Graphical workstation capability for reliability modeling

In addition to computational capabilities, software tools for estimating the reliability of fault-tolerant digital computer systems must also provide a means of interfacing with the user. Described here is the new graphical interface capability of the hybrid automated reliability predictor (HARP), a software package that implements advanced reliability modeling techniques. The graphics oriented (GO) module provides the user with a graphical language for modeling system failure modes through the selection of various fault-tree gates, including sequence-dependency gates, or by a Markov chain. By using this graphical input language, a fault tree becomes a convenient notation for describing a system. In accounting for any sequence dependencies, HARP converts the fault-tree notation to a complex stochastic process that is reduced to a Markov chain, which it can then solve for system reliability. The graphics capability is available for use on an IBM-compatible PC, a Sun, and a VAX workstation. The GO module is written in the C programming language and uses the graphical kernal system (GKS) standard for graphics implementation. The PC, VAX, and Sun versions of the HARP GO module are currently in beta-testing stages

Sufficiency and necessity in reliability modeling

Limitations of current analytic techniques in estimating the reliability of life-critical electronics systems are discussed. A new framework for specification of recovery and fault-handling submodels is suggested, and is shown through several examples to provide substantially improved modeling accuracy and flexibility. Implementation of the new technique in an X-windows based system, XHARP, is also described. The implementation allows for an automated behavioral decomposition of full system models, heretofore unavailable in such tools

User's guide to the Reliability Estimation System Testbed (REST)

The Reliability Estimation System Testbed is an X-window based reliability modeling tool that was created to explore the use of the Reliability Modeling Language (RML). RML was defined to support several reliability analysis techniques including modularization, graphical representation, Failure Mode Effects Simulation (FMES), and parallel processing. These techniques are most useful in modeling large systems. Using modularization, an analyst can create reliability models for individual system components. The modules can be tested separately and then combined to compute the total system reliability. Because a one-to-one relationship can be established between system components and the reliability modules, a graphical user interface may be used to describe the system model. RML was designed to permit message passing between modules. This feature enables reliability modeling based on a run time simulation of the system wide effects of a component's failure modes. The use of failure modes effects simulation enhances the analyst's ability to correctly express system behavior when using the modularization approach to reliability modeling. To alleviate the computation bottleneck often found in large reliability models, REST was designed to take advantage of parallel processing on hypercube processors

Reliability modeling and analysis of a dynamic TMR system using standby spares

Reliability modeling and analysis of dynamic TMR using standby spare

Towards automatic Markov reliability modeling of computer architectures

The analysis and evaluation of reliability measures using time-varying Markov models is required for Processor-Memory-Switch (PMS) structures that have competing processes such as standby redundancy and repair, or renewal processes such as transient or intermittent faults. The task of generating these models is tedious and prone to human error due to the large number of states and transitions involved in any reasonable system. Therefore model formulation is a major analysis bottleneck, and model verification is a major validation problem. The general unfamiliarity of computer architects with Markov modeling techniques further increases the necessity of automating the model formulation. This paper presents an overview of the Automated Reliability Modeling (ARM) program, under development at NASA Langley Research Center. ARM will accept as input a description of the PMS interconnection graph, the behavior of the PMS components, the fault-tolerant strategies, and the operational requirements. The output of ARM will be the reliability of availability Markov model formulated for direct use by evaluation programs. The advantages of such an approach are (a) utility to a large class of users, not necessarily expert in reliability analysis, and (b) a lower probability of human error in the computation

The art of fault-tolerant system reliability modeling

A step-by-step tutorial of the methods and tools used for the reliability analysis of fault-tolerant systems is presented. Emphasis is on the representation of architectural features in mathematical models. Details of the mathematical solution of complex reliability models are not presented. Instead the use of several recently developed computer programs--SURE, ASSIST, STEM, PAWS--which automate the generation and solution of these models is described

Trends in reliability modeling technology for fault tolerant systems

Reliability modeling for fault tolerant avionic computing systems was developed. The modeling of large systems involving issues of state size and complexity, fault coverage, and practical computation was discussed. A novel technique which provides the tool for studying the reliability of systems with nonconstant failure rates is presented. The fault latency which may provide a method of obtaining vital latent fault data is measured

A general graphical user interface for automatic reliability modeling

Reported here is a general Graphical User Interface (GUI) for automatic reliability modeling of Processor Memory Switch (PMS) structures using a Markov model. This GUI is based on a hierarchy of windows. One window has graphical editing capabilities for specifying the system's communication structure, hierarchy, reconfiguration capabilities, and requirements. Other windows have field texts, popup menus, and buttons for specifying parameters and selecting actions. An example application of the GUI is given

Advanced reliability modeling of fault-tolerant computer-based systems

Two methodologies for the reliability assessment of fault tolerant digital computer based systems are discussed. The computer-aided reliability estimation 3 (CARE 3) and gate logic software simulation (GLOSS) are assessment technologies that were developed to mitigate a serious weakness in the design and evaluation process of ultrareliable digital systems. The weak link is based on the unavailability of a sufficiently powerful modeling technique for comparing the stochastic attributes of one system against others. Some of the more interesting attributes are reliability, system survival, safety, and mission success

Evaluation of reliability modeling tools for advanced fault tolerant systems

The Computer Aided Reliability Estimation (CARE III) and Automated Reliability Interactice Estimation System (ARIES 82) reliability tools for application to advanced fault tolerance aerospace systems were evaluated. To determine reliability modeling requirements, the evaluation focused on the Draper Laboratories' Advanced Information Processing System (AIPS) architecture as an example architecture for fault tolerance aerospace systems. Advantages and limitations were identified for each reliability evaluation tool. The CARE III program was designed primarily for analyzing ultrareliable flight control systems. The ARIES 82 program's primary use was to support university research and teaching. Both CARE III and ARIES 82 were not suited for determining the reliability of complex nodal networks of the type used to interconnect processing sites in the AIPS architecture. It was concluded that ARIES was not suitable for modeling advanced fault tolerant systems. It was further concluded that subject to some limitations (the difficulty in modeling systems with unpowered spare modules, systems where equipment maintenance must be considered, systems where failure depends on the sequence in which faults occurred, and systems where multiple faults greater than a double near coincident faults must be considered), CARE III is best suited for evaluating the reliability of advanced tolerant systems for air transport