IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v94y2009i12p1904-1916.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the value of redundancy subject to common-cause failures: Toward the resolution of an on-going debate

Author

Listed:
  • Hoepfer, V.M.
  • Saleh, J.H.
  • Marais, K.B.

Abstract

Common-cause failures (CCF) are one of the more critical and challenging issues for system reliability and risk analyses. Academic interest in modeling CCF, and more broadly in modeling dependent failures, has steadily grown over the years in the number of publications as well as in the sophistication of the analytical tools used. In the past few years, several influential articles have shed doubts on the relevance of redundancy arguing that “redundancy backfires†through common-cause failures, and that the latter dominate unreliability, thus defeating the purpose of redundancy. In this work, we take issue with some of the results of these publications. In their stead, we provide a nuanced perspective on the (contingent) value of redundancy subject to common-cause failures. First, we review the incremental reliability and MTTF provided by redundancy subject to common-cause failures. Second, we introduce the concept and develop the analytics of the “redundancy–relevance boundary†: we propose this redundancy–relevance boundary as a design-aid tool that provides an answer to the following question: what level of redundancy is relevant or advantageous given a varying prevalence of common-cause failures? We investigate the conditions under which different levels of redundancy provide an incremental MTTF over that of the single component in the face of common-cause failures. Recognizing that redundancy comes at a cost, we also conduct a cost–benefit analysis of redundancy subject to common-cause failures, and demonstrate how this analysis modifies the redundancy–relevance boundary. We show how the value of redundancy is contingent on the prevalence of common-cause failures, the redundancy level considered, and the monadic cost–benefit ratio. Finally we argue that general unqualified criticism of redundancy is misguided, and efforts are better spent for example on understanding and mitigating the potential sources of common-cause failures rather than deriding the concept of redundancy in system design.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoepfer, V.M. & Saleh, J.H. & Marais, K.B., 2009. "On the value of redundancy subject to common-cause failures: Toward the resolution of an on-going debate," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(12), pages 1904-1916.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:94:y:2009:i:12:p:1904-1916
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2009.06.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832009001380
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2009.06.007?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. Saleh, J.H. & Marais, K., 2006. "Reliability: How much is it worth? Beyond its estimation or prediction, the (net) present value of reliability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(6), pages 665-673.
    2. Vaurio, Jussi K., 2007. "Consistent mapping of common cause failure rates and alpha factors," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(5), pages 628-645.
    3. Vaurio, Jussi K., 2005. "Uncertainties and quantification of common cause failure rates and probabilities for system analyses," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 186-195.
    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. Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu & Werle, Natalia Jaeger Basso, 2017. "A framework for the analysis of slack in socio-technical systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 439-451.
    2. Levitin, Gregory & Xing, Liudong & Amari, Suprasad V. & Dai, Yuanshun, 2013. "Reliability of non-repairable phased-mission systems with propagated failures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 218-228.
    3. Saleh, J.H. & Marais, K.B. & Bakolas, E. & Cowlagi, R.V., 2010. "Highlights from the literature on accident causation and system safety: Review of major ideas, recent contributions, and challenges," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1105-1116.
    4. Gangwal, Utkarsh & Singh, Mayank & Pandey, Pradumn Kumar & Kamboj, Deepak & Chatterjee, Samrat & Bhatia, Udit, 2022. "Identifying early-warning indicators of onset of sudden collapse in networked infrastructure systems against sequential disruptions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 591(C).
    5. Borgonovo, E. & Smith, C.L., 2012. "Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 222(2), pages 301-311.
    6. Cai, Baoping & Liu, Yonghong & Liu, Zengkai & Tian, Xiaojie & Dong, Xin & Yu, Shilin, 2012. "Using Bayesian networks in reliability evaluation for subsea blowout preventer control system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 32-41.

    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. KanÄ ev, DuÅ¡ko & ÄŒepin, Marko, 2012. "A new method for explicit modelling of single failure event within different common cause failure groups," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 84-93.
    2. Gómez Fernández, Juan F. & Márquez, Adolfo Crespo & López-Campos, Mónica A., 2016. "Customer-oriented risk assessment in network utilities," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 72-83.
    3. Min Zhang & Zhijian Zhang & Ali Mosleh & Sijuan Chen, 2017. "Common cause failure model updating for risk monitoring in nuclear power plants based on alpha factor model," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(3), pages 209-220, June.
    4. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio, 2013. "Uncertainty Analysis in Fault Tree Models with Dependent Basic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1146-1173, June.
    5. Alizadeh, Siamak & Sriramula, Srinivas, 2018. "Impact of common cause failure on reliability performance of redundant safety related systems subject to process demand," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 129-150.
    6. Cui, Lirong & Li, Haijun, 2007. "Analytical method for reliability and MTTF assessment of coherent systems with dependent components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(3), pages 300-307.
    7. Veljanovski, N. & ÄŒepin, M., 2024. "Event tree-based risk and financial assessment for power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    8. L Xing & P Boddu & Y Sun & W Wang, 2010. "Reliability analysis of static and dynamic fault-tolerant systems subject to probabilistic common-cause failures," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 224(1), pages 43-53, March.
    9. Quigley, John & Walls, Lesley, 2011. "Mixing Bayes and empirical Bayes inference to anticipate the realization of engineering concerns about variant system designs," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(8), pages 933-941.
    10. W Mechri & C Simon & K Ben Othman, 2011. "Uncertainty analysis of common cause failure in safety instrumented systems," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 225(4), pages 450-460, December.
    11. Taghipour, Sharareh & Banjevic, Dragan & Jardine, Andrew K.S., 2010. "Periodic inspection optimization model for a complex repairable system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 944-952.
    12. Marais, Karen B. & Saleh, Joseph H., 2009. "Beyond its cost, the value of maintenance: An analytical framework for capturing its net present value," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 644-657.
    13. Quigley, John & Bedford, Tim & Walls, Lesley, 2007. "Estimating rate of occurrence of rare events with empirical bayes: A railway application," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(5), pages 619-627.
    14. Mechri, Walid & Simon, Christophe & BenOthman, Kamel, 2015. "Switching Markov chains for a holistic modeling of SIS unavailability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 212-222.
    15. Atwood, Corwin L., 2013. "Consequences of mapping data or parameters in Bayesian common-cause analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 118-131.
    16. Li, Chun-yang & Chen, Xun & Yi, Xiao-shan & Tao, Jun-yong, 2010. "Heterogeneous redundancy optimization for multi-state series–parallel systems subject to common cause failures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 202-207.
    17. Gianpaolo Di Bona & Antonio Forcina & Domenico Falcone & Luca Silvestri, 2020. "Critical Risks Method (CRM): A New Safety Allocation Approach for a Critical Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Berle, Øyvind & Asbjørnslett, Bjørn Egil & Rice, James B., 2011. "Formal Vulnerability Assessment of a maritime transportation system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(6), pages 696-705.
    19. Abou, Seraphin C., 2010. "Performance assessment of multi-state systems with critical failure modes: Application to the flotation metallic arsenic circuit," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(6), pages 614-622.
    20. Saleh, J.H. & Marais, K.B. & Bakolas, E. & Cowlagi, R.V., 2010. "Highlights from the literature on accident causation and system safety: Review of major ideas, recent contributions, and challenges," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1105-1116.

    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:94:y:2009:i:12:p:1904-1916. 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.