RAMS
Mini-Project
Event Tree Analysis
STUDENTS:
- Menache Mohamed Amine Groupe 04
- Reguieg Yssaad Tahar Benali Groupe 04
- Chaib Abdelbasset Groupe 02
- Yousfi Diae Eddine Groupe 04
To: Ms. BOUTOURA
12/12/2024
Introduction :
Risk assessment is an essential process in many industries, helping us identify,
evaluate, and mitigate potential threats to systems, people, and the
environment. It involves systematically analyzing hazards and vulnerabilities to
reduce the likelihood of failures and their impact.
A key framework in risk assessment is RAMS, which stands for Reliability,
Availability, Maintainability, and Security. Each element plays a crucial role:
• Reliability ensures that systems perform their intended functions without
failure over time.
• Availability measures how often systems are operational and accessible
when needed.
• Maintainability focuses on how easily systems can be repaired or
maintained to restore functionality.
• Security addresses the protection of systems from external threats and
unauthorized access.
Together, RAMS principles guide us in creating robust, efficient, and safe
systems. Within this context, Event Tree Analysis (ETA) emerges as a powerful
tool. ETA allows us to visualize and quantify the outcomes of an initiating event,
evaluate the effectiveness of safety measures, and prioritize risk mitigation
efforts. Today, we will explore how ETA fits into the broader picture of risk
assessment and contributes to achieving RAMS goals
Event Tree Analysis:
Event Tree Analysis (ETA) is a Quantitative, forward-looking, risk assessment
methodology used to systematically evaluate the sequence of potential
outcomes resulting from an initiating event. It identifies how system
components and safety measures respond to the initiating event, creating a
logical "tree" of possible scenarios that range from fortunate to catastrophic
outcomes.
This method tends to evaluate the probability of each outcome in order to assess
the safety measures and to design a better protective system to mitigate from
any disaster that may occur.
Event tree analysis (ETA) vs Fault tree analysis (FTA):
Event Tree Analysis (ETA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) are two complementary
risk assessment techniques widely used in safety and reliability engineering.
They differ primarily in their approach, focus, and purpose. Below is a detailed
comparison:
Aspect Event Tree Analysis (ETA) Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
Identifies root causes of an
Predicts possible outcomes of an
Purpose undesired event (backward
initiating event (forward analysis).
analysis).
Begins with a single initiating event, Begins with a top-level event,
Initiating Focus such as equipment failure or human such as system failure or
error. accident.
Tree structure showing pathways
Tree structure showing sequences of
Output of failures leading to the top
events leading to various outcomes.
event.
Evaluates system response to initiating Identifies weaknesses in system
Applications
events and mitigation effectiveness. design and critical failure points.
- Initiating event- Branches representing - Top event- Logic gates
Key
responses (success/failure)- (AND/OR)- Basic events (failure
Components
Probabilities of outcomes causes)
Assigns probabilities to system Combines probabilities of basic
Probabilities responses and calculates overall path events to compute the likelihood
probabilities. of the top event.
Consequences of an event and how Causes of a specific failure and
Focus
safety systems respond. how they propagate.
Use in Risk Evaluates effectiveness of safety Evaluates the availability of the
Assessment measures and response plans. system.
Methodology of ETA:
Event Tree Analysis (ETA) is a step-by-step method to visualize and assess the
potential consequences of a system failure. It is like mapping out all the possible
ways things can go wrong after an initial problem.
Here is how it works:
1. Define the System: First, we clearly outline what we are analysing. Is it
a machine, a process, or an entire system?
2. Identify the Initiating Event: We pinpoint the initial failure or problem
that starts the chain reaction. This could be anything from a broken part to a
human error.
3. Develop the Event Tree Diagram: We create a flowchart where the
initiating event is the starting point. Each branch represents a possible outcome
or decision point after the initial failure.
4. Identify Key Events and Outcomes: We list all the potential things that
could happen after the initial event and the possible results of each.
5. Map Pathways for Event Sequences: We trace all the possible paths
through the diagram, connecting the dots between events and their outcomes.
6. Assign Failure Probabilities: We estimate the likelihood of each
outcome happening, using historical data, expert opinions, or statistical analysis.
7. Analyse the Event Tree: We calculate the overall probability of each
outcome by multiplying the probabilities along the path.
8. Document the Analysis and Findings: We create a report with the Event
Tree diagram, key findings, and recommendations for improving system
reliability.
By following these steps, ETA helps us:
• Identify high-risk areas: We can pinpoint the most likely failure points.
• Prioritize maintenance: We can focus on the areas that need the most
attention.
• Develop risk mitigation strategies: We can plan ahead to prevent or
minimize the impact of potential failures.
Case Study:
We will implement the Event Tree Analysis for a Distribution Transformer
internal fault.
Initial failure: Transformer Internal Fault.
Succeeding Event:
1. Differential relay failure (DR)
2. Backup Overcurrent Relay failure (OR)
3. Circuit Breaker trip failure (CB)
4. Pressure relief system failure (PRS)
Reliability of Events:
1. Reliability of Differential relay can be estimated to be: RDF = 0.99
2. Reliability of Overcurrent Relay is: ROR = 0.95
3. Reliability of Circuit Breakers: RCB = 0.98
4. Reliability of Pressure Relief System: RPRS = 0.995
Paths:
Success (R), Failure (F), the outcomes of each path are distributed as follow:
1. DR (R) => CB (R) => PRS (R) : System stable (P = 0.965349)
2. DR (R) => CB (R) => PRS (F) : System stable, minor damages risk
(P=0.004851)
3. DR (R) => CB (F) => PRS (R) : System unstable, moderate damage risk
(P=0.0197)
4. DR (R) => CB (F) => PRS (F) :Catastrophic damage, possible explosion
(P=0.00009)
5. DR (F) => OR (R) => CB (R) => PRS (R) : System stable (P=0.009263)
6. DR (F) => OR (R) => CB (R) => PRS (F): System stable, minor damages risk
(P=0.000047)
7. DR (F) => OR (R) => CB (F) => PRS (R): System unstable, moderate damage
risk (P=0.00019)
8. DR (F) => OR (R) => CB (F) => PRS (F): Catastrophic damage, possible
explosion (P=0.000001)
9. DR (F) => OR (F) => PRS (R) : System unstable, moderate damage risk
(P=0.0005)
10. DR (F) => OR (F) => PRS (F) : Catastrophic damage, possible explosion
(P=0.000003)
Analysis:
Path Probabilities = ∏ Pi
Overall Probability (outcome) = ∑ 𝑃𝑃(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜)
P (System stable) = 0.965349 + 0.009263 = 0.974612
P (System Stable Minor damage) = 0.004851 + 0.000047 = 0.005321
P (System Unstable moderate damage) = 0.0197 + 0.00019 + 0.0005 = 0.02039
P (Catastrophic damage) = 0.000003 + 0.000001 + 0.00009 = 0.000094
Discussion:
- The event tree analysis has shown all the possible consequences of the
initial event associated with their corresponding probabilities.
- The result are really good concerning the system safety, as we see the
system would re-stabilise in 97.46% of the cases which is a very good
value concerning a distribution transformer.
- If we want to increase the probability of re-stabilisation we should install
either backup circuit breaker or another backup relay. One commonly
used type of relays with transformers is the Buchholz relays which is
used with bigger and more sensitive transformer as in transmission
substations or in power plants.
- We clearly see from the analysis that the circuit breaker is the more
sensitive component in the safety system, so we should be sure that a
good maintenance is programed periodically to ensure the safety of
equipment and users.
Conclusion:
In summary, risk assessment, guided by frameworks like RAMS, is critical
for ensuring system performance, safety, and resilience. By addressing reliability,
availability, maintainability, and security, organizations can build systems that
not only withstand failures but also recover quickly and operate efficiently.
Event Tree Analysis, as we have seen, complements these efforts by
breaking down complex event sequences into manageable paths, enabling a
deeper understanding of risks and their probabilities. Its visual approach and
quantitative focus make it an invaluable tool in designing systems that align with
RAMS objectives.
By integrating methods like ETA into risk assessment processes, we can
not only prevent failures but also foster innovation and confidence in the
systems we rely on every day.
