4.7 Article

Real-time high-fidelity reliability updating with equality information using adaptive Kriging

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2019.106735

关键词

Reliability updating; Reliability analysis; Surrogate model; Adaptive Kriging; Poisson Binomial distribution; Measurement errors; Monitoring

资金

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) [CMMI-1333943, 1462183, 1635569]
  2. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  3. Directorate For Engineering [1635569, 1462183] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current state-of-the-art methods for reliability updating with equality information transform this challenging problem into an inequality one by introducing an auxiliary random variable. However, the joint event of information and failure in the derived conditional probabilities is typically very rare, and therefore, very challenging to estimate. Moreover, updating the reliability as new information arrives requires reevaluation of the probability of the joint event, which involves large numbers of calls to performance functions. We address these limitations by proposing a new approach to reliability updating called RUAK. One of the important contributions is the decomposition of the rare joint event of the failure and observed information into two events both with relatively high probabilities. Moreover, an adaptive Kriging-based reliability analysis method is proposed for the estimation of the prior failure probability and the conditional probability of information. This way, reliability updating for new information is conducted using the efficient Kriging meta-model, which significantly enhances the computational efficiency. Results for four examples indicate that the computational demand using RUAK is decreased by two orders of magnitude compared to the state-of-the-art methods, while achieving higher accuracy. This approach facilitates real-time reliability updating for various applications such as health monitoring and warning systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据