Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:45:26.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

RISK ANALYSIS OF A ROBOT–SAFETY DEVICE SYSTEM SUBJECTED TO A PRIORITY RULE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2012

Edmond J. Vanderperre  and
Stanislav S. Makhanov
Edmond J. Vanderperre
Affiliation:
Department of Decision Sciences, University of South AfricaP.O. Box 392, Pretoria 0003, South Africa E-mail: [email protected]; Ruzettelaan 183, Bus 158, 8370 Blankenberge, Belgium
Stanislav S. Makhanov
Affiliation:
School of Information and Computer Technology, Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology, Thammasat University, 131 Moo 5, Tiwanont Road, Bangkadi Muang, Pathum Thani 12000, Thailand E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We introduce a robot–safety device system characterized by cold stand-by and by an admissible risky state. The system is attended by a single repairman and the robot has overall (break-in) priority in repair with regard to the safety device. We obtain an explicit formula for the point availability of the robot via an integral equation of the renewal-type. The explicit solution requires the notion of effective repair-versus-virtual repair. In order to decide whether the risky state is admissible, we also introduce a risk criterion. The criterion is always satisfied in the case of fast repair. As an example, we consider the case of Weibull–Gnedenko repair and we display a computer-plotted graph of the point availability obtained by a direct numerical solution of a convolution-type integral equation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 2012 , pp. 295 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Birolini, A. (2006). Reliability Engineering. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
2.Brandin, B.A. (1996). The real time supervisory control of an experimental manufacturing cell. IEEE Transactions on Robotics Automation 12: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Brémaud, P. (1991). Point processes and queues. Springer Series in Statistics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
4.Dhillon, B.S. & Liu, Y. (2006). Human error in maintenance: A review. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 12: 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Dhillon, B.S. & Yang, N. (1996). Availability analysis of a robot with safety device. Microelectronics & Reliability 36: 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Dhillon, B.S. & Yang, N. (1997). Stochastic analysis of an active stand-by redundant system with two types of common-cause failures. Stochastic Analysis and Applications 15: 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Gaskill, S.P. & Went, S.R.G. (1996). Safety issues in modern applications of robots. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 53: 301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Gnedenko, B. & Ushakov, I.A. (1994). In Falk, A.J. (ed.), Probabilistic Reliability Engineering. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
9.Serfoso, R.F. (1990). Point Processes. In [Heyman, D.P. & Sobel, M.J. (eds.)] Handbook in operations research and management science, vol. 2, Amsterdam: North-Holland, P.C.Google Scholar
10.Shaked, M. & Shanthikumar, I. G. (1990). Reliability and maintainability. In [Heyman, D.P., Sobel, M.J. (eds.)], Handbook in operations research and management science, vol. 2, Amsterdam: North-Holland, P.C.Google Scholar
11.Thomson, J.F., Soni, B., & Weatherill, N. (1998). Handbook of grid generation. Baco Raton: CRC Press, LLC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Vanderperre, E.J. (2000). A Sokhotski-Plemelj problem related to a robot–safety device system. Operations Research Letters 27: 67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Vanderperre, E.J. & Makhanov, S.S. (2002). Risk analysis of a robot–safety device. International Journal of Reliability, Quality and Safety Engineering 9: 79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Vanderperre, E.J. & Makhanov, S.S. (2009). Overall availability of a robot with internal safety device. Computers & Industrial Engineering 56: 236–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar