An advanced method for the sensitivity analysis of safety system

  • Lijuan Kan
  • Jihui Xu


Safety system always involves variation on account of the epistemic uncertainty of the inputs. Therefore, it is significant to identify the uncertainty source of the output for the safety system. Sensitivity analysis (SA) which measures the effect of variance variation of inputs on the absolute change in the variance of system unsafety is a useful tool for identifying the importance of inputs. A finite difference method has been proposed to estimate the effect in the existing work. This method may be numerical unstable or inaccuracy and is computational heavy. In order to overcome these issues, an advanced method which combing the simulation method and the analytical deduction of the partial derivative is established in this paper to estimate the SA indices. Discussion and several examples are introduced to illustrate the efficiency and accuracy of the proposed method when comparing with the finite difference method.


Safety system Sensitivity analysis Single-loop Monte Carlo Analytical deduction Safety integrity level 



This work is supported by the Natural Science for Youth Foundation of China (Grant 71701210) and the Aeronautical Science Foundation of China (Grant 20165196017).


  1. Borgonovo E (2007) A new uncertainty importance measure. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 92(6):771–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gupta AK, Zeng WB, Wu Y (2010) Exponential distribution. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 91(6):689–697Google Scholar
  3. Helton JC (1993) Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 42(2–3):327–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. IEC (1998) Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems. IEC 61508, Parts 1–7, 1st edn. GenevaGoogle Scholar
  5. Ionescu-Bujor M, Cacuci DG (2004) A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems-I: deterministic methods. Nucl Sci Eng 147(3):189–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jensen JS, Nakshatrala PB, Tortorelli DA (2014) On the consistency of adjoint sensitivity analysis for structural optimization of linear dynamic problems. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49(5):831–837MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson NL, Kotz S, Balakrishnan N (1994) Continuous univariate distributions, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Kang HY, Kwak BM (2009) Application of maximum entropy principle for reliability based design optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 38(4):331–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lacaze S, Brevault L, Missoum S (2015) Probability of failure sensitivity with respect to decision variables. Struct Multidiscip Optim 52(2):375–381MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lee I, Choi KK, Zhao L (2011) Sampling-based RBDO using the stochastic sensitivity analysis and dynamic kriging method. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44(3):299–317MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Li L, Lu ZZ (2017) Variance-based sensitivity analysis for models with correlated inputs and its state dependent parameter solution. Struct Multidiscip Optim 6:1–19MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Lukacs E (1955) A characterization of the gamma distribution. Ann Math Stat 26(2):319–324MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Millwater H (2009) Universal properties of kernel functions for probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Probab Eng Mech 24(1):89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moon MY, Kim JH, Ha YD, Cho S (2014) Adjoint design sensitivity analysis of dynamic crack propagation using peridynamic theory. Struct Multidiscip Optim 51(3):585–598MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Oliveira LF, Abramovitch RN (2010) Extension of ISA TR84.00.02 PFD equations to KooN architectures. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 95:707–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Peng X, Li J, Jiang S (2017) Unified uncertainty representation and quantification based on insufficient input data. Struct Multidiscip Optim 7:1–13Google Scholar
  17. Ross S (2009) A first course in probability. Macmillan 93(443):xii+317MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Rouvroye JL (2001) Enhanced markov analysis as a method to assess safety in the process. Technische Universiteitndhoven, EindhovenGoogle Scholar
  19. Sobol IM (2001) Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math Comput Simul 55(1–3):271–280MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Tang ZC, Lu ZZ, Wang P (2012) An entropy-based global sensitivity analysis for the structures with both fuzzy variables and random variables. Mech Eng Sci 227(2):195–212Google Scholar
  21. Tang ZC, Lu ZZ, Jiang B (2013) Entropy-based importance measure for uncertain model inputs. AIAA J 51(10):2319–2334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang ZC, Zuo MJ, Xiao NC (2016) An efficient method for evaluating the effect of input parameters on the integrity of safety systems. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 145:111–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wei PF, Lu ZZ (2012) Efficient sampling methods for global reliability sensitivity analysis. Comput Phys Commun 183(8):1728–1743MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Xiao NC, Huang HZ, Wang Z (2011) Reliability sensitivity analysis for structural systems in interval probability form. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44(5):691–705MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Xiao SN, Lu ZZ, Wang P (2018) Multivariate global sensitivity analysis for dynamic models based on energy distance. Struct Multidiscip Optim 57(1):279–291Google Scholar
  26. Xu M, Chen T, Yang XH (2012) The effect of parameter uncertainty on achieved safety integrity of safety system. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 99:15–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Xu L, Jiang Y, Qiu R (2018) Parametric study and global sensitivity analysis for co-pyrolysis of rape straw and waste tire via variance-based decomposition. Bioresour Technol 247:545–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xue FW, Zhou JP, Wang K (2013) The structure dynamic optimum design of the frame for high speed conveying manipulator based on sensitivity analysis. Appl Mech Mater 415:431–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yun WY, Lu ZZ, Jiang X (2017) A modified importance sampling method for structural reliability and its global reliability sensitivity analysis. Struct Multidiscip Optim 6:1–17Google Scholar
  30. Zaman K, Dey PR (2017) Likelihood-based representation of epistemic uncertainty and its application in robustness-based design optimization. Struct Multidiscip Optim 56(4):767–780MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang L, Lu ZZ, Cheng L (2014) A new method for evaluating Borgonovo moment-independent importance measure with its application in an aircraft structure. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 132(8):163–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zong WG (2005) Optimal cost design of water distribution networks using harmony search. Eng Optim 8(3):259–277Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Equipment Management and Safety Engineering CollegeAir Force Engineering UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations