Startseite Well-posedness and Stability of the Repairable System with Three Units and Vacation
Artikel Öffentlich zugänglich

Well-posedness and Stability of the Repairable System with Three Units and Vacation

  • Xiaoshuang Han , Mingyan Teng und Ming Fang EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 25. Februar 2014
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

The stability of the repairable system with three units and vacation was investigated by two different methods in this note. The repairable system is described by a set of ordinary differential equation coupled with partial differential equations with initial values and integral boundaries. To apply the theory of positive operator semigroups to discuss the repairable system, the system equations were transformed into an abstract Cauchy problem on some Banach lattice. The system equations have a unique non-negative dynamic solution and positive steady-state solution and dynamic solution strongly converges to steady-state solution were shown on the basis of the detailed spectral analysis of the system operator. Furthermore, the Cesáro mean ergodicity of the semigroup T(t) generated by the system operator was also shown through the irreducibility of the semigroup.

1 Introduction

Repairable system is not only an important class of systems discussed in reliability theory but also one of main objects studied in reliability mathematics. It consists of some components under the supervision of one or more repairmen. If a component fails at any time, it is immediately sent to the repair facility for repair.

The repairable system with three units is frequently encountered in practice. Many authors have discussed this repairable system where the repairmen always remain idle until the failed units present. For instance, Song and Deng analyzed the reliability of a three-unit system in a changing environment in [1]. Li et al. studied a repairable system with three units and two different repair facilities, and derived the explicit expressions of the state probabilities of the system and the steady-state reliability characteristics of the system in [2]. Kovalenko investigated a three-components system consisting of one master control element and two slave elements with priority serving by a single repair facility, and obtained the readiness factor and the average up-time in [3]. Hu et al. discussed a three-unit system with n failure modes and priority, and obtained explicit expressions of the steady-state probabilities of the system in [4].

The vacation conceptions (single vacation, multiple vacation, and delay vacation[5]) were first introduced into the repairable system by Su and Shi in [6]. The three-unit repairable system with vacations were discussed by Hu and his collaborators in recent years. Hu et al discussed the three-unit system with multiple vacations and priority in [7] and [8]. Thethree-unit system with single vacations was established and its reliability was then studied in [9]. They defined the repairable system and derived integro-differential equations, which describe the system precisely. By transforming the system equations into the first-order ordinary differential equations, they obtained the explicit formulas for the steady-state solution, the steady-state availability and mean up-time of the system.

However, the above authors investigated the repairable systems from the reliability theory only and mainly devoted to obtaining the quantities related to reliability of the system. They focused not at all on the problems of uniqueness, existence and asymptotic stability of the dynamic solutions to the system equations. We shall concern these questions of the repairable system with three units and single vacation in this paper. Indeed, the well-posedness and stability of the repairable systems have attracted the attention of many researchers since the end of last century. The corresponding properties of various repairable systems without vacation were obtained by the C0 semigroups theory of functional analysis in [1019].

Though several different methods given by the authors of [1019] were given to deal with the well-posedness and stability of the repairable systems, it is not easy to obtain the well-posedness and stability of the repairable system with vacation due to the complexity of the system equations. Analyzing the methods of [1019] in length, we find out that the spectral analysis of the system operator plays important role in those methods. So we begin this paper with the spectral analysis. On the basis of the detailed spectral analysis of the system operator, we show that the C0 semigroup T(t) generated by the system operator is positive, contractive and irreducible. Thus the well-posedness of the system is obtained, that is the system equations have a unique non-negative dynamic solution. Moreover, we show the system equations have positive steady-state solution and dynamic solution strongly converges to steady-state solution by two different methods. One way follows from the extension theorem of Lyubich and Phong in [20]. Another way is based on the irreducibility of the semigroups.

The structure of this paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we will introduce the repairable system with three units and vacation. The state space and system operator are also introduced in this section. In section 3, several lemmas and corollaries are given to obtain the spectral distributions of the system operator. In section 4, we analyze the spectral distribution of the system operator. In the section 5, main results of this paper are obtained.

2 System equations and system operator

Following [9], the system considered here consists of three dissimilar units (called units 1, 2 and 3) and one repairman with single vacation. Initially, the system with three new units begins to operate. The repairman does not take a vacation and remain idle until the first failed unit appears. A repaired unit is as good as a new one. The failure time distributions are exponential, and the repair time distributions are general: λk and μk(x) are the failure rates and repair rate functions of unit k (k = 1,2,3). The vacation time distribution is assumed to be general as well, η(x) is the vacation rate function. By utilizing the similar method of [9], we are able to obtain the integro-differential equations

ddt+λ1+λ2+λ3p0(t)=0η(u)q7(u,t)du(1)
t+x+μ1(x)q1(x,t)=0(2)
t+y+λ1+λ3+μ2(y)q2(y,t)=0μ1(x)q4(x,y,t)dx(3)
t+z+λ1+λ2+μ3(z)q3(z,t)=0μ1(x)q5(x,z,t)dx+0μ2(y)q6(y,z,t)dy(4)
t+x+μ1(x)q4(x,y,t)=0(5)
t+x+μ1(x)q5(x,z,t)=0(6)
t+y+μ2(y)q6(y,z,t)=0(7)
t+u+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(u)q7(u,t)=0(8)
t+u+η(u)q8(u,t)=λ1q7(u,t)(9)
t+u+λ1+λ3+η(u)q9(u,t)=λ2q7(u,t)(10)
t+u+λ1+λ2+η(u)q10(u,t)=λ3q7(u,t)(11)
t+u+η(u)q11(u,t)=λ1q9(u,t)(12)
t+u+η(u)q12(u,t)=λ1q10(u,t)(13)
t+u+η(u)q13(u,t)=λ2q10(u,t)+λ3q9(u,t)(14)
t+x+μ1(x)q14(x,t)=0(15)
t+x+μ1(x)q15(x,t)=0(16)
t+y+μ2(y)q16(y,t)=λ3q2(y,t)(17)

with boundary conditions:

q1(0,t)=λ1p0(t)+0η(u)q8(u,t)du(18)
q2(0,t)=λ2p0(t)+0η(u)q9(u,t)du+0μ1(x)q14(x,t)dx(19)
q3(0,t)=λ3p0(t)+0η(u)q10(u,t)du+0μ1(x)q15(x,t)dx+0μ2(y)q16(y,t)dy(20)
q4(0,y,t)=λ1q2(y,t),q5(0,z,t)=λ1q3(z,t),q6(0,z,t)=λ2q3(z,t)(21)
q7(0,t)=0μ1(x)q1(x,t)dx+0μ2(y)q2(y,t)dy+0μ3(z)q3(z,t)dz(22)
qi(0,t)=0,i=8,,13(23)
qj(0,t)=0η(u)qj3(u,t)du,j=14,15,16(24)

and the only nonzero initial condition is p0(0) = 1.

The state space is chosen as

X=R×(L1(R+))3×(L1(R+×R+))3×(L1(R+))10.

Obviously, X is a Banach space with the norm

P=|p0|+i=46R+×R+|pi(x,y)|dxdy+i=1,i4,5,616R+|pi(x)|dx,

in which

P=(p0,p1(x),p2(x),p3(x),p4(x,y),p5(x,y),p6(x,y),p7(x),,p16(x))X.

To introduce the system operator, we need the identities

p1(0)=λ1p0+0η(x)p8(x)dx(25)
p2(0)=λ2p0+0η(x)p9(x)dx+0μ1(x)p14(x)dx(26)
p3(0)=λ3p0+0η(x)p10(x)dx+0μ1(x)p15(x)dx+0μ2(x)p16(x)dx(27)
p4(0,y)=λ1p2(y),p5(0,y)=λ1p3(y),p6(0,y)=λ2p3(y)(28)
p7(0)=0μ1(x)p1(x)dx+0μ2(x)p2(x)dx+0μ3(x)p3(x)dx(29)
pi(0)=0,i=8,,13(30)
pj(0)=0η(x)pj3(x)dx,j=14,15,16(31)

Thus, from the system equations of (1)∼(24), the system operator A defined in the state space X is given by

D(A)=PXpi(x) and pj(x,y) are absolutely continuous,pi(x)L1(R+),xpj(x,y)L1(R+×R+),(j=4,5,6;i=1,2,3,7,,16) and they satisfy the identities (25)(31).
AP=λ1+λ2+λ3p0+0η(x)p7(x)dxddx+μ1(x)p1(x)[ddy+λ1+λ3+μ2(y)]p2(y)+0μ1(x)p4(x,y)dx[ddy+λ1+λ2+μ3(y)]p3(y)+0μ1(x)p5(x,y)dx+0μ2(x)p6(x,y)dxx+μ1(x)p4(x,y)x+μ1(x)p5(x,y)x+μ2(x)p6(x,y)ddx+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(x)p7(x)ddx+η(x)p8(x)+λ1p7(x)ddx+λ1+λ3+η(x)p9(x)+λ2p7(x)ddx+λ1+λ2+η(x)p10(x)+λ3p7(x)ddx+η(x)p11(x)+λ1p9(x)ddx+η(x)p12(x)+λ1p10(x)ddx+η(x)p13(x)+λ2p10(x)+λ3p9(x)ddx+μ1(x)p14(x)ddx+μ1(x)p15(x)ddx+μ2(x)p16(x)+λ3p2(x)

From the above definitions of the state space and the operator A, the equations (1)∼(24) is equivalent to the following abstract Cauchy problem on the Banach space X.

ddtP(t)=AP(t),t0,P(t)XP(0)=(1,0,,0)T(32)

3 Lemmas and corollaries

The main results are obtained under the following hypotheses.

General Hypothesesμi(x) (i = 1, 2, 3) and η(x) are bounded functions satisfying 0μj(x)dx= and 0η(x)dx=. Moreover, there exist positive constants Mj and cj (j = 1, 2, 3, 4) such that 0 ≤ μi(x) ≤ Mi, 0 ≤ η(x) ≤ M4 and xR+,1x0xμi(x)dx>ci,1x0xη(x)dx>c4.

It is easy to obtain the following lemmas and corollaries by the general hypotheses. The proofs of these lemmas and corollaries are given in the appendix of this note.

Lemma 1

For the repair rate functions μi(x) (i = 1,2,3) and vacation rate function η(x), we have

0μi(x)e0xμi(s)dsdx=1,0η(x)e0xη(s)dsdx=1.

Lemma 2

If let

a1=0η(x)e0xλ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)dsdx,a2=λ10η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,a3=λ20η(x)e0xλ1+λ3+η(s)ds0xeλ2sdsdx,a4=λ30η(x)e0xλ1+λ2+η(s)ds0xeλ3sdsdx,a5=λ10η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,a6=λ10η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,a7=λ30η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,a8=λ20η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,b1=λ30μ2(x)e0xμ2(s)ds0xeλ3sdsdx,b2=0μ2(x)e0xλ3+μ2(s)dsdx,
theni=18ai=1andb1+b2=1.

Lemma 3

If z ∈ ℂ, Rez > 0 or z = ai, a ≠ 0, then the following inequalities hold

0η(x)e0xz+η(s)dsdx<1,0μi(x)e0xz+μi(s)dsdx<1.

We are able to derive the following corollaries from the above lemmas.

corollary 1

If z is the same as above, set

g0=0η(x)e0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)dsdx,g1=λ10η(x)e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,g2=0η(x)e0xz+λ1+λ3+η(s)dse0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)dsdx,g3=0η(x)e0xz+λ1+λ2+η(s)dse0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)dsdx,g4=λ10η(x)e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,g5=λ10η(x)e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,g6=λ20η(x)e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx+λ30η(x)e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx,g7=0μ1(x)e0xz+μ1(s)dsdx,g8=0μ2(x)e0xz+μ2(s)dsdx,g9=0μ3(x)e0xz+μ3(s)dsdx,g10=λ30μ2(x)e0xz+μ2(s)ds0xe((1d1)λ1+λ3)ydydx,g11=0μ2(x)e0yz+(1d1)λ1+λ3+μ2(s)dsdx,g12=0μ3(x)e0yz+λ1(1d1)+λ2(1d2)+μ3(s)dsdx.
then the matrix
T=z+λ1+λ2+λ3000g0000λ1100g1000λ2010g2g900λ3001g30g7g80g7g11g1210000000g41000000g501000g100g6001
is a diagonally dominant matrix about column.

corollary 2

Let c = min{c1,c2,c3,c4} and the matrix T be the same as in corollary 1. If f(z) were the determinant of the matrix T, then the function f(z) have finite zeros in the region {z ∈ C|0 > Re z > −c}.

Furthermore, we need two other lemmas to analyze the spectral distributions of system operator.

Lemma 4

If z ∈ {zC|0 > Re z > −c}, for each given

Q=(q0,q1(x),q2(x),q3(x),q4(x,y),q5(x,y),q6(x,y),q7(x),,q16(x))X,
set
f1(y)=0yeτyz+(1d1)λ1+λ3+μ2(s)dsq2(τ)dτ,f2(y)=0yeτyz+(1d1)λ1+λ3+μ2(s)ds0μ1(x)0xerxz+μ1(s)dsq4(r,τ)drdxdτ,f3(y)=0yeτyz+λ1(1d1)+λ2(1d2)+μ3(s)dsq3(τ)dτ,f4(y)=0yeτyz+λ1(1d1)+λ2(1d2)+μ3(s)ds0μ1(x)0xerxz+μ1(s)dsq5(r,τ)drdxdτ,f5(y)=0yeτyz+λ1(1d1)+λ2(1d2)+μ3(s)ds0μ2(x)0xerxz+μ2(s)dsq6(r,τ)drdxdτ,f6(x)=0xeτxz+μ1(s)dsq1(τ)dτ,f7(x)=0xeτxz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτ,f8(x)=e0xz+η(s)ds0xe0rz+η(s)dsq8(r)dr,f9(x)=λ10x0re(λ1+λ2+λ3)(rτ)eτxz+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdr,f10(x)=e0xz+λ1+λ3+η(s)ds0xe0rz+λ1+λ3+η(s)dsq9(r)dr,f11(x)=λ20x0reλ2(rτ)eτxz+λ1+λ3+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdr,f12(x)=e0xz+λ1+λ2+η(s)ds0xe0rz+λ1+λ2+η(s)dsq10(r)dr,f13(x)=λ30x0reλ3(rτ)eτxz+λ1+λ2+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdr,f14(x)=λ10x0ue(λ1+λ3)(ur)erxz+η(s)dsq9(r)drdu,f15(x)=λ1λ20x0u0re(λ1+λ3)(uτ)eλ2(rτ)eτxz+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdrdu,f16(x)=0xerxz+μ1(s)dsq11(r)dr,f17(x)=λ10x0ue(λ1+λ2)(ur)erxz+η(s)dsq10(r)drdu,f18(x)=λ1λ30x0u0re(λ1+λ2)(uτ)eλ3(rτ)eτxz+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdrdu,f19(x)=0xerxz+μ1(s)dsq12(r)dr,f20(x)=λ20x0ue(λ1+λ2)(ur)erxz+η(s)dsq10(r)drdu,f21(x)=λ2λ30x0u0re(λ1+λ2)(uτ)eλ3(rτ)eτxz+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdrdu,f22(x)=λ3e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)u0ue0rz+λ1+λ3+η(s)dsq9(r)drdu,f23(x)=λ2λ30x0u0re(λ1+λ3)(uτ)eλ2(rτ)eτxz+η(s)dsq7(τ)dτdrdu,f24(x)=0xerxz+μ1(s)dsq13(r)dr,f25(x)=e0xz+μ1(s)ds0xe0rz+μ1(s)dsq14(r)dr,f26(x)=e0xz+μ1(s)ds0xe0rz+μ1(s)dsq15(r)dr,f27(x)=e0xz+μ2(s)ds0xe0rz+μ2(s)dsq16(r)dr,f28(x)=λ3e0xz+μ2(s)ds0xe((1d1)λ1+λ3)y0ye0τz+(1d1)λ1+λ3+μ2(s)dsq2(τ)dτdy,f29(x)=λ30x0ye((1d1)λ1+λ3)(yτ)eτxz+μ2(s)ds0μ1(u)0ueruz+μ1(s)dsq4(r,τ)drdudτdy,f30(y)=e0yz+(1d1)λ1+λ3+μ2(s)ds,f31(y)=e0yz+λ1(1d1)+λ2(1d2)+μ3(s)ds,f32(x)=e0xz+μ1(s)ds,f33(x)=e0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)ds,f34(x)=λ1e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds,f35(x)=e0xz+λ1+λ3+η(s)dse0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)ds,f36(x)=e0xz+λ1+λ2+η(s)dse0xz+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)ds,f37(x)=λ1e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds,f38(x)=λ1e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds,f39(x)=λ2e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds+λ3e0xz+η(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds,f40(x)=e0xz+μ2(s)ds,f41(x,y)=e0xz+μ1(s)ds0xe0τz+μ1(s)dsq4(τ,y)dτ,f42(x,y)=e0xz+μ1(s)ds0xe0τz+μ1(s)dsq5(τ,y)dτ,f43(x,y)=e0xz+μ2(s)ds0xe0τz+μ2(s)dsq6(τ,y)dτ,
then the functions fk(k = 1,2,⋯,43) are absolutely continuous and absolutely integrable.

Lemma 5

If let

e0=0η(x)f7(x)dx,e1=0η(x)[f8(x)+f9(x)]dx,e2=0η(x)[f10(x)+f11(x)]dx+0μ1(x)f25(x)dx,e3=0η(x)[f12(x)+f13(x)]dx+0μ1(x)f26(x)dx+0μ2(x)[f27(x)+f28(x)+f29(x)]dx,e4=0μ1(x)f6(x)dx+0μ2(x)[f1(x)+f2(x)dx+0μ3(x)[f3(x)+f4(x)+f5(x)]dx,e5=0η(x)[f14(x)+f15(x)+f16(x)]dx,e6=0η(x)[f17(x)+f18(x)+f19(x)]dx,e7=0η(x)[f20(x)+f21(x)+f22(x)+f23(x)+f24(x)]dx,
in which fk(x)(k = 1,2,⋯,29) are defined by the above lemma, then for l = 0,1,⋯,7, el ∈ ℂ.

4 Spectral analysis of the system operator

In this section, we shall give the detailed spectral analysis of the system operator with the help of the lemmas and corollaries listed in the previous section. Moreover, several useful corollaries are also obtained.

Theorem 1

Zero is the eigenvalue of system operator A whose geometric multiplicity is one. Furthermore, system operator A has a positive eigenfunction corresponding to eigenvalue zero.

Proof

If the equation AP=0 have nonzero solution in the domain D(A) of A, then zero would be the eigenvalue of system operator. However, the equation AP=0 is equivalent to

λ1+λ2+λ3p0=0η(x)p7(x)dx(33)
ddx+μ1(x)p1(x)=0(34)
ddy+λ1+λ3+μ2(y)p2(y)=0μ1(x)p4(x,y)dx(35)
ddy+λ1+λ2+μ3(y)p3(y)=0μ1(x)p5(x,y)dx+0μ2(x)p6(x,y)dx(36)
x+μ1(x)p4(x,y)=0(37)
x+μ1(x)p5(x,y)=0(38)
x+μ2(x)p6(x,y)=0(39)
ddx+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(x)p7(x)=0(40)
ddx+η(x)p8(x)=λ1p7(x)(41)
ddx+λ1+λ3+η(x)p9(x)=λ2p7(x)(42)
ddx+λ1+λ2+η(x)p10(x)=λ3p7(x)(43)
ddx+η(x)p11(x)=λ1p9(x)(44)
ddx+η(x)p12(x)=λ1p10(x)(45)
ddx+η(x)p13(x)=λ2p10(x)+λ3p9(x)(46)
ddx+μ1(x)p14(x)=0(47)
ddx+μ1(x)p15(x)=0(48)
ddx+μ2(x)p16(x)=λ3p2(x)(49)

Since the desired nonzero solution P belongs to D(A), it must satisfies identities (25)∼(31). Firstly, it follows from (34) that

p1(x)=p1(0)e0xμ1(s)ds(50)

Solving the equations (37)∼(39) with the help of (28), we have

p4(x,y)=λ1p2(y)e0xμ1(s)ds(51)
p5(x,y)=λ1p3(y)e0xμ1(s)ds(52)
p6(x,y)=λ2p3(y)e0xμ2(s)ds(53)

Substitute the functions above into the corresponding equations (35)∼(36), it follows from lemma 1 that

p2(y)=p2(0)e0yλ3+μ2(s)ds(54)
p3(y)=p3(0)e0yμ3(s)ds(55)

Secondly, it is easy to see

p7(x)=p7(0)e0xλ1+λ2+λ3+η(s)ds(56)

Substitute p7(x) into the equations (41)∼(43) and then solve them with the help of the identity (30), we obtain

p8(x)=λ1p7(0)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds(57)
p9(x)=λ2p7(0)e0xλ1+λ3+η(s)ds0xeλ2sds(58)
p10(x)=λ3p7(0)e0xλ1+λ2+η(s)ds0xeλ3sds(59)

Similarly, it follows from the equations (44)∼(46) that

p11(x)=λ1p7(0)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds(60)
p12(x)=λ1p7(0)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds(61)
p13(x)=λ3p7(0)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds+λ2p7(0)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)se(λ1+λ2+λ3)sds(62)

At last, solving the equations (47)∼(49) leads to

p14(x)=p14(0)e0xμ1(s)ds(63)
p15(x)=p15(0)e0xμ1(s)ds(64)
p16(x)=p16(0)e0xμ2(s)ds+λ3p2(0)e0xμ2(s)ds0xeλ3sds(65)

Substitute the above functions pj(x) (j = 1, 2, 3, 7, ⋯, 16) into the identities (25)∼(27), (29), (31) and (33), we will obtain a homogeneous linear equations on p0, p1(0), p2(0), p3(0), p7(0), p14(0), p15(0) and p16(0)

(λ1+λ2+λ3)p0+a1p7(0)=0,λ1p0p1(0)+a2p7(0)=0,λ3p0+b1p2(0)p3(0)+a4p7(0)+p15(0)+p16(0)=0,p1(0)+b2p2(0)+p3(0)p7(0)=0,a5p7(0)p14(0)=0,a6p7(0)p15(0)=0,(a7+a8)p7(0)p16(0)=0,

in which the notations ai(i = 1,⋯,8) and bj(j = 1,2) are given in lemma 2. If let

B=(λ1+λ2+λ3)000a1000λ1100a2000λ2010a3100λ30b11a401101b2110000000a51000000a60100000a7+a8001,

then the coefficients matrix of the equations is the matrix B. Since the sum of every column of B is zero by the arguments of lemma 2, the determinant of the matrix B is zero. Thus, there exists nonzero solution to the equations. This means the nonzero solution to the equation P exists, so zero is an eigenvalue of the operator A. Moreover, it follows from the equations that

p0=a1(λ1+λ2+λ3)1p7(0)(66)
p1(0)=[λ1a1(λ1+λ2+λ3)1+a2]p7(0)(67)
p2(0)=[λ2a1(λ1+λ2+λ3)1+a3+a5]p7(0)(68)
p3(0)=[λ3a1(λ1+λ2+λ3)1+a4+a6+a7+a8]p7(0)+b1[λ2a1(λ1+λ2+λ3)1+a3+a5]p7(0)(69)
p14(0)=a5p7(0)(70)
p15(0)=a6p7(0)(71)
p16(0)=(a7+a8)p7(0)(72)

which show the geometric multiplicity of the eigenvalue zero is one. Thus the first statement of the theorem is right. The second statement is easy to be verified by setting p7(0) = 1. The proof of the theorem is complete.

Moreover, it is not hard to know the system operator A is densely defined and closed by direct verification. We do not want to give the proofs of both properties because the verification is trivial. For more information on the denseness and closeness of the similar operator, you can refer to [22]. With the help of these basic properties, we can present the following spectral distribution of the system operator.

Theorem 2

The spectral set σ(A) of the system operator A lies in left half-plane {z ∈ ℂ|Rez < 0} and zero is the unique point spectrum on the imaginary axis.

Proof

To show the arguments of the theorem 2, if let ρ(A) be the resolvent set of the operator A, then it is sufficient to show T := {z ∈ ℂ|Rez > 0 or z = ia, a ≠ 0} ⊂ ρ(A). To this end, for each given QX and zT, consider the equation (zIA) P = Q, which is equivalent to

z+λ1+λ2+λ3p00η(x)p7(x)dx=q0,p1(x)=z+μ1(x)p1(x)+q1(x),p2(y)=z+λ1+λ3+μ2(y)p2(y)+0μ1(x)p4(x,y)dx+q2(y),p3(y)=z+λ1+λ2+μ3(y)p3(y)+0μ1(x)p5(x,y)dx+0μ2(x)p6(x,y)dx+q3(y),p4(x,y)x=z+μ1(x)p4(x,y)+q4(x,y),p5(x,y)x=z+μ1(x)p5(x,y)+q5(x,y),p6(x,y)x=z+μ2(x)p6(x,y)+q6(x,y),p7(x)=z+λ1+λ2+λ3+η(x)p7(x)+q7(x),p8(x)=z+η(x)p8(x)+λ1p7(x)+q8(x),p9(x)=z+λ1+λ3+η(x)p9(x)+λ2p7(x)+q9(x),p10(x)=z+λ1+λ2+η(x)p10(x)+λ3p7(x)+q10(x),p11(x)=z+η(x)p11(x)+λ1p9(x)+q11(x),p12(x)=z+η(x)p12(x)+λ1p10(x)+q12(x),p13(x)=z+η(x)p13(x)+λ2p10(x)+λ3p9(x)+q13(x),p14(x)=z+μ1(x)p14(x)+q14(x),p15(x)=z+μ1(x)p15(x)+q15(x),p16(x)=z+μ2(x)p16(x)+λ3p2(x)+q16(x).

Firstly, solving the equations above by the functions defined in lemma 4, we have

p1(x)=p1(0)f32(x)+f6(x),p2(y)=p2(0)f30(y)+f1(y)+f2(y),p3(y)=p2(0)f31(y)+f3(y)+f4(y)+f5(y),p4(x,y)=λ1p2(y)f32(x)+f41(x,y),p5(x,y)=λ1p3(y)f32(x)+f42(x,y),p6(x,y)=λ2p3(y)f40(x)+f43(x,y),p7(x)=p7(0)f33(x)+f7(x),p8(x)=p7(0)f34(x)+f8(x)+f9(x),p9(x)=p7(0)f35(x)+f10(x)+f11(x),p10(x)=p7(0)f36(x)+f12(x)+f13(x),p11(x)=p7(0)f37(x)+f14(x)+f15(x)+f16(x),p12(x)=p7(0)f38(x)+f17(x)+f18(x)+f19(x),p13(x)=p7(0)f39(x)+f20(x)+f21(x)+f22(x)+f23(x)+f24(x),p14(x)=p14(0)f32(x)+f25(x),p15(x)=p15(0)f32(x)+f26(x),p16(x)=p16(0)f40(x)+f27(x)+f28(x)+f29(x).

Substitute the above functions into corresponding boundary conditions (25)∼(27), (29), (31) and the first equation, inhomogeneous linear equations on p0, p1(0), p2(0), p3(0), p7(0), p14(0), p15(0), p16(0)

(z+λ1+λ2+λ3)p0g0p7(0)=e0+q0(73)
λ1p0+p1(0)g1p7(0)=e1(74)
λ2p0+p2(0)g2p7(0)g9p14(0)=e2(75)
λ3p0+p3(0)g3p7(0)g7p15(0)g8p16(0)=e3(76)
g7p1(0)g11p2(0)g12p3(0)+p7(0)=e4(77)
g4p7(0)+p14(0)=e5(78)
g5p7(0)+p15(0)=e6(79)
g10p2(0)g6p7(0)+p16(0)=e7(80)

are obtained with the help of the notations in corollary 2 and lemma 5. The coefficient matrix of the equations (73)∼(80) is just the matrix T given in corollary 2, which tells us the matrix T is a diagonally dominant matrix about column, so it is nonsingular (see page 184 of [21]). According to lemma 5, el (l = 0, 1, ⋯, 7) belong to the complex number set ℂ. These statements imply the unique solution to the equations (73)∼(80) exists. Since pk(x)(k = 1,2,3,7,⋯,16) and pj(x,y)(j = 4,5,6) are uniquely determined by p1(0),p2(0),p3(0),p7(0), p14(0),p15(0),p16(0), the unique solution to the equation (zIA) P = Q exists in the domain D(A). This means the operator zIA be bijective, which is equivalent to its inverse (zIA)−1 exists. (zIA)−1 is closed because the operator zIA is closed. The classical closed graph theorem is applied to show the boundedness of the inverse operator (zIA)−1, that is to say zρ(A). Thus we complete the proof of the theorem.

Recall that the spectral bound s(T) of an unbounded operator T is the quantity sup{Reλ : λ ∈ σ(T)}. Thus, theorem 1 and theorem 2 imply the spectral bound s(A) of the system operator A is zero. Moreover, the proof of the theorem 2 implies the following corollary is true.

corollary 3

There exists a positive constant δ such that {z|z ∈ ℂ, Rez > −δ, z ≠ 0} ⊂ ρ(A).

Proof

According to the proof of the theorem 2, we know, for z ∈ ℂ, Rez > −c, zρ(A) if and only if f(z) ≠ 0. Notice that f(z) is given in proof of corollary 2 and it shows the analytic function f(z) has finite zeros in the strip {z ∈ ℂ| −c < Rez < 0}. If let z1, z2, ⋯, zn be the zeros of f(z) and δ = −max{Rezi|1 ≤ in}, then we would have {z|z ∈ ℂ, Rez > −δ, z ≠ 0} ⊂ ρ(A).

To give the next corollary, we need some notations on the state space X. For PX, we assume

P=(p0,p1(x),p2(x),p3(x),p4(x,y),p5(x,y),p6(x,y),p7(x),,p16(x))

and call P positive (in symbol 0 ≤ P) if 0 ≤ p0 and

0pi(x)(i=1,2,3,7,,16) for almost all xR+,0pk(x,y)(k=4,5,6) for almost all (x,y)R+×R+.

To indicate that 0 ≤ P and 0 ≠ P we use the notation 0 < P. We call a vector function P is strictly positive (in symbol 0 ≪ P) if 0 < p0 and

0pi(x)(i=1,2,3,7,,16) for almost all xR+,0pk(x,y)(k=4,5,6) for almost all (x,y)R+×R+.

In fact, the above notations and concepts are the terminologies of Banach lattice. You can refer to [2325] for detailed information. Thus, we have the following corollary by proof of the theorem 2.

corollary 4

IfQXandQ > 0, then R(λ,A) Q ≫ 0 for λ > s(A) = 0.

Proof

According to the proof of the theorem 2, R(λ,A) Q exists uniquely for each given QX. It is easy to see if p0, p1(0), p2(0), p3(0), p7(0), p14(0), p15(0), p16(0) are all positive, then R(λ,A) Q ≫ 0. However, from the equations (73)∼(80), if p7(0) is positive, then p0, p1(0), p2(0), p3(0), p14(0), p15(0), p16(0) are also. Thus, to complete the proof of this corollary, it is sufficient to show p7(0) > 0. To this end, let

T5=λ+λ1+λ2+λ3000e0+q0000λ1100e1000λ2010e2g900λ3001e30g7g80g7g11g12e40000000e51000000e601000g100e7001,

then the Cramer’s rule is applied to the equations (73)∼(80) results in p7(0)=|T5||T|, in which

|T|=(λ+λ1+λ2+λ3)[1g12(g3+g6g8+g5g7)g1g7(g2+g9g4)(g11+g8g10g12)]g0[λ2(g11+g8g10g12)+(λ3g12+λ1g7)]

is given in proof of the corollary 2. Finally, for λ > s(A) = 0, according to the results of corollary 2 we know 0 < gk < 1(k = 7,8,9,12), 0 < i=06|gi| < 1 and 0 < g10 + g11 < 1. This means |T| > 0. Comparing the matrix T5 with the matrix T, it is easy to obtain the determinant of matrix T5

|T5|=(λ+λ1+λ2+λ3)[e4+g12(e3+e7g8+e6g7)+e1g7+(e2+g9e5)×(g11+g8g10g12)]+(e0+q0)[λ2(g11+g8g10g12)+(λ3g12+λ1g7)].

Since one of the right terms of the above identity must be positive and the other terms are nonnegative, |T5| is greater than 0. Thus, p7(0) > 0 due to p7(0)=|T5||T|. Thus the proof of the corollary is complete.

5 The well-posedness and stability of the system

By Theorem II 6.7 and Definition II 6.8 of [25], we know that the well-posedness of the system (32) is equivalent to the operator A generating a C0 semigroup T(t) on X. In fact, the C0 semigroup T(t) generated by the operator A is even positive, contractive and irreducible since we have the following results.

Theorem 3

The operator A is a dispersive operator in X.

Proof

We denote by X+ and [ P]+ the positive cone of the state space and the positive part of the vector P in X, respectively. For arbitrary PD(A), set

ϕ=[P]+(sign(p0),sign(p1(x)),sign(p2(x)),sign(p3(x)),sign(p4(x,y)),sign(p5(x,y)),sign(p6(x,y)),sign(p7(x)),,sign(p16(x))),

in which sign(a) is the sign of the number a. Then ϕX+ and the identities ∥ϕ2 = ∥[ P]+2 = ( P,ϕ) obviously hold. Now we verify (AP,ϕ) ≤ 0. By the definition of the operator A, it is easy to see

[P]+1(AP,ϕ)λ1+λ2+λ3[p0]+0μ1(x)[p1(x)]+dx0(λ1+μ2(y))[p2(y)]+dy0(λ1+λ2+μ3(y))[p3(y)]+dy+[p1(0)]++[p2(0)]++[p3(0)]++[p7(0)]++[p14(0)]++[p15(0)]++[p16(0)]+0η(x)i=813[pi(x)]+dx+0[p4(0,y)]++[p5(0,y)]++[p6(0,y)]+dy0μ1(x)[p14(x)]++[p15(x)]+μ2(x)[p16(x)]+dx.

It follows from the boundary conditions (25)∼(31) that

[p1(0)]+λ1[p0]++0η(x)[p8(x)]+dx,[p2(0)]+λ2[p0]++0η(x)[p9(x)]+dx+0μ1(x)[p14(x)]+dx,[p3(0)]+λ3[p0]++0η(x)[p10(x)]+dx+0μ1(x)[p15(x)]+dx+0μ2(x)[p16(x)]+dx,[p4(0,y)]+=λ1[p2(y)]+,p5(0,y)=λ1[p3(y)]+,[p6(0,y)]+=λ2[p3(y)]+,p7(0)0μ1(x)[p1(x)]+dx+0μ2(x)[p2(x)]+dx+0μ3(x)[p3(x)]+dx,[p14(0)]+0η(x)[p11(x)]+dx,[p15(0)]+0η(x)[p12(x)]+dx,[p16(0)]+0η(x)[p13(x)]+dx.

If substitute them into the original inequality, we obtain (AP,ϕ) ≤ 0. The operator A is therefore dispersive by the definition of the dispersive operator in [23].

Now we can obtain one of the main results of this note.

Theorem 4

The operator A generates some positive C0semigroups T(t), which is contractive and irreducible, on Banach lattice X. Therefore, the unique non-negative solutionp(⋅,t) of the system (1)∼(24) exists and it is given by T(t) p(0).

Proof

According to Philips Theorem in the positive semigroup theory (see [23]), A generates a positive C0-semigroup of contractions if and only if A is a dispersive and the operator IA is surjective. Since theorem 2 has asserted that 1 belongs to the resolvent set of the operator A and theorem 3 show that A is a dispersive, we obtain the semigroup T(t) generated by system operator A is positive and contractive. Thus the equations (1)∼(24) have a unique solution by well known result in the theory of the C0-semigroup and it could be expressed as T(t) p0). Moreover, the unique solution T(t) p(0) is non-negative since the inial value p(0) in (32) is non-negative and the semigroup T(t) is positive. At last, it follows the corollary 4 and the definition VI 3.1 in [25] that the semigroup T(t) is irreducible. The proof of the theorem is complete.

Furthermore, we can obtain the asymptotic stability of the the system (32). To this end, we have to show zero is the simple eigenvalue of the system operator A. This result is given in the following theorem.

Theorem 5

Zero is the simple eigenvalue of the system operator A.

Proof

By the theory of the functional analysis, we know that the dual space of the state space X is X* = ℝ × (L(ℝ+))3 ×(L(ℝ+ × ℝ+))3 ×(L(ℝ+))10. For QX*, the norm of Q is given by

Q=max{|q0|,supxR+qi(x),sup(x,y)R+×R+qj(x,y),i=1,2,3,7,,16,j=4,5,6}.

If let Q = (1, 1, ⋯, 1) ∈ X*, then QD(A*) and A*Q = 0. This means that zero is the eigenvalue of the operator A* and Q is the corresponding eigenfunction. Let P^ be the non-negative eigenfunction corresponding to eigenvalue 0. Since (P^,Q)=P^0, we therefore deduce that zero is the simple eigenvalue of the system operator A by similar argument in the theorem 4.1.2 of reference [19]. Since it is easy to obtain the dual operator of the system operator A as follows,

D(A)=QXqi(x)L(R+),qj(x,y)xL(R+×R+),qi(x)andqj(x,y)areabsolutely continuous and they satisfyqi(),qj(,y)R,i=1,2,3,7,,16,j=4,5,6.
AQ=λ1q1(0)+λ2q2(0)+λ3q3(0)(λ1+λ2+λ3)q0q1(y)+q7(0)q1(x)μ1(x)q2(y)+λ1q4(0,y)+q7(0)μ2(y)+λ3q16(y)λ1+λ3+μ2(y)q2(y)q3(y)+λ1q5(0,y)+λ2q6(0,y)+q7(0)μ3(y)λ1+λ2+μ3(y)q3(y)q4(x,y)x+[q2(y)q4(x,y)]μ1(x)q5(x,y)x+[q3(y)q5(x,y)]μ1(x)q6(x,y)x+[q3(y)q6(x,y)]μ2(x)q7(x)+q0η(x)+λ1q8(x)+λ2q9(x)+λ3q10(x)λ1+λ2+λ3+η(x)q7(x)q8(x)+(q1(0)q8(x))η(x)q9(x)+q2(0)η(x)+λ1q11(x)+λ3q13(x)λ1+λ3+η(x)q9(x)q10(x)+q3(0)η(x)+λ1q12(x)+λ2q13(x)λ1+λ2+η(x)q10(x)q11(x)+[q14(0)q11(x)]η(x)q12(x)+[q14(0)q12(x)]η(x)q13(x)+[q16(0)q13(x)]η(x)q14(x)+[q2(0)q14(x)]μ1(x)q15(x)+[q3(0)q15(x)]μ1(x)q16(x)+[q3(0)q16(x)]μ2(x)

From the definition of the strictly dominant eigenvalue in [15], corollary 3 and the above theorem, we can get the following result.

Corollary 5

Zero is a strictly dominant eigenvalue of the system operator A.

Now, we show another main result of this note, that is the steady-state solution to the equations (1)∼(24) is existed and the dynamic solution converges to the steady-state solution in the norm topology of state space X. We elaborate on this property in following theorem. Indeed, the following theorem is a direct consequence of the theorem 2, theorem 5 and lemma 4.1 in [13], which is an extension theorem of Lyubich and Phong in [20].

Theorem 6

IfP~is the non-negative eigenfunction of corresponding eigenvalue 0 of the system operator such thatP~ ‖ = 1, thenP~is just the steady-state solution of the system (32). More precisely, the dynamic solutionT(t) P (0) converges toP~in the norm topology ofXas timetapproaches infinity, i.e.

limtT(t)P(0)P~=0,

in whichP (0) is the initial value of the system (32).

On the other hand, we are able to obtain the asymptotic stability of the system by another way. For this purpose, we define the spectral project E(0, A) corresponding to the strictly dominant eigenvalue zero by

E(0,A)P=12πi|z|=ε(zIA)1Pdz=(P,Q)P~,PX.

Thus, we can deduce the following theorem from the irreducibility of the semigroup T(t), which has been obtained in theorem 4.

Theorem 7

The semigroupT(t) is Cesáro mean ergodic and the state spaceXcan be decomposed into direct sum ofX = X1X2, in whichX1 = ker A = R(E(0, A)) andX2 = R(A) = ker E(0, A). Moreover, for anyPX,

limtT(t)PE(0,A)P=0.

Proof

By the Definition II 8.1 in [24], we know that the state space X is a AL space. Thus, the statements of the theorem are direct consequences of the lemma 5.1.1 and theorem 5.1.2 in [26].

In particular, if the vector P is the initial value P (0) of the system (32), then theorem 7 implies theorem 6 since E(0,A)P(0)=(P(0),Q)P~=P~. Thus, we obtain the asymptotic stability of the system again. However, another important result of the theorem 6 is the Cesáro mean ergodicity of the semigroup T(t).

6 Conclusions and further researches

We obtained the well-posedness and asymptotic stability of the repairable system with three units and vacation by the theory of positive operator semigroups. That is to say the system equations have a unique non-negative dynamic solution and positive steady-state solution and dynamic solution strongly converges to steady-state solution. However, it is pity to enclose the manuscript that we did not give the reliability and exponential stability of the repairable system in this note. We shall show these properties and estimation of the availability of the system in another paper.

Appendix: Proofs of lemmas 1 to 5 and corollaries 1 and 2

Proof of lemma 1

The identities of the lemma 1 hold since

0μi(x)e0xμi(s)dsdx=0de0xμi(s)ds=e0xμi(s)ds0=1,0η(x)e0xη(s)dsdx=0de0xη(s)ds=e0xη(s)ds0=1.

Proof of lemma 2

By simple computation we know

b1=10μ2(x)e0xλ3μ2(s)dsdx=1b2.

Thus, b1 + b2 = 1 holds. It is easy to see that

a2+a5=λ10η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)sdsdx,a3=0η(x)e0xη(s)dse(λ1+λ3)xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)xdx,a4=0η(x)e0xη(s)dse(λ1+λ2)xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)xdx.

With the help of lemma 1 we have

a2+a5+a6+a7+a8=(λ1+λ2)0η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2)sdsdx+(λ1+λ3)0η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ3)sdsdx(λ1+λ2+λ3)0η(x)e0xη(s)ds0xe(λ1+λ2+λ3)sdsdx=10η(x)e0xη(s)dse(λ1+λ2)xdx0η(x)e0xη(s)dse(λ1+λ3)xdx+0η(x)e0xη(s)dse(λ1+λ2+λ3)xdx.

Adding a1, a3 and a4 to a2 + a5 + a6 + a7 + a8, we would obtain i=18ai=1.

Proof of lemma 3

When Rez > 0, it is easy to obtain

0η(x)e0xz+η(s)dsdx<0η(x)e0xη(s)dsdx=1.

When z = ai, we have

0η(x)e0xai+η(s)dsdx0η(x)e0xη(s)dsdx=1,

If the equality hold, that is

0η(x)e0xai+η(s)dsdx=1,

then

0η(x)e0xai+η(s)dsdx2=1.

It follows from the formula of the module of complex number that

0η(x)e0xai+η(s)dsdx2=0η(x)e0xη(s)dscosaxdx2+0η(x)e0xη(s)dssinaxdx2=0η(x)e0xη(s)dscosaxdx0η(u)e0uη(s)dscosaudu+0η(x)e0xη(s)dssinaxdx0η(u)e0uη(s)dssinaudu=00η(x)e0xη(s)dsη(u)e0uη(s)dscosa(xu)dxdu=1.

However, lemma 1 tells us

00η(x)e0xη(s)dsη(u)e0uη(s)dsdxdu=1.

Thus

00η(x)e0xη(s)dsη(u)e0uη(s)ds[1cosa(xu)]dxdu=0.

Since η(x)e0xη(s)dsη(u)e0uη(s)dsη(x) is nonnegative function, the above identity holds if and only if cos a(xu) ≡ 1, which is equivalent to a = 0 because xu is an arbitrary real number.

Therefore, if a ≠ 0, then

0η(x)e0xia+η(s)dsdx1.

This means that the first inequality holds for z = ai and a ≠ 0. The second inequality will be similarly proven.

Proof of corollary 1

If z ∈ ℂ, Rez > 0 or z = ai, a ≠ 0, since λi are positive, it follows that |λ1 + λ2 + λ3| < |z + λ1 + λ2 + λ3| and |gk| < 1 (k = 7, 8, 9, 12) hold. Moreover, we have

i=06|gi|<i=18ai=1,|g10|+|g11|<b1+b2=1

by lemma 3 and the notations and results of lemma 2. Thus, the statement of this corollary is true by the definition of the diagonally dominant matrix about column(see P. 184 of [21]).

Proof of corollary 2

The function gi given by corollary 2 is analytic in the right half-plane {zC|Rez > −c}. Moreover, we have

f(z)=|T|=(z+λ1+λ2+λ3)[1g12(g3+g6g8+g5g7)g1g7(g2+g9g4)(g11+g8g10g12)]g0[λ2(g11+g8g10g12)+(λ3g12+λ1g7)].

f(z) is then an analytic function in {zC|Rez > −c. Thus, the conclusion of this corollary results from lim|Imz|+|f(z)|=+.

Proof of lemma 4

The absolute continuity of the functions fk(k = 1, 2, ⋯, 43) results from their special expressions. Concerning the absolute integrability, we just give an example. The other function is absolutely integrable is similarly derived. Indeed, we are able to obtain the following estimate

0|f29(x)|dx=00ye((1d1)λ1+λ3)(yτ)eτxz+μ2(s)ds0μ1(u)0ueruz+μ1(s)dsq4(r,τ)drdudτdydx00x0yeτxz+μ2(s)dse((1d1)λ1+λ3)(yτ)0μ1(u)0ueruz+μ1(s)dsq4(r,τ)drdudτdydx1c200x0yec2τe((|1d1|)λ1+λ3)(yτ)00ue0rμ1(s)dsq4(r,τ)drde0uμ1(s)dsdτdydec2x=1c200xe((|1d1|)λ1+λ3+c2)(xτ)0q4(u,τ)dudτdx=1c21|(1d1)|λ1+λ3+c200xe((1d1)λ1+λ3+c2)τ0q4(u,τ)dudτde((1d1)λ1+λ3+c2)x1c21λ3+c200q4(u,x)dudx<,

by the general hypotheses and integration by parts. Thus, f29(x) is an absolutely integrable function.

Proof of lemma 5

el(l = 0, 1, ⋯, 7) ∈ ℂ is equivalent to the module |el| of el is finite.

Only one example is given here. For instance, the module |e0| is finite due to

|e0|=0η(x)f7(x)dx0η(x)0xeτxz+λ1+λ2+λ3+μ3(s)dsq7(τ)dτdx00xe0τη(s)dsq7(τ)dτde0xη(s)ds=0q7(x)dx<,

in which the same techniques of the above lemma are used.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the referees for their helpful suggestions and comments. This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.11201037).

References

[1] Song S B, Deng Y L. Reliability analysis of a three-unit system in a changing environment. Microelectronics Reliability, 1993, 33: 637–640.10.1016/0026-2714(93)90269-5Suche in Google Scholar

[2] Li W, Alfa A S, Zhao Y Q. Stochastic analysis of a repairable system with three units and two repair facilities. Microelectronics Reliability, 1998, 38: 585–595.10.1016/S0026-2714(97)00204-7Suche in Google Scholar

[3] Kovalenko A I. Analysis of the reliability of a three-component system with renewal. Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 2001, 103: 273–277.10.1023/A:1026679321177Suche in Google Scholar

[4] Hu L M, Yue D Q, Tian R L. Reliability analysis of a three-unit system with $n$ failure modes and priority. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 2009, 5: 253–258.Suche in Google Scholar

[5] Guo L N, Xu H, Gao C, et al. Stability analysis of a new kind $N$-units series repairable system. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2011, 35(1): 202–217.10.1016/j.apm.2010.05.018Suche in Google Scholar

[6] Su B H, Shi D H. Reliability analysis of $n$-unit series systems with multiple vacations of a repairman. Mathematical Statistics and Applied Probability, 1995, 10: 78–82.Suche in Google Scholar

[7] Hu L M, Tian R L, Wu J B, et al. Reliability analysis of serie-parallel repairable system consisting of three-unit with vacation. Journal of Yanshan University, 2007, 31: 299–303.Suche in Google Scholar

[8] Hu L M, Li J D. Reliability analysis of a three-unit system with vacation and priority. ICIC Express Letters, 2009, 3: 171–176.Suche in Google Scholar

[9] Hu L M, Yue D Q, Li J D. Probabilistic analysis of a series-parallel repairable system with three units and vacation. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2010, 34: 2711–2721.10.1016/j.apm.2009.12.007Suche in Google Scholar

[10] Gupur G, Li X Z. Semigroup method for a mathematical model in reliability analysis. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2001, 10: 137–147.Suche in Google Scholar

[11] Hu W W, Shen Z F, Xin Y H, et al. Exponential stability of a repairable system with imperfect switching mechanism. Asymptotic Analysis, 2007, 54: 93–102.Suche in Google Scholar

[12] Shen Z F, Hu X X, Fan W F, et al. Exponential asymptotic property of a parallel repairable system with warm standby under common-cause failure. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 2008, 341: 457–466.10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.10.016Suche in Google Scholar

[13] Wang W L, Xu G Q. Stability analysis of a complex standby system with constant waiting and different repairman criteria incorporating environmental failure. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2009, 33: 724–743.10.1016/j.apm.2007.12.008Suche in Google Scholar

[14] Zheng F, Zhu G T, Gao C. Well-posedness and stability of the repairable system with $N$ failure modes and one standby unit. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 2011, 375: 174–184.10.1016/j.jmaa.2010.08.063Suche in Google Scholar

[15] Zheng F, Zhu G T. The Exponential stability of a repairable system with checking time. Advance in Mathematics, 2010, 39(5): 568–576.Suche in Google Scholar

[16] Ma L X, Xu G Q. Analysis of a deteriorating cold standby system with priority. WSEAS Transactions on Mathematics, 2011, 10(2): 84–94.Suche in Google Scholar

[17] Yuan W Z, Xu G Q. Modelling of a deteriorating system with repair satisfying general distribution. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2012, 218(11): 6340–6350.10.1016/j.amc.2011.12.002Suche in Google Scholar

[18] Wang H X, Xu G Q. A cold system with two different components and a single vacation of the repairman. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2012, 219(5): 2634–2657.10.1016/j.amc.2012.08.097Suche in Google Scholar

[19] Guo L N, Xu H B, Gao C, et al. Stability analysis of a new kind series system. IMA Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2010, 75: 439–460.10.1093/imamat/hxq013Suche in Google Scholar

[20] Lyubich Y I, Phong V Q. Asymptotic stability of linear differential equations in Banach spaces. Studia Mathematica, 1988, 88: 37–42.10.4064/sm-88-1-37-42Suche in Google Scholar

[21] Meyer C D. Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra. Cambridge University Press, 2000.10.1137/1.9780898719512Suche in Google Scholar

[22] Gupur G, Li X Z, Zhu G T. Functional analysis method in queueing theory. Hertfordshire, Research Information Ltd: United Kingdom, 2001.Suche in Google Scholar

[23] Nager R. One-parameter semigroup of positive operators. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1986.Suche in Google Scholar

[24] Schaefer H H. Babach lattice and positive operator. Springer-Verlag, 1974.10.1007/978-3-642-65970-6Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Engel K J, Nagel R. A short course on operator semigroups. Springer, 2006.Suche in Google Scholar

[26] Radle R. Semigroups applied to transport and queueing processes. Doctoral Dissertatian of Tubingen University, 2006.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2013-11-11
Accepted: 2014-1-3
Published Online: 2014-2-25

© 2014 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 20.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/JSSI-2014-0054/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen