Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Marks
Report
Mid Term
Final Exam
30%
30%
40%
Mar 28
Feb 28
Apr 4
Report Format
1.
2.
3.
4.
Title
Summary, it is not an introduction to the report. What is the main highlight of the
document? What is contained in the report?
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Course Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
History of Reliability
EMP5103 Lecture 1
History of Safety
Pling, the Elder (AD 23-79) - Historia Naturalis wearing of protective masks by workers to
stop the inhalation of toxic substances
Miners Safety Lamp-Humphrey Davy-18th century
American Public Health Association1885 - Occupational Health and Safety
1st Text book-Industrial Safety by H.W. Heinrich1931
Publications
Reliability Publications
Safety Publications
Design Reliability
Design specification (MTBF-mean time between failure ,MTTR-mean time to repair, Etc)
Reliability allocation
2000 hrs
1000 hrs
1000 hrs
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Reliability demonstration takes place at customer facility, performed at the system level
and is typically set up as a success test
Reliability warranty determine what percentage of the failure population can be covered
financially and estimating the time at which this portion of the population will fail
Failure data feedback citing the causes/reasons for failure occurrences
Reliability general
Mechanical reliability
Software reliability
Human reliability
Reliability optimization
Reliability growth modeling (see graph above)
Power system reliability
Life cycle costing (LCC)
LCC = AC + OC
with AC = Acquisition Cost and OC = Ownership Cost
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Mathematics
Probability Properties:
0 P( X ) 1
P( X 1 X 2 X 3 ... X n ) P ( X 1 ) P ( X 2 ) ... P ( X n ) (mutually exclusive events)
i 1
If n 2 : P ( X 1 X 2 ) P( X 1 ) P ( X 2 ) P( X 1 ) P( X 2 ) (independent events)
P(S ) 1
S = sample space
P( S ) 0
F (t )
f ( x ) dx
f(t):
F(t):
dF (t )
dt
Total Area:
F () 1
Reliability:
R F 1
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R (t ) 1 F (t ) 1 f ( x )dx f ( x) dx
t
f ( x)dx f ( x)dx 1
f ( x) dx 1 f ( x )dx
0
Hazard rate:
(t )
f (t )
f (t )
R (t ) 1 F (t )
F (t ) ( )e t dt 1 e t
(t)
R (t ) 1 F (t ) e t
(t )
f (t ) e t
t
R (t )
e
Example:
0.002 failures/year
If t 10
F (t ) 1 e t 1 e 0.002*10 0.0198
R (t ) e 0.002*10 0.9802
Weibull Distribution:
f (t )
(t )b1e
b
(t )
for t
6
=0
=1
EMP5103 Lecture 1
F (t ) 1 e
(t )
b = 1: exponential distribution
b = 2: Reyleigh distribution
b
f (t )
(t )
R (t )
(t ) b 1 e
b 2; (t )
(t ) b 1
(t)
t b 1
b 1; (t )
b
(t )
For = 0:
b
(t )
(t )
b=1
1
t
t
(t)
EMP5103 Lecture 1
(t)
Burn-in period
t
(t ) kct c1 (1 k )bt b1 e t
tf (t )dt
0
MTTF
R(t )dt
0
MTTF lim R ( s )
s 0
Exponential Distribution:
EMP5103 Lecture 1
f (t ) e t
E (t ) MTTF te t dt
0
F (t ) 1 e
R (t ) e t
MTTF e t dt
0
1
R( s)
s
MTTF lim
s 0
1
1
Product failure
related data
General data
(product related)
9
EMP5103 Lecture 1
General Data:
o Serial number and identification of model
o Starting date of the warranty
o Date of production
o Name of the producing plant
Product Failure Related Data:
o Failed part
o Failure: date, type, and severity
o Cost of repair
o Warranty coverage type
o Age of the product at failure
o Etc
Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP)
Typical Deficiencies in Failure Data Sources:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
10
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Example:
Failure rate evaluation of an electronic component
ea
b C exp
kt
b: base failure rate
t: Absolute temperature
k: Boltzmanns constant
ea: activation energy
C: constant
b Fq Fe ...
Fq: the factor which takes into consideration the part quality level
Fe: the factor which takes into consideration the influence of environment
c Constant failure rate
Example:
Tunnel diode
c b Fe Fq failures/106 hours
Fq (quality level - Jan) = 5
note Jan is the unit
Fe (environment ground, Benign) = 1
note Benign is the unit
b (base failure rate) = 0.044 failures/106 hours
c 0.044 1 5 0.22 failures/106 hours
Note: failure rate is exponentially distributed.
11
EMP5103 Lecture 1
t q j ( g Fq ) j
j 1
E1
E2
E3
Ek
P ( E1 E 2 E 3 ...E k ) P ( E1 ) P ( E 2 )...P ( E k )
Let : Ri P ( E i )
k
RS R1 R2 R3 ...Rk Ri
i 1
Example:
R1=0.8
R2=0.9
IFF Ri 0.95
k
RS 1 Fi
(non-identical units)
i 1
12
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Parallel Configuration:
E1
1
E1
2
E1
3
E1
Fp P ( E1 E 2 E3 ...E ) P ( E1 ) P ( E 2 ) P ( E3 )...P ( E )
Let : Fi P ( Ei )
Fp Fi
i 1
R p 1 Fi
i 1
Rp 1 F
Example:
A parallel system is composed of four independent and active units. The unvreliability of units
1,2,3 and 4 is 0.4, 0.3, 0.2 and 0.1 respectively. Calculate the system reliability.
13
EMP5103 Lecture 1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
1
0.95
Rp
=3
0.90
=2
0.85
=1
0.1
0.2
0.3
14
0.4
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1
0.90
Rp
=4
0.80
=2
0.70
=3
=1
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
F
K-out-of- -unit System:
15
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1 R i R i
i k i
Rk
where
!
i i!( i )!
n
(R
i 1
(identical units)
Fi ) 1
R F 3 R 3 3R 2 F 3RF 2 F 3 1
R2 R 3 3R 2 (1 R ).....F 1 R
3
=3
Parallel System
0.80
System
Reliability
0.60
2-ou-of-3 System
0.40
0.20
Series System
0.2
0.4
0.6
Unit Reliability
RS R 3 ( Series _ system)
R p 1 (1 R 3 )( Parallel _ system)
Rk R 2
( R F ) 3 R 3 3R 2 F 3RF 2 F 3
Stop here
16
0.8
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1
0.80
System
Reliability
0.60
R = 0.9
0.40
R = 0.7
0.20
R = 0.5
0
A parallel system is composed of three independent and active units. At least two units must be
functioning successfully for system success. The reliability of units 1, 2 and 3 is 0.8, 0.9 and 0.7
respectively. Calculate the systems reliability.
(R1 + F1)(R2 + F2)(R3 + F3) = 1
Ri: is the units reliability for i= 1, 2, 3
Fi: is the units unreliability for i= 1, 2, 3
R1 R2 R3 + R 1 R2 F 3 + R 1 R3 F 2 + R 2 R3 F 1 + R 1 F 2 F 3 + R 2 F 1 F 3 + R 3 F 1 F 2 + F 1 F 2 F 3 = 1
R2/3 = R1 R2 R3 + R1 R2 F3 + R1 R3 F2 + R2 R3 F1 = R1 R2 R3 + R1 R2 (1-R3) + R1 R3 (1-R2) + R2 R3 (1R1) = 0.8*0.9*0.7+0.8*0.7*(1-0.9)+..
Series-Parallel configuration:
17
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R pj 1 F ji
i 1
j 1
j 1
i 1
Rsp R pj (1 F ji )
Rsp 1 F r
Example:
A system is composed of two independent, identical and active subsystems. Each subsystem consists
of two identical units in parallel. The units failure probability is 0.2. calculate the systems
reliability.
F = 0.2 and r = 2 and k = 2
R sp 1 F r
1 0. 2 2
0.9216
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
18
EMP5103 Lecture 1
r=3
F = 0.1
r=2
0.80
0.60
Rsp
r=3
0.40
0.20
r=2
F = 0.5
r=1
k
1
Rsj R ji
i 1
r
r
k
R ps 1 1 Rsj 1 1 R ji
j 1
j 1
i 1
19
EMP5103 Lecture 1
k = r = 2, F = 0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
R ps 1 1 R k 1 1 0.8 2 0.8704 R ps 1 1 R k
r
r=3
R = 0.9
r=2
0.80
Rps
r=1
0.60
r=3
0.40
0.20
r=2
R = 0.5
r=1
t
( x ) dx
R t e 0
F (t )
f (t )
1 dR (t )
(t )
R (t )
R (t ) dt
t
f (t ) dt
dF (t )
f (t )
dt
R (t ) F (t ) 1
R (t ) 1 F (t )
At t=0; R(0) = 1
20
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R (t )
1
dR (t )
R (t )
(t )dt
0
(t ) ln R (t )
0
R (t ) e
( t ) dt
0
Example:
(t )
t
R(t ) e
dt
0
e t
MTTF R (t )dt
0
MTTF lim R ( s)
s 0
MTTF lim R (t ) dt
t
0
Where __ f (t ) R (t ) dt
0
Laplace _ transform :
lim f (t ) lim s f ( s )
t
s 0
R(s)
s
Then, _ MTTF lim R ( s )
but , _ f ( s )
s 0
Example:
21
EMP5103 Lecture 1
(t )
k (t k 1 )
where :
k : shape _ parameter
: scale _ parameter
t : time
t
R (t ) e
( t ) dt
0
MTTF
1
tk
kt
dt
1
tk
dt
k 1
1 t
e dt
Example:
k 1
where :
Series configuration:
1
1
For
1
2
1
3
1
k
,
k
Rs (t ) R (t ) e
i 1
1
t
i
as we have:
i 1
MTTFs Rs (t ) dt
e
i 1
1
t
i
R (t ) e
dt e
i 1
i t
( t ) dt
dt
22
1
1
i 1 i
k
1 dt
0
1
t
1
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1
1
t for ( t ) 0.05
i 1 i
i
Hazard rate:
f (t )
1 dRs (t )
s (t ) s
Rs (t )
Rs (t ) dt
1
let : i
i
k
Rs (t ) 1
s (t )
i
i 1
it
(e
it
i 1
i 1
s i
i 1
1
k
R (t ) e
1
t
i
i 1
1
1
t 0.05
t : true _ for :
i 1 i
i
k
Rs (t ) 1
j (t ) j j t
23
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R (t ) e
( t ) dt
0
R j (t ) e
j t 1
jt
1
Rs (t ) e
j t 1
jt
1
i 1
Rs (t ) exp
k
1
t
j
k
j 1
jt
1
j 1
tot 1
Rs (t ) exp
1 tot tot
let :
tot i
j 1
k
tot i
j 1
ttot : gamma
it
j 1
Mean Time To Failure for Various Simple Unit and Series Systems:
System Structure
MTTF
1
Z(t)=
2k
Z(t)=kf
1
1
1
k m 1
(m 1)
m 1
m 1
Z(t)=kfm
1
n
Z1=1
Z2=2
Z3=3
11
24
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Z1 k1t
Z 2 k 2t
Z n knt
m
R p (t ) 1 Fi (t )
i 1
i 1
for : i t 0.05 :
R p (t ) 1 i t
i 1
R p (t ) 1 1 e t
m 1
R p (t ) 1 1 e i t
ki
( m 1) 11
m
1
m 1
Parallel Network:
Ri (t ) e i t
t = 100 hours
25
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1
0.80
Rp(t)
0.60
0.40
=4
=3
=2
0.20
=1
0.5
1.5
2.5
R p (t ) 2e t e 2t
0.80
R (t ) e t
0.60
Reliability
0.40
Rs (t ) 2e t
0.20
0.5
1.5
t
R(t )dt
0
26
2.5
EMP5103 Lecture 1
2 t
R p (t ) 1 1 e 1t 1 e
R p (t ) e 1t e 2 t e (1 2 )t
MTTF p
1t
e 2 t e (1 2 )t dt
e 1t e 2 t e 1 2 t
1 2
2
1
1
1
1
1 2 1 2
k1tm
k2tm
m
1
1
1
1
m 1 m 1 1 1
1
m 1
k1 m 1 k 2 m 1 k1 k 2 m 1
MTTF
( ) t 1e t dt
0
Reliability and MTTF Functions for Various Active Configurations for Exponentially
Distributed Failure Times Identical Components:
Reliability Configuration
27
EMP5103 Lecture 1
MTTF
MTTF
1 m 1
i 1 i
1
n
28
MTTF
1 n
n
1
(1) j 1
j 1
j i 1 i
jm
EMP5103 Lecture 1
MTTF
11
12
MTTF
m
1
k _ out _ of _ m
MTTF
29
1 m 1
1 k i
1 m 1
n i 1 i
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R(t ) e t
R p (t ) 1 1 e t
0.80
R 2 (t ) 3e 2t 2e 3t
3
0.60
Reliability
0.40
Rs (t ) e 3t
0.20
0.5
1.5
2.5
t
Standby System:
1
Assumptions:
19. switch perfect
20. standby units remain as good as new
21. unit failures are independent
22. identical units
Rs (t ) e t
MTTF
k 1
( t ) t
j!
j 0
Rs (t )dt
0
30
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Situation
1 unit of 2 must
be working for
success
1 unit of 3 must
be working for
success
1 unit of 4 must
be working for
success
1 unit of n must
be working for
success
2 units of 3 must
be working for
success
3 units of 4 must
be working for
success
(n-1) units of n
must be working
for success
(n-2) units of n
must be working
for success
n
Formula R(t)
Approximation R(t)
2 e t e 2 t
1 t 2
3e t 3e 2t e 3t
1 t 3
4e t 6e 2t 4e 3t e 4t
1 t 4
n t
e
1 1
1 t n
3e 2t 2e 3t
1 3 t 2
4e 3t 3e 4t
1 6 t 2
n
t 2
2
ne ( n 1)t (n 1)e nt
n ( n 2 ) t
n 1 n t
e
e
(2n n 2 )e ( n 1)t
2
2
n
t 3
3
n!
Note:
( n i )!i!
i
Standby Systems:
Situation
1 unit of 2
must
be
working
for
success
1 unit of n
must
be
working
for
success
Formula R(t)
e t te t
e t te t
1
t 2 e t ... 1 t n 1 e t
2
(n 1)!
Approximation
R(t)
1
t 2
2
t n
n!
EMP5103 Lecture 1
inputs
The AND gate denotes that an output event occurs if and only if all the input events occur.
- OR Gate:
output
inputs
The OR gate denotes that an output event occurs if any one or more of the input events occur.
- Resultant event:
A rectangle denotes an event which results from the combination of fault events through the input of
a logic gate.
- Basic fault event:
32
EMP5103 Lecture 1
A circle represents a basic fault event or the failure of an elementary component. The failure
parameters such as unavailability probability, failure and repair rates of a fault event are obtained
from the empirical data or other sources.
Example:
Build the constant a fault tree of a simple system concerning a room containing a switch and a light
bulb. Assume the switch only fails to close. In addition, the top event is dark room.
Switch fails
to close
Dark Room
Power off
Power
failure
Bulb burnt
out
Fuse failure
P ( A B ) P ( A) P ( B ) P ( A) P ( B )
n
P ( X 1 X 2 X 3 ... X n ) 1 1 P ( X i )
i 1
P ( X 1 X 2 X 3 ... X n )
P( X i )
i 1
output
inputs
P ( A.B ) P ( A) P ( B )
Example:
33
EMP5103 Lecture 1
A
1
6
D
7
4
B
8
C
E
F
0.1421
0.1296
0.36
0.0144
0.36
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
34
0.2
0.2
0.36
0.2
0.2
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R S 1 1 R n
1 R n
(1 RS )
n ln(1 R ) ln(1 RS )
n
ln(1 R S )
ln(1 R )
Example:
RS=0.98
RS=0.85
ln(1 0.98)
2units
ln(0.85)
RS 1 (1 0.85) 2 0.9775
35
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R 2 3R 2 2 R 3
3
R F 3
R 3 3R 2 F 3RF 2 F 3 R 3 3R 2 F R 3 3R 2 (1 R) ...
RSimplex R
R 2 RSimplex
3
3R 2 2 R 3 R
3R 2 R 2 1
2 R 2 3R 1 0
b b 2 4ac
2a
R1, 2 1or1 / 2
R1, 2
R (t ) e t
1 / 2 e t
t 0.693
36
EMP5103 Lecture 1
RSimplex (t ) e t
1
Reliability
0.80
R 2 (t )
3
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.20
t=0.693 (mission time)
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
37
EMP5103 Lecture 1
n!q 1
( n q )
(n q 1)! q
1
MTTFk n
MTTFk
n
for : 0 :
( n q )
n
1
i
inq
24. Two active on-line units with different failure repair rates. One out of two is required for
success:
A
A,A
B,B
A B
12 A B A B
A B A B A B
38
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Unit A down
Unit B up
A
Both Up
Both down
B
B
Unit B down
Unit A up
A B 0
A2B AB
A 2 B 2 AB
12
Example:
A system has five active units, each with a failure rate of 220 failures/10 6 hours and only three are
required for successful operation. If one unit fails, it takes an average of three hours to repair it to an
active state. What is the effective failure rate of this configuration?
n5
q 53 2
35
5! 220 10 6
5 2 1! 13 2
Example:
A ground radar system has 2-level-weather-channel with failure rate of 50 failures/10 6 hours and a 6level-weather-channel with a failure rate of 180 failures/10 6 hours. Although the 6 level weather
channel provides more comprehensive coverage, the operation of either channel will result in
acceptable system operation. What is effective failure rate of the two-level-weather-channel if one of
two is required and mean time to repair is 1 hour?
A 50 10 6
B 180 10 6
A B 1
12
50 10 6 180 10 6 1 1 50 10 6 180 10 6
1 1 1 1 50 10 6 180 10 6
39
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Example:
Determine the effective failure rate for 8 of 10 identical units required with no repair. The failure rate
of a single unit is 60 failures / 106 hours.
n 10
q2
60 10 6
(10 2 )
10
60 10 6
10
1i
i 10 2
8units :
60 f / 10 6 hours
( failure _ rate 480 failures / 10 6 hours )
That means that by adding 2 (from 8 to 10) more units the failure rate will drop from 480 to 179
failures / 106 hours.
3. Reliability Testing.
Reliability tests can be divided into three categories:
1. Reliability Development and Demonstration Testing
2. Qualification and Acceptance Testing
3. Operational Testing
Standard used: MIL-STD-471
3.3.Operational Testing
Operational Testing:
40
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Bartlett Test:
Bartlett statistic is defined as:
k
2
12k
7k 1
ln X
S bk
1 k
ti
k i 1
k
Y ln t i
i 1
where t i is the ith time to failure and k is the total number of failures in the sample.
A sample of at least 20 failures is necessary for the test to discriminate effectively. If the failure
times are exponentially distributed, then S bk is distributed as chi-square with k 1 degrees
of freedom. Thus, a two-tailed chi-square approach is utilized.
S bk
lower
limit
upper
limit
Example:
A sample of 20 failure times (in days) of an air traffic control system is given in Table 1.
Determine with the aid of the Bartlett test that the Table 1 data are representative of an
exponential distribution with 90% confidence.
7
8
35
46
85
86
41
142
186
EMP5103 Lecture 1
20
19
34
45
63
64
111
112
141
Table 1
185
266
267
1
7 8 20 19 ... 267 96.10
20
20
Y ln t k 82.8311
k 1
82.8311
20
14.43
(7)(20) 1
ln(96.10)
S bk (12)(20) 2
Upper Limit:
Lower Limit:
2 1 , ( k 1)
2
0.1
2
Upper limit:
Lower limit: 1
2
0.1
, ( 20 1) 10.12 (from Table 12.4 in handout #1)
2
The above result exhibits that there is no contradiction to the assumption of exponential
distribution because S bk falls in between the upper limit and the lower limit.
Confidence Limits for Mean Time Between Failures:
2 p, fd
p : the quantity which is the function of the confidence coefficient
fd : degrees of freedom
f : the accumulated number of failures at time t* , where t* denotes the life test termination
f * : the number of failures which were preassigned
42
EMP5103 Lecture 1
To estimate confidence intervals, there are two cases to consider: (1) the test is terminated at a
specified time,
, 2 f 2
2
lower
limit
2
p
1 ,2 f
2
upper
limit
2
2
,
p
2 p
2
,2 f 1 ,2 f
2
2
lower
limit
f *:
upper
limit
The type of test determines the value of , for example, when a failure (failed units) is
replaced or repaired (replacement test) the value of is given by:
mt *
Similarly, for the non-replacement test, the value of gamma is given by:
f
Example:
Fifteen components were put on test at time t=0, and testing was terminated when the 8 th
failure occurred. That failure (8th) was observed at the 100th hour of testing. Calculate the
components mean time between failures and mean life upper and lower confidence limits with
90% confidence level.
Failed repaired back to its as good as new state:
2 f (2)(8) 16
43
EMP5103 Lecture 1
2
(2)(1500)
3000
2
376.9 hours
0.95,16 7.96
p
Upper limit:
(from handout #1)
2
1 ,2 f
2
2
(2)(1500)
3000
2
Lower limit:
(from handout #1)
2 p
,2 f
2
Example:
Twenty-five components were put on a test at time t=0. It was a non-replacement test and was
terminated after 90 hours. During the period, five components failed at 20, 40, 30, 70, and 80
hours of operation respectively. Calculate the components mean time between failures and
mean life upper and lower confidence units with 95% confidence level.
2
Lower limit:
Upper limit:
, 2 f 2
2
(2)( 2040)
4080
174.81 hours
23.34
(handout 1)
2 0.05
,12
2
p
1 ,2 f
2
2
(2)(2040)
4080
1255.39 hours
3.25
0.05
(handout 1)
1
,10
2
Economics of Testing:
Cost of Testing:
CT P
NL
n
Cost of Not-Testing:
C NT NR P I C R P W C R
44
EMP5103 Lecture 1
R P I C R PW C R
Ln
Source
Design and Development
Quality of Components
Quality of Workmanship
(t )
infant
mortality
failures
random
failures
wear-out
failures
t
45
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Overstressed components
Etc
Material wear
Aging
Limited-life components
Inadequate or improper preventive maintenance
Etc
Probability
0.975
0.001
0.05
0.95
0.004
0.1
0.05
3.84
5.99
46
0.025
5.02
7.38
EMP5103 Lecture 1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
0.35
0.71
1.15
1.64
2.17
2.73
3.33
3.94
4.58
5.23
5.89
6.57
7.26
7.96
8.67
9.39
10.12
10.85
13.85
7.82
9.49
11.07
12.59
14.07
15.51
16.92
18.31
19.68
21.92
22.36
23.69
25.00
26.30
27.59
28.87
30.14
31.41
36.42
9.35
11.14
12.83
14.45
16.01
17.54
19.02
20.48
21.92
23.34
24.74
26.12
27.49
28.85
30.19
31.53
32.85
34.17
39.36
Probability
0.975
0.05
0.48
1.24
2.18
3.25
4.40
5.63
6.91
8.23
9.59
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.95
0.10
0.71
1.64
2.73
3.94
5.23
6.57
7.96
9.39
10.85
0.90
0.21
1.06
2.20
3.49
4.87
6.30
7.79
9.31
10.87
12.44
0.05
5.99
9.45
12.59
15.51
18.31
21.03
23.69
26.30
28.87
31.41
0.025
7.38
11.14
14.45
17.53
20.48
23.34
26.12
28.85
31.53
34.17
0.01
9.21
13.28
16.81
20.09
23.21
26.22
29.14
32.00
34.81
37.57
47
EMP5103 Lecture 1
48
EMP5103 Lecture 1
38. Etc
Reliability Cost Categories:
Reliability cost = PC+ AC + IFC + EFC
PC: Prevention Cost
AC: Appraisal Cost
IFC: Internal Failure Cost
EFC: External Failure Cost
Prevention Cost:
39. Redundancy
40. Parts
41. Hourly cost and overhead rates for design engineers, reliability engineers, etc
Appraisal Cost:
42. Hourly cost and overhead rates for evaluation, reliability qualification, reliability
demonstration, life-testing, etc
43. Vendor assurance cost for new component qualification, inspection, etc
44. Etc
Internal Failure Cost:
45. Hourly cost and overhead rates for troubleshooting and repair, retesting, failure analysis,
etc
46. Replaced parts cost.
47. Spare parts inventory.
48. Etc
External Failure Cost:
49. Cost to failure or repair.
50. Replaced parts cost.
51. Cost of failure analysis.
52. Warranty administration and reporting cost.
53. Liability insurance.
54. Etc
Reliability Program Cost Estimation:
RAM (Reliability and Maintainability) Program Plan (in man hours):
= 2.73 (NOT)2
Where NOT = number of MIL-STD-785 tasks required.
Min 4
Max 22
Reliability Modeling and Allocation:
= 4.05 (MAC)2(NOV)
Where:
MAC: Modelling and Allocation Complexity
Series system = 1
Simple redundancy = 2
Very complex redundancy = 3
NOV: Number of items in allocation process
49
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Min 7
Max 445
Reliability Prediction:
= 4.54(LOD)2(RF)2(POC)
Where:
LOD: Level of detail
1 Prediction exists
2 Prediction made using similar system data
3 Full MIL- HDBK-217 stress prediction
RF: Report formality
1 Internal report
2 Formal report
POC: Percentage Commercial, Hardware used
4 025%
3 2650%
2 5175%
1 76100%
FMEA (Failure Modes and Effect Analysis):
= 17.79(NOI)
Where:
NOI: number of equipment for equipment level FMEA
NOI min 3 max 206
Reliability Testing:
= 182.07(HC)
Where:
HC: Hardware complexity
1 if < 15000 parts
2 if between 15000 and 25000 parts
3 if > 25000
8. Safety Management
In year 2000, in the USA:
55. 5,200 deaths
56. 2.9 million disabling injuries
57. It costs 131 billion dollars to the nation
History:
58. Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD): grinding wear masks
59. 1893 in the USA: Rail Safety Act
60. 1938 in the USA: Food, Drugs and Cosmetic Act
61. 1970: Occupational Safety and Health Act
62. Nuclear regulatory commission
63. Consumer product safety
64. Commission
65. National Transportation Safety Board
66. Federal Aviation Agency (FAA)
67. Etc
50
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Safety Periodicals:
68. Journal of Occupational Accident
69. Professional Safety
70. Concern
71. Journal of Safety Research
72. Protection
73. National Safety News
74. Nuclear Safety
75. Accident Prevention
76. Accident Facts
77. Safety Management Journal
78. Etc
Selective Texts on Safety:
1. Heinrich, H.W., Industrial Accident Prevention, McGraw Hill, New York, 1831
2. Handley, Industrial Safety Handbook, McGraw Hill, New York, 1969
3. Gloss, D.S, Introduction to Safety Engineering, Wiley, New York, 1994
4. Hammer, W., Product Safety and Engineering, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1980
5. Dhillon, B.S, Safety Assessment, A Quantitative Approach, Lewis Publish, New York.
1994
Safety-Related Data Sources:
79. Government Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP), Fleet Missile Systems Analysis,
and Evaluation Group, U.S. Navy, Corona, California.
80. International Occupational Safety and Health Information Center, Bureau International
du Travail, Geneva, Switzerland.
81. Loss Management Information System (LOMIS), Gulf Canada 800 Bay Street, Toronto.
Factors for Developing Safety Requirements:
82. Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations.
83. Environmental Protection Agency regulations.
84. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations.
85. Company safety policy with respect to plant and administrative procedures.
86. State and local government requirements.
87. Etc
Safety-Related Activities for the top management:
88. Safety training.
89. Safety Inspections.
90. Safety problem diagnosis ns solutions.
91. Accident investigations.
92. Employee participation in safety programs.
Safety Engineers Responsibilities:
93. Accident prevention and analysis.
94. Management of safety training.
95. Acting as a consultant to management on safety-related matters.
96. Design layout of equipment with respect to safety.
97. Study human factors (ergonomics) with respect to safety.
98. Focus on the interface between the workplace and environment.
99. Keep abreast of new literature on safety.
100.
Etc
51
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Operator fails
to wear safety
glasses
Machine
operating
People in the
area (motive to
go into area by
non operator)
Safety glasses
not worn
52
Operator
fails to
stop
oeration
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Person enters
to bring item
to the area
Person enters
to carry away
items
0.08012
0.00012
0.08
0.1
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.1
0.2
0.03
DIFR
NDI (100000)
EHE
DISR
D(100000)
EHE
53
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Automobile (36%)
Electric machinery (30%)
Plastic molding products (10%)
Metal working
Steel making
54
EMP5103 Lecture 1
136.
137.
138.
139.
USA:
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
In 1990, the
Textile
Chemical
Ship building
Etc
Assembly (35 40%)
Arc welding (15 20 % )
Material handling (30 35%)
Paint spraying (5%)
Spot welding (3 5%)
Other areas (7 10%)
US had about 100,000 robots
55
EMP5103 Lecture 1
163.
164.
U.K. Accidents:
165.
2623 robots
166.
Survey 37 robot systems different designs
167.
Approximately 22,000 robot production hours.
168.
73 accident occurrence
169.
1 led to human injury
170.
57 damage to machinery
171.
15 no damage accidents
172.
Approximately 25% of system production time lost due to accidents.
U.S.A. Accidents:
- 13,000 robots (1984).
- 1 death
- General Motors Corporation (used robots over 23 year)
- One serious injury.
- One minor injury.
U.S.A. Canada Accidents:
- 17 accidents:
o 1 death.
o 3 serious injuries.
o 5 minor injuries.
o 8 mal-functions.
Causes of Robot Accidents:
- Japanese study-causes of 18 near accidents.
- Incorrect action by the robot during manual operation.
- Incorrect movement of peripheral equipment during teaching or testing.
- Erroneous movement of the robot during teaching or testing.
- Sudden entry of the human to the robot area.
- Incorrect movement of peripheral equipment during normal operation.
- Etc
Possible Sources of Robot Accidents:
- Engineering Factors:
o Control panel failure
o Robot arms high speed (the speed is the factor)
o Poor software design
o Poor control panel design
o Etc
- Usability (user-friendliness) Engineering Factors.
- Organizational factors:
o Inadequate robot training programs-repairman, operators, programmers, etc
o Incorrect procedures for initial robots start-up.
o Operator carrying robot adjustments (they know how to operate but not how to
maintain).
o Etc
56
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Some
-
Robot Reliability:
- Expected life: 40,000 hours.
- MTBF at least 400 hours.
- MTTR of 8 hours or less.
- Maximum MTBF: 2500 hours
- Cost of maintenance: approximately 11% of the procurement cost
- Availability: 0.98 (98%) (for power station 0.9999)
Publications:
1. Engelberger, J.F., Three Million Hours of Robot Field Experience, The Industrial Robot,
1974, pp. 164-168.
2. Pollard, B.W., RAM for Robots: Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability, Robotics Today,
1981, pp. 209-220.
3. Bonney, M.C., Yong, Y.F., Editors. Robot Safety, Springer, New York, 1985.
4. Dhillon, B., Survey On Robot Reliability and Safety, Microelectronics and Reliability, Vol.
27, 1987, pp.105-118.
5. Dhillon, 1991 (publications).
Rr ( s )
Rr (t )dt slim
0
MMTFR
0
t
Rr (t ) e
r (t ) dt
MTTFR
PHR DTDTRF
NRF
where :
PHR is the production hours of the robot.
DTDTRF is the downtime due to robot failure expressed in hours.
NRF is the number of robot failures.
Example:
PHR=15,500 hours, DTDRF=200 hours, and NRF=10
MTTFR = (15500-200)/10 = 1530 hours
Mean Time to Robot-Related Problems:
57
EMP5103 Lecture 1
MTRP
PHR DTDTRP
NRP
Rr (t ) e
r (t ) dt
0
r (t ) r
t
Rr (t ) e
r (t ) dt
0
e r t
p
Robot down
for preventive
Robot
Operating
maintenance
Robot Failed
58
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Po (t t ) Po (t ) ( f p ) Po (t )t P f (t ) f t Pp (t ) p t
P (t t ) Po (t )
lim o
( f p ) Po (t ) P f (t ) f Pp (t ) p
t
t 0
dPo (t )
( f p ) Po (t ) P f (t ) f Pp (t ) p
dt
dPp (t )
dt
dP f (t )
p Pp (t ) Po (t ) p
f P f (t ) Po (t ) f
dt
At _ time _ t 0, Po (0) 1, Pp (0) P f (0) 0
Laplace _ transform :
p( s)
st
p (t ) dt
p (t )
e
at
dp (t )
dt
p (s )
1
sa
sp ( s ) p (0)
f (t ) lim sf ( s )
Final value Theorem: tlim
0
s 0
sPo ( s) Po ( s) ( f p ) Po ( s) Pp ( s ) p P f ( s ) f
sPo ( s) 1 ( f p ) Po ( s ) Pp ( s) p P f ( s ) f
Po ( s)
( s f )( s p )
s s 2 s( f p p f ) f p p f f p
A s 2 s( f p p f ) f p p f f p
f (s p )
Pp ( s )
sA
p (s f )
Pf (s)
sA
f p
Ass Po lim sPo ( s )
f p p f f p
s 0
B f p p f f p
Pf
Pf
f p
B
p f
B
59
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Po (t )
Pp (t )
P f (t )
f p
k1k 2
p f
k1k 2
f p
k1k 2
k
)
k
(
k
k
)
1
1
2
2
1
2
p k1 p f k t f k 2 k t
e 1
e 2
k
(
k
k
)
k
(
k
k
)
1 1 2
2 1 2
f k1 f p k t f k 2 k t
e 1
e 2
k
(
k
k
)
k
(
k
k
)
1 1 2
2 1 2
( p f f p ) ( f p p f ) 2 4( f p p f f p )
k1 , k 2
2
Maximizing Income of a Robot System Subject to Failure and Repair:
Robot Up
0
Robot Down
1
dP0 (t )
P0 (t ) P1 (t )
dt
dP1 (t )
P1 (t ) P0 (t )
dt
At _ time _ t 0, P0 (0) 1, P1 (0) 0
e ( )t availability
U (t ) P1 (t )
e ( )t unavailability
A(t ) P0 (t )
60
EMP5103 Lecture 1
A(t)
0
t
Ass
1
MTTR
1
1
MTTF MTTR
MTTF
uptime
MC k
k
MTTR
where:
k is the robot system maintenance cost (constant) depending on the nature of the robot
system.
The expected periodic income from the robot system output:
EI I AV
where:
I is the periodic income from the robot system output, if the robot system worked full time.
MTTF
MTTF MTTR
EI I r AV I r
61
EMP5103 Lecture 1
NI EI MC
I r MTTF
k
NI
0
2
dMTTR
MTTF MTTR MTTR 2
MTTF
MTTR*
1/ 2
I MTTF
1
62
EMP5103 Lecture 1
Quality Costs:
- Post delivery failure costs:
o Warranty charges
o Complain adjustment
o Returned material
o Etc
- Prevention costs:
o Quality planning
o Design review
o Supplier evaluation
o Process control
o Training
o Equipment calibration
o Etc
- Costs of internal failures:
o Repair and rework
o Scrap
o Re-inspection
o Downtime of facilities because of defects
o Etc
- Evaluation Costs:
o Incoming material inspection
o In process inspection
o Assembly inspection
o Review and recording data
o Auditing the quality system
o Etc
Indexes:
- Vendor Rating Program Index:
63
EMP5103 Lecture 1
QI
Cvq C p
Cp
a
100 100
b
: Quality _ Index
a : Quality _ cos t
b : The _ value _ of _ the _ output
In real life situation, a value of = 105 can readily be achieved.
= 110130: quality costs are ignored
- Determining Accuracy and waste of inspector:
Formula I:
100
where :
: the percent of defects correctly identified by the regular inspector.
: is the number of defects missed by the regular inspector as reveled by the check
inspector.
: is the number of defects discovered by the regular inspector.
: is the number of units without defects rejected by the regular inspector as revealed by
the check inspector.
Example:
A regular inspector inspected a number of units in a lot and found 60 defects. All units (i.e.:
good plus defective) of the lot were reexamined by the check inspector. Thus according to
the findings of the check inspector, the values of and were 10 and 15.
100 50100
76.92%
15 50 15
60 10 50
Formula II:
100
m
64
EMP5103 Lecture 1
99.7%
N
m
Where :
N: is the total number of defectives in classification
65
EMP5103 Lecture 1
1
m
Example: 8 samples were taken from a production line. Each sample consists of 40 mechanical
parts. After inspection, it was found that samples 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 contained 5, 6, 4, 2,
8, 10, 12, and 9 defectives respectively. Develop the p-chart.
The fraction of defectives in sample 1:
5
0.1250
40
Similarly, the fraction of defectives in samples 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are0.15, 0.10, 0.05, 0.20,
0.25, 0.30, and 0.225 respectively.
56
0.175
40 8
0.1751 0.175 2
0.06
40
UCL p 3 0.3552
1
0.40
UCLp=0.352
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
=0.175
0.15
0.10
0.05
0
Sample number
66