TY - GEN
T1 - A comparison of control strategies for disruption management in engineering design for resilience
AU - Wu, Jiaxin
AU - Wang, Pingfeng
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2018 ASME.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - Managing potential disruptive events at the operating phase of an engineered system therefore improving the system’s failure resilience is an importance yet challenging task in engineering design. The resilience of an engineered system can be improved by enhancing the failure restoration capability of the system with appropriate system control strategies. Therefore, control-guided failure restoration is an essential step in engineering design for resilience. Considering different characteristics of disruptive events and their impacts to the performance of a system, effective control strategies for the failure restoration must be selected correspondingly. However, the challenge is to develop generally applicable guiding principles for selecting effective control strategies thus implementing the control-guided failure restorations. In this paper, a comparison of three commonly used control strategies for dynamic system control is conducted with the focus on the effectiveness of restoring system performance after the system has undergone different major disruptive events. A case study of an electricity transmission system is used to demonstrate the dynamic system modeling and the comparison of three control strategies for disruption management.
AB - Managing potential disruptive events at the operating phase of an engineered system therefore improving the system’s failure resilience is an importance yet challenging task in engineering design. The resilience of an engineered system can be improved by enhancing the failure restoration capability of the system with appropriate system control strategies. Therefore, control-guided failure restoration is an essential step in engineering design for resilience. Considering different characteristics of disruptive events and their impacts to the performance of a system, effective control strategies for the failure restoration must be selected correspondingly. However, the challenge is to develop generally applicable guiding principles for selecting effective control strategies thus implementing the control-guided failure restorations. In this paper, a comparison of three commonly used control strategies for dynamic system control is conducted with the focus on the effectiveness of restoring system performance after the system has undergone different major disruptive events. A case study of an electricity transmission system is used to demonstrate the dynamic system modeling and the comparison of three control strategies for disruption management.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85057020177&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85057020177&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1115/DETC2018-85708
DO - 10.1115/DETC2018-85708
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85057020177
T3 - Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference
BT - 44th Design Automation Conference
PB - American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
T2 - ASME 2018 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, IDETC/CIE 2018
Y2 - 26 August 2018 through 29 August 2018
ER -