0
Research Papers

Reliability Analysis With Model Uncertainty Coupling With Parameter and Experiment Uncertainties: A Case Study
of 2014 Verification and Validation Challenge Problem

[+] Author and Article Information
Zhimin Xi

Mem. ASME
Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering,
University of Michigan–Dearborn,
4901 Evergreen Road,
Dearborn, MI 48128
e-mail: zxi@umich.edu

Ren-Jye Yang

Fellow ASME
Ford Motor Company,
MD2115-RIC, 2101 Village Road,
Dearborn, MI 48121
e-mail: ryang@ford.com

Manuscript received February 9, 2015; final manuscript received October 18, 2015; published online December 14, 2015. Guest Editor: Kenneth Hu.

J. Verif. Valid. Uncert 1(1), 011005 (Dec 14, 2015) (11 pages) Paper No: VVUQ-15-1011; doi: 10.1115/1.4031984 History: Received February 09, 2015; Revised October 18, 2015

A validation strategy with copula-based bias approximation approach is proposed to address the 2014 Verification and Validation (V & V) challenge problem developed by the Sandia National Laboratory. The proposed work further incorporates model uncertainty into reliability analysis. Specific issues have been addressed including: (i) uncertainty modeling of model parameters using the Bayesian approach, (ii) uncertainty quantification (UQ) of model outputs using the eigenvector dimension reduction (EDR) method, (iii) model bias calibration with the U-pooling metric, (iv) model bias approximation using the copula-based approach, and (v) reliability analysis considering the model uncertainty. The proposed work is well demonstrated in the challenge problem.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustration of the U-pooling value (i.e., the shaded area)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Uncertainty modeling of parameter uncertainties from test data using the Bayesian and Pearson approaches

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

UQ of the maximum stress using the MCS and EDR methods at the intended operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison of maximum displacement between test data and model prediction at 12 tank operation conditions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Copula modeling of model bias with the relationship of design variables and the baseline model prediction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Bias distribution of the displacement at the intended tank operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Statistical relationship between the maximum displacement and maximum stress at the intended tank operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

CDF of the tank probability of failure at the intended operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

CDF of the tank maximum stress with and without considering the model bias at the intended operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

PDFs of the tank stress using two mesh sizes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Model bias calibration and approximation of the displacement using mesh size #1: (a) comparison of maximum displacement between test data and model prediction at 12 tankoperation conditions and (b) bias distribution of the displacement at the intended tank operation condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

CDF of the tank probability of failure at the intended operation condition using mesh size #1

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In