Industry 4.0: Emerging challenges for dependability analysis

  • 1 Institute of Automation, Faculty of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
  • 2 Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Dresden, Germany


Industry 4.0 brings new challenges for the quantitative methods for the evaluation of system dependability properties such as reliability and safety. In this paper, we recall relevant Industry 4.0 and dependability concepts and provide an overview of available reliability and safety metrics and evaluation methods including event trees, fault trees, reliability block diagrams, and more sophisticated dynamic methods based on Markov chain models. The special focus is on the model-based application of these methods. The paper discusses several common MBSE paradigms, such as UML/SysML, AADL, and Simulink, that can be employed in the context of Industry 4.0 and allow automated generation of the dependability evaluation models. Finally, we discuss how the Industry 4.0 increases system complexity, justify what kind of dependability evaluation methods are required, and what limitations we still need to overcome.



  1. Avizienis, A., Laprie, J.C., Randell, B., Landwehr, C.: Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans. Dependable Secure Computing. 1(1), 11–33 (2004)
  2. FIDES (2009). Reliability methodology for electronic systems. FIDES group.
  3. Denson, W., Chandler, G., Crowell, W., Clark, A., and Jaworski, P. (1994). Nonelectronic parts reliability data 1995. Technical report, RELIABILITY ANALYSIS CENTER GRIFFISS AFB NY.
  4. MIL-HDBK-217F (1991). Military Handbook: Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment. United States of America: Department of defense.
  5. D. H. Stamatis. Failure mode and effect analysis: FMEA from theory to execution. ASQ Quality Press, 2003.
  6. R. Borgovini, S. Pemberton, and M. Rossi. Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). Technical report, RELIABILITY ANALYSIS CENTER GRIFFISS AFB NY, 1993.
  7. J. Dunjó, V. Fthenakis, J. A. Vílchez, and J. Arnaldos. HAZard and OPerability (HAZOP) analysis. a literature review. Journal of hazardous materials, 173(1-3):19–32, 2010.
  8. P. Clemens. Event tree analysis. JE Jacobs Sverdrup, 2002.
  9. W. E. Vesely, F. F. Goldberg, N. H. Roberts, and D. F. Haasl. Fault tree handbook. Technical report, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington dc, 1981.
  10. S. B. Akers. Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Transactions on computers, (6):509–516, 1978.
  11. J. B. Dugan, S. J. Bavuso, and M. A. Boyd. Fault trees and sequence dependencies. In Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 1990. Proceedings., Annual, pages 286–293. IEEE, 1990.
  12. E. Ruijters and M. Stoelinga. Fault tree analysis: A survey of the state-of-the-art in modeling, analysis and tools. Computer science review, 15:29–62, 2015.
  13. K. Buchacker et al. Combining fault trees and petri nets to model safety-critical systems. In High performance computing, pages 439–444, 1999.
  14. D. C. Raiteri, G. Franceschinis, M. Iacono, and V. Vittorini. Repairable fault tree for the automatic evaluation of repair policies. In Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004 International Conference on, pages 659–668. IEEE, 2004.
  15. B. Kaiser, C. Gramlich, and M. Förster. State/event fault trees—a safety analysis model for software-controlled systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 92(11):1521–1537, 2007.
  16. M. Bouissou. Boolean logic driven Markov processes: A powerful new formalism for specifying and solving very large Markov models. PSAM6, Puerto Rico, 2002.
  17. A. Morozov and K. Janschek. Probabilistic error propagation model for mechatronic systems. Mechatronics, 24(8):1189–1202, 2014.
  18. C. Baier and J.-P. Katoen. Principles of model checking. MIT press, 2008.
  19. L. L. Pullum and J. B. Dugan. Fault tree models for the analysis of complex computer based systems. In Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 1996 Proceedings. International Symposium on Product Quality and Integrity., Annual, pages 200– 207. IEEE, 1996.
  20. W. Han, W. Guo, and Z. Hou. Research on the method of dynamic fault tree analysis. In Reliability, Maintainability and Safety (ICRMS), 2011 9th International Conference on, pages 950– 953. IEEE, 2011.
  21. D. Liu, iei Xiong, Z. Li, P. iang, and H. Zhang. The simplification of cut sequence set analysis for dynamic systems. The 2nd International Conference on Computer and Automation Engineering (ICCAE), volume 3, pages 140–144, Feb 2010.
  22. O. Yevkin. An improved modular approach for dynamic fault tree analysis. In Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), 2011 Proceedings-Annual, pages 1–5. IEEE, 2011.
  23. E. Ruijters, D. Reijsbergen, P.-T. de Boer, and M. Stoelinga. Rare event simulation for dynamic fault trees. In International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, pages 20–35. Springer, 2017.
  24. Object Management Group: System Modeling Language (SysML) 1.5 Core Specification. 2017
  25. Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language (UML) 2.5.1 Core Specification. 2017
  26. Feiler, Peter H. ; Gluch, David P.: Model-based engineering with AADL: an introduction to the SAE architecture analysis & design language. Addison-Wesley, 2012
  27. Mathworks: Matlab & Simulink: Simulink Users Guide R2018a. Retrieved 2018
  28. Mathworks: Matlab & Simulink: Stateflow Users Guide R2018a. Retrieved 2018
  29. P. Feiler and J. Delange. Automated fault tree analysis from aadl models. Ada Lett., 36(2):39–46, May 2017.
  30. A. Joshi, S. Vestal, and P. Binns. Automatic generation of static fault trees from aadl models. 06 2018.
  31. H. Sun, M. Hauptman, and R. Lutz. Integrating product-line fault tree analysis into aadl models. In High Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium, 2007. HASE ‘07. 10th IEEE, pages 15– 22, Nov 2007.
  32. T. Zhang, Y. Jiang, J. Ye, C. Jing, and H. Qu. An aadl modelbased safety analysis method for flight control software. In 2014 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Communication Networks, pages 1148–1152, Nov 2014.
  33. Y. Dong, G. Wang, and H. Zhao. A model-based testing for aadl model of embedded software. In 2009 Ninth International Conference on Quality Software, pages 185–190, Aug 2009.
  34. Y. Papadopoulos and M. Maruhn. Model-based synthesis of fault trees from matlab-simulink models. In 2001 International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, pages 77–82, July 2001.
  35. M. Roth, M.Wolf, and U. Lindemann. Integrated matrix-based fault tree generation and evaluation. Procedia Computer Science, 44:599 – 608, 2015. 2015 Conference on Systems Engineering Research.
  36. A. Joshi and M. Heimdahl. Model-based safety analysis of simulink models using scade design verifier, 09 2005.
  37. G. J. Pai and J. B. Dugan. Automatic synthesis of dynamic fault trees from uml system models. In 13th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, 2002. Proceedings., pages 243–254, 2002.
  38. F. Mhenni, N. Nguyen, and J. Y. Choley. Automatic fault tree generation from sysml system models. In 2014 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, pages 715–720, July 2014.
  39. N. Yakymets, H. Jaber, and A. Lanusse. Model-based system engineering for fault tree generation and analysis, 02 2013.
  40. F. Machida, J. Xiang, K. Tadano, and Y. Maeno. Composing hierarchical stochastic model from sysml for system availability analysis. In 2013 IEEE 24th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), pages 51–60, Nov 2013.
  41. M. Debbabi, F. Hassaïne, Y. Jarraya, A. Soeanu, and L. Alawneh. Verification and Validation in Systems Engineering - Assessing UML / SysML Design Models. 01 2010.
  42. Roth, A. [Ed.], Einführung und Umsetzung von Industrie 4.0, Springer Gabler, 2016.
  43. Kaiser, Bernhard, Peter Liggesmeyer, and Oliver Mäckel. "A new component concept for fault trees." Proceedings of the 8th Australian workshop on Safety critical systems and softwareVolume 33. Australian Computer Society, Inc., 2003.
  44. J.-P. Katoen and M. Stoelinga. Boosting fault tree analysis by formal methods. In ModelEd, TestEd, TrustEd, pages 368–389. Springer, 2017.

Article full text

Download PDF