It is widely accepted that the reliability of aerospace devices is essential for aircraft during flight because the operational efficiency of aviation systems directly impacts the safety of flight. In complex structures, it is challenging to estimate accurate reliability properly. As a consequence, firstly the complex aerospace communication system is proposed with its logical and graphical representation to evaluate their min-paths and min-cuts via prevalence matrix and least cut matrix respectively. Secondly, we evaluate the accurate reliability function for the proposed system using the matrix-based approach namely the path tracing approach. Its polynomial form will allow the evaluation of the tail signature. Thirdly, by utilizing the tail signature, the signature reliability and cumulative signature have been depicted easily. Then, we deduce the lower and upper constraints for two-terminal reliability and methodologies, which will allow us to enhance the reliability of the proposed system using the Esary-Proschan bound and edge-packing bound with their upper and lower bounds. The reliability makes use of a listed set of min-pathways and a listed set of min-cuts. Lastly, the expected operational lifespan is estimated using the reliability of the provided complex model.
LiuYWMosesF.A sequential response surface method and its application in the reliability analysis of aircraft structural systems. Struct Saf1994; 16(1–2): 39–46.
2.
HechtMFiorentinoE.Causes and effects of spacecraft failures. Qual Reliab Eng Int1988; 4(1): 11–20.
3.
FragolaJRMcFaddenRH.External maintenance rate prediction and design concepts for high reliability and availability on space station Freedom. Reliab Eng Syst Saf1995; 49(3): 255–273.
4.
Antao TongYC. Literature review on aircraft structural risk and reliability analysis. DSTO Aeronautical and Maritime Research Laboratory, 2001.
5.
AntaoPSoaresCG.Causal factors in accidents of high-speed craft and conventional ocean-going vessels. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2008; 93(9): 1292–1304.
6.
BrallA.Pre-proposal assessment of reliability for spacecraft and instruments. In: 2012 Proceedings annual reliability and maintainability symposiumReno, NV, 23 January 2012, pp.1–5. New York: IEEE.
7.
SafieFMFullerRP.NASA applications and lessons learned in reliability engineering. In: 2012 Proceedings annual reliability and maintainability symposium, Reno, NV, 23 January 2012, pp.1–5. New York: IEEE.
8.
JunLHuibinX.Reliability analysis of aircraft equipment based on FMECA method. Phys Procedia2012; 25: 1816–1822.
9.
BozzanoMCimattiAKatoenJP, et al. Spacecraft early design validation using formal methods. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2014; 132: 20–35.
10.
ChiomaOO.Reliability analysis of aircraft fleet in Nigeria. Communications2020; 39: 12.
11.
RamMKumarANaazS.UGF-based signature reliability for solar panel k-out-of-n-multiplex systems. J Qual Maint Eng2023; 29(4): 810–821.
12.
SongZZhaoQJiaX, et al. Reliability evaluation for complex system based on bayesian theory and multi-source information fusion. In: IOP conference series: materials science and engineering, 2021, vol. 1043, no. 5, p. 052019. IOP Publishing.
13.
JoshiTGoyalNRamM.An approach to analyze reliability indices in peer-to-peer communication systems. Cybern Syst2022; 53(8): 716–733.
14.
MutarEK.Estimating the reliability of complex systems using various bounds methods. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag2023; 14(6): 2546–2558.
15.
RachealERAfolaluAPeterO, et al. Human reliability in complex systems: a profound investigation into the unpredictable element. In: 2024 international conference on science, engineering and business for driving sustainable development goals (SEB4SDG), Omu-Aran, Nigeria, 2 April 2024, pp.1–12. New York: IEEE.
16.
ChenZZhangHWangX, et al. Reliability analysis and redundancy design of satellite communication system based on a novel Bayesian environmental importance. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2024; 243: 109813.
17.
LiMPanXZhangN, et al. Reliability of system-of-systems: a new challenge of complex engineered systems. Front Eng Manag2025; 12: 1–8.
18.
BilobrkMPerićTStazićL, et al. Analysis of complex reliability, case study. Transp Res Proc2025; 83: 390–399.
19.
ChangEYThompsonWE.Bayes analysis of reliability for complex systems. Oper Res1976; 24(1): 156–168.
20.
KontogiannisT.A framework for the analysis of cognitive reliability in complex systems: a recovery centred approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf1997; 58(3): 233–248.
21.
JohnsonVEMoosmanACotterP.A hierarchical model for estimating the early reliability of complex systems. IEEE Trans Reliab2005; 54(2): 224–231.
22.
PengWLiYFMiJ, et al. Reliability of complex systems under dynamic conditions: a Bayesian multivariate degradation perspective. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2016; 153: 75–87.
23.
LafortuneEPWillemsYD.Bi-directional path tracing. In: Proceedings of the third international conference on computational graphics and visualization techniques (Compugraphics ’93), Leuven, Belgium, 19 October 1993, pp.145–153. Lisbon: Portuguese ACM.
24.
MutarEK.Matrix-based minimal cut method and applications to system reliability. Adv Sci Technol Eng Syst J2020; 5(5): 991–996.
25.
MutarEK. Reliability analysis of complex safety-critical system with exponential decay failure laws. In: 2022 6th international conference on system reliability and safety (ICSRS), 23 November 2022, pp.435–440. New York: IEEE.
26.
MutarEK.Path tracing method to evaluate the signature reliability function of a complex system. J Aerosp Technol Manag2022; 14: e3122.
27.
SamaniegoFJ.System signatures and their applications in engineering reliability. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
28.
SamaniegoFJBalakrishnanNNavarroJ.Dynamic signatures and their use in comparing the reliability of new and used systems. Nav Res Logist2009; 56(6): 577–591.
29.
MarichalJLMathonetPWaldhauserT.On signature-based expressions of system reliability. J Multivar Anal2011; 102(10): 1410–1416.
30.
MarichalJLMathonetP.Computing system signatures through reliability functions. Stat Prob Lett2013; 83(3): 710–717.
31.
PatelliEFengGCoolenFP, et al. Simulation methods for system reliability using the survival signature. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2017; 167: 327–337.
32.
BolandPJSamaniegoFJ.The signature of a coherent system and its applications in reliability. In: NozerDSingpurwallaNDSoyerRMazzuchiTA (eds)Mathematical reliability: an expository perspective, 2004, pp.3–30. Boston, MA: Springer.
33.
FrankoCTütüncüGY.Signature based reliability analysis of repairable weighted k-out-of-n: G systems. IEEE Trans Reliab2015; 65(2): 843–850.
34.
Sadiya RamMKumarA.A new approach to compute system reliability with three-serially linked modules. Mathematics2022; 11(1): 57.
35.
NaasSRamMKumarA.Signature reliability scrutiny of domestic refrigerator. Int J Qual Reliab Manag2023; 40(10): 2581–2591.
36.
GertsbakhIShpunginY.Network reliability and resilience. Springer Science & Business Media, 2011.
37.
AvenTJensenU (eds). Stochastic models in reliability. Springer, 1999.
38.
MutarEK.Analytical method of calculating reliability sensitivity for space capsule life support systems. Math Probl Eng2022; 2022: 3653549.
39.
JensenHW.Importance driven path tracing using the photon map. In: Rendering techniques’ 95: proceedings of the eurographics workshop in Dublin, Ireland, June 12–14 1995, pp.326–335. Springer.
40.
KuoWZuoMJ.Optimal reliability modeling: principles and applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2003.
41.
MarichalJL.Structure functions and minimal path sets. IEEE Trans Reliab2016; 65(2): 763–768.
42.
TodinovMT.Flow networks: analysis and optimization of repairable flow networks, networks with disturbed flows, static flow networks and reliability networks. Newnes, 2013.
43.
HassanZAMutarEK.Evaluation the reliability of a high-pressure oxygen supply system for a spacecraft by using GPD method. Al-Mustansiriyah J Coll Educ2017; 2: 993–1004.
NaazSKhannaRRawatR, et al. Signature reliability analysis of complex consecutive k-out-of-n: W CMO system via UGF and SFA. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part O: J Risk Reliab2024; 238(5): 1037–1052.
46.
BishtSSinghSB.Signature reliability of binary state node in complex bridge networks using universal generating function. Int J Qual Reliab Manag2019; 36(2): 186–201.
47.
AltavillaAGarbelliniL.Risk assessment in the aerospace industry. Saf Sci2002; 40(1–4): 271–298.
48.
ColbournCJ.Edge-packings of graphs and network reliability. Ann Discrete Math1988; 38: 49–61.
49.
JinTCoitDW.Approximating network reliability estimates using linear and quadratic unreliability of minimal cuts. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2003; 82(1): 41–48.
50.
ZhuHZhangC.Expanding a complex networked system for enhancing its reliability evaluated by a new efficient approach. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2019; 188: 205–220.
51.
EsaryJDProschanF.Coherent structures of non-identical components. Technometrics1963; 5(2): 191–209.
52.
SebastioSTrivediKSWangD, et al. Fast computation of bounds for two-terminal network reliability. Eur J Oper Res2014; 238(3): 810–823.
53.
YangDYFrangopolDM.Life-cycle management of deteriorating bridge networks with network-level risk bounds and system reliability analysis. Struct Saf2020; 83: 101911.
54.
BlokusA.Multistate system reliability with dependencies. Academic Press, 2020.
55.
MuecklichNSikoraIParaskevasA, et al. Safety and reliability in aviation–A systematic scoping review of normal accident theory, high-reliability theory, and resilience engineering in aviation. Saf Sci2023; 162: 106097.
56.
Goncalves FilhoAPWatersonPJunGT.Improving accident analysis in construction–Development of a contributing factor classification framework and evaluation of its validity and reliability. Saf Sci2021; 140: 105303.
57.
PhamH.Commentary: steady-state series-system availability. IEEE Trans Reliab2003; 52(2): 146–147.
58.
ElidoluGAhnSISezerSI, et al. Applying evidential reasoning extended SPAR-H modelling to analyse human reliability on crude oil tanker cargo operation. Saf Sci2023; 164: 106169.
59.
HassanZAMuterEK.Geometry of reliability models of electrical system used inside spacecraft. In: 2017 second Al-Sadiq international conference on multidisciplinary in IT and communication science and applications (AIC-MITCSA), 30 December 2017, pp.301–306. New York: IEEE.
60.
CoolenFPCoolen-MaturiT.The survival signature for quantifying system reliability: an introductory overview from practical perspective. In: vanGulijk C.ZaitsevaE (eds) Reliability engineering and computational intelligence. Springer, 2021, pp.23–37.
61.
RusnakPZaitsevaECoolenFP, et al. Logic differential calculus for reliability analysis based on survival signature. IEEE Trans Dependable Secur Comput2022; 20(2): 1529–1540.
62.
CoolenFPCoolen-MaturiTAl-NefaieeAH.Nonparametric predictive inference for system reliability using the survival signature. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part O: J Risk Reliab2014; 8(5): 437–448.
