IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v10y2019i1d10.1007_s13198-019-00909-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of risks related to the functioning of railway telecommunication

Author

Listed:
  • V. A. Gapanovich

    (RZD, NIIAS)

  • I. B. Shubinsky

    (RZD, NIIAS)

  • I. N. Rosenberg

    (RZD, NIIAS)

  • A. M. Zamyshlyaev

    (RZD, NIIAS)

Abstract

Railway transport is a complex technical system with telecommunication being one of its constituent parts. Technical condition of the objects of the telecommunication division impacts directly on the traffic process. Therefore, to ensure the required indices of the traffic process reliability it is necessary to provide for a pre-set factor for availability of services that are needed for safe control of train traffic. According to the methodology of management of resources, risks and dependability at life cycle stages (URRAN) (Gapanovich et al. in Dependability 2:4–22, 2015. https://doi.org/10.21683/1729-2646-2015-0-2-4-22) implemented on Russian railways, resources are managed in the telecommunication division based on the risk level criterion: if a risk is tolerable then the objects of the telecommunication division ensure the compliance with the traffic process requirements. If risks exceed the tolerable values it is necessary to take measures aimed at the modernization of the objects, or at the improvement of their technical maintenance. This approach is aimed at the optimization of cost of the life cycle of the objects of the telecommunication division. Order of estimation of risks related to the functional faults of telecommunication objects includes the identification of undesirable events that lead to the violations of availability of services of railway telecommunication, and consequently to train delays. Then the frequencies of these undesirable events are estimated, the amount of damage is defined. This data is initial data used to construct matrices of risks of the functional faults of telecommunication objects. The article contains calculation expressions for the construction of risk matrices and the rules of decision making in relation to tolerability (or intolerability) of the assigned risk level. The article also describes the example of estimation of risk related to the functional faults of telecommunication objects based on the statistics of undesirable events held on the Russian railways during several years of observation, with the description of possible measures that can be taken to control each category of the risk.

Suggested Citation

  • V. A. Gapanovich & I. B. Shubinsky & I. N. Rosenberg & A. M. Zamyshlyaev, 2019. "Estimation of risks related to the functioning of railway telecommunication," 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. 10(1), pages 37-44, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:10:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s13198-019-00909-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-019-00909-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-019-00909-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-019-00909-3?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. Louis Anthony (Tony)Cox, 2008. "What's Wrong with Risk Matrices?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 497-512, April.
    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. David J. Ball & Laurence Ball‐King, 2013. "Safety Management and Public Spaces: Restoring Balance," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 763-771, May.
    2. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2012. "Evaluating and Improving Risk Formulas for Allocating Limited Budgets to Expensive Risk‐Reduction Opportunities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(7), pages 1244-1252, July.
    3. Luca Allodi & Fabio Massacci, 2017. "Security Events and Vulnerability Data for Cybersecurity Risk Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1606-1627, August.
    4. E. S. Levine & Julie F. Waters, 2013. "Managing Risk at the Tucson Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(7), pages 1281-1292, July.
    5. Wei, Lu & Jing, Haozhe & Huang, Jie & Deng, Yuqi & Jing, Zhongbo, 2023. "Do textual risk disclosures reveal corporate risk? Evidence from U.S. fintech corporations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Michael R. Powers & Thomas Y. Powers & Siwei Gao, 2012. "Risk Finance for Catastrophe Losses with Pareto‐Calibrated Lévy‐Stable Severities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1967-1977, November.
    7. David Rios Insua & David Banks & Jesus Rios, 2016. "Modeling Opponents in Adversarial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 742-755, April.
    8. David Rios Insua & Aitor Couce‐Vieira & Jose A. Rubio & Wolter Pieters & Katsiaryna Labunets & Daniel G. Rasines, 2021. "An Adversarial Risk Analysis Framework for Cybersecurity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 16-36, January.
    9. Gilberto Montibeller & L. Alberto Franco & Ashley Carreras, 2020. "A Risk Analysis Framework for Prioritizing and Managing Biosecurity Threats," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2462-2477, November.
    10. Erik Pruyt & Diederik J. D. Wijnmalen & Marc Bökkerink, 2013. "What Can We Learn from the Evaluation of the Dutch National Risk Assessment?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(8), pages 1385-1388, August.
    11. Gonçalves, Ana & Marques, Margarida Correia & Loureiro, Sílvia & Nieto, Raquel & Liberato, Margarida L.R., 2023. "Disruption risk analysis of the overhead power lines in Portugal," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PA).
    12. Jonathon Mackay & Matthew Pepper & Albert Munoz, 2023. "Disruptions, systems and individual agents—Exploring the intersections," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 43-60, January.
    13. Laurence Ball‐King & John Watt & David J. Ball, 2013. "The Rise and Fall of a Regulator: Adventure Sports in the United Kingdom," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 15-23, January.
    14. Wan, Chengpeng & Yan, Xinping & Zhang, Di & Qu, Zhuohua & Yang, Zaili, 2019. "An advanced fuzzy Bayesian-based FMEA approach for assessing maritime supply chain risks," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 222-240.
    15. Rehak, David & Senovsky, Pavel & Hromada, Martin & Lovecek, Tomas, 2019. "Complex approach to assessing resilience of critical infrastructure elements," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 125-138.
    16. Jia, Xiaohui & Zhang, Donghui, 2021. "Prediction of maritime logistics service risks applying soft set based association rule: An early warning model," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    17. Liangdong Lu & Hong Huang & Jiuchang Wei & Jia Xu, 2020. "Safety Regulations and the Uncertainty of Work‐Related Road Accident Loss: The Triple Identity of Chinese Local Governments Under Principal–Agent Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1168-1182, June.
    18. Jianping Li & Chunbing Bao & Dengsheng Wu, 2018. "How to Design Rating Schemes of Risk Matrices: A Sequential Updating Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 99-117, January.
    19. David J. Ball & John Watt, 2013. "Further Thoughts on the Utility of Risk Matrices," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(11), pages 2068-2078, November.
    20. Bukhman, Stanislav & Brito, Mario P. & Sung, Ming-Chien, 2024. "Quantifying civilian aircraft vulnerability: A data-driven approach in geo-political conflict zones for improved risk assessment of aircraft shot-down," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 121(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:spr:ijsaem:v:10:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s13198-019-00909-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.