abstract

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Protection Survivability Importance in Systems with Multilevel Protection

Abstract

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information