The high complexity of the system topology and the uncertainty of threats necessitate the consideration of the resilience of high-speed electric multiple units (EMUs). This paper first gives a definition of high-speed EMU resilience. Then, the structure of a high-speed EMU is described in the form of a network to enable the application of network science for resilience evaluation based on corresponding mathematical expressions. Afterward, a measure of system performance (MSP) is constructed that considers the influence of the high-speed EMU topology and performance data. According to the definition of resilience of a high-speed EMU, a system resilience measurement (SRM) is proposed that comprehensively considers the degree and time of the change in system performance. The validity of our method is then illustrated by applying it to the system topology and performance data associated with the Chinese standard electric multiple units (CEMUs) that serve on high-speed railways in China. Experiments are reported to illustrate the concept of resilience and the procedure for its measurement and to present comparisons with an existing resilience index. Our results indicate that the SRM proposed here can capture the sensitivity of the response of high-speed EMUs to the disturbances, thereby supporting the optimal design and risk management.
ZhaoHWLiangJYLiuCQ.High-speed EMUs: characteristics of technological development and trends. Engineering2020; 6(3): 234–244.
2.
EbelingK.High-speed railways in Germany. Jpn Railw Transp Rev2005; 40: 36–45.
3.
GivoniM.Development and impact of the modern high-speed train: a review. Transp Rev2006; 26(5): 593–611.
4.
HolmerP.Faster than a speeding bullet train. IEEE Spectr2003; 40(8): 30–34.
5.
YodoNWangPRafiM.Enabling resilience of complex engineered systems using control theory. IEEE T Reliab2018; 67: 53–65.
6.
BhamraRDaniSBurnardK.Resilience: the concept, a literature review and future directions. Int J Prod Res2011; 49(18): 5375–5393.
7.
LinSJiaLMWangY.Safety assessment of complex electromechanical systems based on hesitant interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy theory. Int J Fuzzy Syst2019; 21(8): 2405–2420.
8.
ZhangZLiuX.Safety risk analysis of restricted-speed train accidents in the United States. J Risk Res2019; 12: 1–9.
9.
YanNChenXLiY.Assessment of overturning risk of high-speed trains in strong crosswinds using spectral analysis approach. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2018; 1(174): 103–118.
10.
LinSWangYJiaLM, et al. Reliability assessment of complex electromechanical systems: a network perspective. Qual Reliab Eng Int2018; 34(5): 772–790.
11.
LuYZhengHZengJ, et al. Fatigue life reliability evaluation in a high-speed train bogie frame using accelerated life and numerical test. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2019; 188: 221–232.
12.
SinhaP.Architectural design and reliability analysis of a fail-operational brake-by-wire system from ISO 26262 perspectives. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2011; 96(10): 1349–1359.
13.
TanabeMMatsumotoNWakuiH, et al. Simulation of a Shinkansen train on the railway structure during an earthquake. Jpn J Ind Appl Math2011; 28(1): 223–236.
14.
WuXChiMGaoH.Post-derailment dynamic behaviour of a high-speed train under earthquake excitations. Eng Fail Anal2016; 64: 97–110.
15.
ChenZWangY.Impacts of severe weather events on high-speed rail and aviation delays. Transp Res D Transp Environ2019; 69: 168–183.
16.
HeDFLuRQHuangHY, et al. Tectonic and geological setting of the earthquake hazards in the Changning shale gas development zone, Sichuan Basin, SW China. Petrol Explor Dev2019; 46(5): 1051–1064.
17.
MoyaLMasEKoshimuraS.Learning from the 2018 western Japan heavy rains to detect floods during the 2019 Hagibis typhoon. Remote Sens-Basel2020; 12(14): 224401–224416.
18.
HongMWangQSuZ, et al. In situ health monitoring for bogie systems of CRH380 train on Beijing–Shanghai high-speed railway. Mech Syst Signal Process2014; 45(2): 378–395.
19.
LebelDSoizeCFunfschillingC, et al. High-speed train suspension health monitoring using computational dynamics and acceleration measurements. Vehicle Syst Dyn2020; 58(6): 911–932.
20.
HuHTangBGongX, et al. Intelligent fault diagnosis of the high-speed train with big data based on deep neural networks. IEEE Trans Industr Inform2017; 13(4): 2106–2116.
21.
YodoNWangPZhouZ.Predictive resilience analysis of complex systems using dynamic Bayesian networks. IEEE Trans Reliab2017; 66(3): 1–10.
22.
TranHTBalchanosMDomerçantJC, et al. A framework for the quantitative assessment of performance-based system resilience. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2017; 158: 73–84.
23.
YounBDHuCWangP, et al. Resilience allocation for resilient engineered system design. J Inst Control Robot Syst2011; 17(11): 1082–1089.
JainPPasmanHJWaldramS, et al. Process Resilience Analysis Framework (PRAF): a systems approach for improved risk and safety management. J Loss Prev Process Ind2018; 53: 61–73.
GoldbeckNAngeloudisPOchiengWY, et al. Resilience assessment for interdependent urban infrastructure systems using dynamic network flow models. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2019; 188: 62–79.
28.
KumarSAnbanandamR.Impact of risk management culture on supply chain resilience: an empirical study from Indian manufacturing industry. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk and Reliability2019; 234(3): 246–259.
29.
ZavalaANowickiDRamirez-MarquezJE.Quantitative metrics to analyze supply chain resilience and associated costs. Proc IMechE, Part O: J Risk and Reliability2018; 233(2): 186–199.
30.
JiaLMLinS.Current status and prospect for the methods of system reliability. Syst Eng Electron2015; 37(12): 2887–2893 (in Chinese).
31.
CassottanaBShenLTangLC.Modeling the recovery process: a key dimension of resilience. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2019; 190: 106528.
32.
HosseiniSBarkerKRamirez-MarquezJ E.A review of definitions and measures of system resilience. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2016; 145: 47–61.
33.
ZhouYWangJYangH.Resilience of transportation systems: concepts and comprehensive review. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2019; 4: 1–15.
34.
HollingS.Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst1973; 4(1): 1–23.
35.
BurnardKBhamraR.Organisational resilience: development of a conceptual framework for organisational responses. Int J Prod Res2011; 49(18): 5581–5599.
36.
GillyJPKechidiMTalbotD.Resilience of organisations and territories: the role of pivot firms. Eur Manag J2014; 32(4): 596–602.
37.
YuYPengLChenL, et al. Resilience and social support promote posttraumatic growth of women with infertility: the mediating role of positive coping. Psychiat Res2014; 215(2): 401–405.
38.
WhiteRKEdwardsWCFarrarA, et al. A practical approach to building resilience in America’s communities. Am Behav Sci2015; 59(2): 200–219.
39.
RoseA.Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: multidisciplinary origins and contextual dimensions. Environ Hazards2007; 7(4): 383–398.
ShafieezadehABurdenLI.Scenario-based resilience assessment framework for critical infrastructure systems: case study for seismic resilience of seaports. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2014; 132: 207–219.
42.
OuyangMWangZ.Resilience assessment of interdependent infrastructure systems: with a focus on joint restoration modeling and analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2015; 141: 74–82.
43.
TNA of sciences. Disaster resilience: a national imperative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012.
44.
VugrinEDWarrenDEEhlenMA, et al. A framework for assessing the resilience of infrastructure and economic systems. In: GopalakrishnanKPeetaS (eds) Sustainable and resilient critical infrastructure systems. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, 2010, pp.77–116.
45.
UdayPMaraisK.Designing resilient systems-of-systems: a survey of metrics, methods, and challenges. Syst Eng2015; 18(5): 491–510.
46.
ProagV.The concept of vulnerability and resilience. Procedia Econ Finance2014; 18: 369–376.
47.
WoodsDD.Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2015; 141: 5–9.
48.
WangYChenCWangJ, et al. Research on resilience of power systems under natural disasters—a review. Trans Power Syst2015; 31(2): 1604–1613.
49.
DekkerSHollnagelEWoodsD, et al. Resilience engineering: new directions for measuring and maintaining safety in complex systems. The Second Progress Report, Lund University School of Aviation, Lund, 2008.
50.
MoslehiSReddyTA.Sustainability of integrated energy systems: a performance-based resilience assessment methodology. Appl Energy2018; 228: 487–498.
51.
RusKKilarVKorenD.Resilience assessment of complex urban systems to natural disasters: a new literature review. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2018; 31: 311–330.
52.
PatriarcaRBergströmJDi GravioG, et al. Resilience engineering: current status of the research and future challenges. Safety Sci2018; 102: 79–100.
53.
ReedDAPowellMDWestermanJM.Energy supply system performance for Hurricane Katrina. J Energ Eng2010; 136(4): 95–102.
54.
GaninAAMassaroEGutfraindA, et al. Operational resilience: concepts, design and analysis. Sci Rep2016; 6: 1954001–1954012.
55.
KimDHEisenbergDAChunYH, et al. Network topology and resilience analysis of South Korean power grid. Physica A2017; 465: 13–24.
56.
CerquetiRFerraroGIovanellaA.Measuring network resilience through connection patterns. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2019; 188: 320–329.
57.
SterbenzJPÇetinkayaEKHameedMA, et al. Evaluation of network resilience, survivability, and disruption tolerance: analysis, topology generation, simulation, and experimentation. Telecommun Syst2013; 52(2): 705–736.
58.
BaroudHRamirez-MarquezJEBarkerK, et al. Stochastic measures of network resilience: applications to waterway commodity flows. Risk Anal2014; 34(7): 1317–1335.
ZangTLGaoSBLiuBX, et al. Integrated fault propagation model based vulnerability assessment of the electrical cyber-physical system under cyber attacks. Reliab Eng Syst Safe2019; 189: 232–241.
61.
TianMDongZCuiM, et al. Energy-supported cascading failure model on interdependent networks considering control nodes. Physica A2019; 522: 195–204.
62.
LiJShiCChenC, et al. A cascading failure model based on AC optimal power flow: case study. Physica A2018; 508: 313–323.
63.
LiuXAnS.Failure propagation analysis of aircraft engine systems based on complex network. Procedia Eng2014; 80: 506–521.
64.
SchaferRW.What is a Savitzky-Golay filter?IEEE Signal Process Mag2011; 28(4): 111–117.
65.
JönssonPEklundhL.TIMESAT-a program for analyzing time-series of satellite sensor data. Comput Geosci2004; 30(8): 833–845.
66.
Attoh-OkineNOCooperATMensahSA. Formulation of resilience index of urban infrastructure using belief functions. IEEE Syst J2009; 3(2): 147–153.
67.
ReedDAKapurKCChristieRD.Methodology for assessing the resilience of networked infrastructure. IEEE Syst J2009; 3(2): 174–180.
68.
MartinPAnderiesJM.Resilience: a literature review. New York: City University of New York and Tucson, AZ: Arizona State University, 2011.
69.
LehmannJBernasconiJ.Stochastic load-redistribution model for cascading failure propagation. Phys Rev E2010; 81(3): 0311291–0311295.
70.
RenHDobsonI.Using transmission line outage data to estimate cascading failure propagation in an electric power system. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst II Express Briefs2008; 55(9): 927–931.
71.
DeyPMehraRKaziF, et al. Impact of topology on the propagation of cascading failure in power grid. IEEE Trans Smart Grid2016; 7(4): 1970–1978.
72.
WhiteKPRobinsonS.The problem of the initial transient (again), or why MSER works. J Simul2010; 4: 268–272.
73.
WangRJGlynnPW.On the marginal standard error rule and the testing of initial transient deletion methods. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul2016; 27(1): 1–30.
74.
LinSWangYJiaLM, et al. Intuitionistic mechanism for weak components identification method of complex electromechanical system. J Intell Fuzzy Syst2018; 34(1): 583–598.
75.
LatoraVNicosiaVRussoG.Complex networks: principles, methods and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
76.
LandherrAFriedlBHeidemannJ.A critical review of centrality measures in social networks. Bus Inform Syst Eng2010; 2(6): 371–385.
77.
ZhouYPanteliMMorenoR, et al. System-level assessment of reliability and resilience provision from microgrids. Appl Energy2018; 230: 374–392.
78.
PanteliMMancarellaP.The grid: stronger bigger smarter?: presenting a conceptual framework of power system resilience. IEEE Power Energy Mag2015; 13(3): 58–66.
79.
HaimesYY.On the definition of resilience in systems. Risk Anal2009; 29(4): 498–501.
80.
EfthymiouKShelbourneBGreenhoughM, et al. Evaluating manufacturing systems robustness: an aerospace case study. Procedia CIRP2018; 72: 653–658.
81.
LinkovIFox-LentCReadL, et al. Tiered approach to resilience assessment. Risk Anal2018; 38(9): 1772–1780.
