IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v175y2018icp62-78.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deterministic sampling for propagating epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in dynamic event tree analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Rahman, S.
  • Karanki, D.R.
  • Epiney, A.
  • Wicaksono, D.
  • Zerkak, O.
  • Dang, V.N.

Abstract

Dynamic Event Tree (DET) analysis allows for integrated deterministic and probabilistic safety assessment by coupling thermal-hydraulic system models with safety system and operator response models. It is a realistic but computationally challenging approach for risk quantification in a nuclear power plant. DET can also provide a two-loop nested framework to quantify uncertainty arising from aleatory and epistemic parameters of the risk assessment model. However, the propagation of uncertainties in a DET is a challenge, since the set of uncertain parameters is often very large and the computational cost of each run can be significant (e.g. prolonged station-blackout scenarios). In this case, the intensive calculation required to propagate epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in two-loop approaches with usual Monte Carlo sampling makes the DET computationally impractical for uncertainty quantification in many complex nuclear power plant transient applications. To overcome this computational burden, a sampling approach called Deterministic Sampling (DS) is adapted and evaluated in this work as a potentially more efficient alternative to Monte Carlo sampling. The application and performance of DS are first tested by quantifying the system failure probability for an illustrative problem, including the propagation of uncertainties. Subsequently, DS is applied to a DET analysis of a realistic nuclear power plant transient, namely, a Station Blackout with feed and bleed sequence. The impact of epistemic and aleatory uncertainty on the core damage frequency contribution from the accident sequence of Zion power plant is evaluated using discrete DET and deterministic sampling based DET approaches. The comparison and analysis of the results reveal that the DS-based approach is computationally efficient and practical.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahman, S. & Karanki, D.R. & Epiney, A. & Wicaksono, D. & Zerkak, O. & Dang, V.N., 2018. "Deterministic sampling for propagating epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in dynamic event tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 62-78.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:175:y:2018:i:c:p:62-78
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2018.03.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832017304775
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2018.03.009?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catalyurek, Umit & Rutt, Benjamin & Metzroth, Kyle & Hakobyan, Aram & Aldemir, Tunc & Denning, Richard & Dunagan, Sean & Kunsman, David, 2010. "Development of a code-agnostic computational infrastructure for the dynamic generation of accident progression event trees," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 278-294.
    2. Karanki, D.R. & Dang, V.N. & MacMillan, M.T. & Podofillini, L., 2018. "A comparison of dynamic event tree methods – Case study on a chemical batch reactor," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 542-553.
    3. Eldred, M.S. & Swiler, L.P. & Tang, G., 2011. "Mixed aleatory-epistemic uncertainty quantification with stochastic expansions and optimization-based interval estimation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(9), pages 1092-1113.
    4. Karanki, D.R. & Rahman, S. & Dang, V.N. & Zerkak, O., 2017. "Epistemic and aleatory uncertainties in integrated deterministic and probabilistic safety assessment: Tradeoff between accuracy and accident simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 91-102.
    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. Zheng, Xiaoyu & Tamaki, Hitoshi & Sugiyama, Tomoyuki & Maruyama, Yu, 2022. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plants using multi-fidelity simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    2. Park, Jong Woo & Lee, Seung Jun, 2022. "Simulation optimization framework for dynamic probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    3. Qingwei Xu & Kaili Xu, 2020. "Statistical Analysis and Prediction of Fatal Accidents in the Metallurgical Industry in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Morales-Torres, Adrián & Escuder-Bueno, Ignacio & Serrano-Lombillo, Armando & Castillo Rodríguez, Jesica T., 2019. "Dealing with epistemic uncertainty in risk-informed decision making for dam safety management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Xu, Gaowei & Azhari, Fae, 2022. "Data-driven optimization of repair schemes and inspection intervals for highway bridges," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    6. Jinhua Mi & Yuhua Cheng & Yufei Song & Libing Bai & Kai Chen, 2022. "Application of dynamic evidential networks in reliability analysis of complex systems with epistemic uncertainty and multiple life distributions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(1), pages 311-333, April.
    7. Huang, Jia & You, Jian-Xin & Liu, Hu-Chen & Song, Ming-Shun, 2020. "Failure mode and effect analysis improvement: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    8. Zarghami, Seyed Ashkan & Dumrak, Jantanee, 2021. "Aleatory uncertainty quantification of project resources and its application to project scheduling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).

    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. Yoo, Yeongmin & Jung, Ui-Jin & Han, Yong Ha & Lee, Jongsoo, 2021. "Data Augmentation-Based Prediction of System Level Performance under Model and Parameter Uncertainties: Role of Designable Generative Adversarial Networks (DGAN)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    2. Chemweno, Peter & Pintelon, Liliane & Muchiri, Peter Nganga & Van Horenbeek, Adriaan, 2018. "Risk assessment methodologies in maintenance decision making: A review of dependability modelling approaches," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 64-77.
    3. Zheng, Xiaoyu & Tamaki, Hitoshi & Sugiyama, Tomoyuki & Maruyama, Yu, 2022. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plants using multi-fidelity simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    4. Karanki, D.R. & Dang, V.N. & MacMillan, M.T. & Podofillini, L., 2018. "A comparison of dynamic event tree methods – Case study on a chemical batch reactor," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 542-553.
    5. Picoco, Claudia & Rychkov, Valentin & Aldemir, Tunc, 2020. "A framework for verifying Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    6. Guo, Zehua & Dailey, Ryan & Feng, Tangtao & Zhou, Yukun & Sun, Zhongning & Corradini, Michael L & Wang, Jun, 2021. "Uncertainty analysis of ATF Cr-coated-Zircaloy on BWR in-vessel accident progression during a station blackout," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    7. Helton, Jon C. & Brooks, Dusty M. & Sallaberry, Cédric J., 2020. "Property values associated with the failure of individual links in a system with multiple weak and strong links," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    8. Bellaera, R. & Bonifetto, R. & Di Maio, F. & Pedroni, N. & Savoldi, L. & Zanino, R. & Zio, E., 2020. "Integrated deterministic and probabilistic safety assessment of a superconducting magnet cryogenic cooling circuit for nuclear fusion applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Chen, Wen-Bin & Li, Xiao-Yang & Kang, Rui, 2022. "Integration for degradation analysis with multi-source ADT datasets considering dataset discrepancies and epistemic uncertainties," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    10. Lv, Y. & Yan, X.D. & Sun, W. & Gao, Z.Y., 2015. "A risk-based method for planning of bus–subway corridor evacuation under hybrid uncertainties," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 188-199.
    11. Shah, Harsheel & Hosder, Serhat & Winter, Tyler, 2015. "Quantification of margins and mixed uncertainties using evidence theory and stochastic expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 59-72.
    12. Vincenzo Destino & Nicola Pedroni & Roberto Bonifetto & Francesco Di Maio & Laura Savoldi & Enrico Zio, 2021. "Metamodeling and On-Line Clustering for Loss-of-Flow Accident Precursors Identification in a Superconducting Magnet Cryogenic Cooling Circuit," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-37, September.
    13. Helton, Jon C. & Brooks, Dusty M. & Sallaberry, Cédric J., 2020. "Margins associated with loss of assured safety for systems with multiple weak links and strong links," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    14. Palash Dutta, 2019. "Structural Reliability Analysis with Inverse Credibility Distributions," New Mathematics and Natural Computation (NMNC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 47-63, March.
    15. Karanki, Durga Rao & Dang, Vinh N., 2016. "Quantification of Dynamic Event Trees – A comparison with event trees for MLOCA scenario," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 19-31.
    16. Zamalieva, Daniya & Yilmaz, Alper & Aldemir, Tunc, 2013. "Online scenario labeling using a hidden Markov model for assessment of nuclear plant state," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-13.
    17. Wang, Chong & Matthies, Hermann G., 2019. "Novel model calibration method via non-probabilistic interval characterization and Bayesian theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 84-92.
    18. Turati, Pietro & Pedroni, Nicola & Zio, Enrico, 2016. "Advanced RESTART method for the estimation of the probability of failure of highly reliable hybrid dynamic systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-126.
    19. Rockafellar, R.T. & Royset, J.O. & Miranda, S.I., 2014. "Superquantile regression with applications to buffered reliability, uncertainty quantification, and conditional value-at-risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(1), pages 140-154.
    20. Maidana, Renan G. & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Gomola, Alojz & Utne, Ingrid B. & Mosleh, Ali, 2023. "Supervised dynamic probabilistic risk assessment: Review and comparison of methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).

    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:eee:reensy:v:175:y:2018:i:c:p:62-78. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    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.