Abstract
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.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | 020902 |
| Journal | ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part B: Mechanical Engineering |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 1 2019 |
Keywords
- Complex systems
- Control theory
- Disruption management
- Engineering design
- Resilience
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
- Safety Research
- Mechanical Engineering