SRC Forum - Message Replies


Forum: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic Posted by: Reliability & Maintainability Forum (src_forum@alionscience.com )
Organization: System Reliability Center
Date Posted: Mon Aug 31 12:47:36 US/Eastern 1998

Back to message list Topics List About this forum
Original Message:

Posted by: IC
Date posted: Mon Mar 5 16:07:21 US/Eastern 2007
Subject: Reliability Apportionment
Message:
I am looking for information in relation to apportionment and the techniques used for calculating it. I have calculated the apportionment for a System with 6 sub-systems (Using the Equal Apportionment Technique from MIL-HDBK-338). NOW I am trying to calculate the apportionment for the sub systems with the new information that each sub system has now been "weighted" (i.e sub sys 1 will be responsible for 20% fo all system failures and Sub sys 2 47% etc etc). Can anybody tell me how I will calculate the new reliability apportionment based on the "weighted" factors or let me know of any techniques/equations that I can use.

Thanks for the help.


Reply:

Subject: Reliability Apportionment
Reply Posted by: John Cloarec
Date Posted: Tue Mar 6 6:26:38 US/Eastern 2007
Message:
The Equal Apportionment Technique is not very sophisticated, that's why you need another method for subsystem apportionment. In the same document MIL-HDBK-338 you can find a more sophisticated and useful method : Feasibility of Objectives Technique which use 4 parameters and a set of simple formulas. You have no limitation in the decomposition of your system. You can put your model in a excel file and redo the calculation any times you want to assess the impact of some changes in the value of each parameters. This method is interesting because there is a great analogy with reliability prediction as per MIL-HDBK-217. The only limitation is that the system configuration is assumed to be serial (no redundancy). I've conducted a survey for EdF in France. The papers I have are all in French ... What we found is that the best compromise for : - reliability allocation is the Feasibility of Objectives Technique method, - maintainability allocation is the method described by Arsenault & Roberts in R&M of Electronic System, Ed. Pitman. If you can read French, I can send you a scan of my papers. Regards. John


Reply:

Subject: Reliability Apportionment
Reply Posted by: IC
Date Posted: Tue Mar 6 6:27:43 US/Eastern 2007
Message:
Thanks John, Unfortunately I do not read or speak French. Also thanks for the info, however this techniques does not fit with what I am trying to do as I am only in the requirements definition phase of the project and am only trying to define a sub system reliability requirement based on the system requirement of 0.8. I have 6 subsystems and when using the Equal apportionment technique it gives a reliability of 0.9635, however based on experience I know that each subsystem effects the systems differently, hence the % weighted values (System 1-20%; Sys 2; 47%; Sys 3 8%; Sys 4 8%; sys 5 2%; Sys 6 15%)for system failure. I am just trying to define what the apportioned reliability should be. Is the calculation just a simple proportional calculation or is there some other method of calculating this high level number. Thanks and Regards


Reply:

Subject: Reliability apportionment with side constraints
Reply Posted by: Larry George
Date Posted: Tue Mar 6 6:28:47 US/Eastern 2007
Message:
95.68% 90.35% 98.05% 98.05% 99.58% 96.67% is the least squares solution that I get from a quick and dirty analysis. Check it. The product is 80%. Consider using the workbook linked to www.fieldreliability.com/RalloMan.htm with your side constraints. Alternatively, plug in the parts costs and system failure costs and see what solution cost-based allocation leads to.


Reply:

Subject: Allocations
Reply Posted by: BWD
Organization: System Reliability Center
Date Posted: Fri Mar 9 13:18:14 US/Eastern 2007
Message:
The three allocation techniques that most common are; Equal Allocation, AGREE Allocation, and Feasibility of Objectives Allocation. I believe that the feasibility technique is the best as it weights the design for intricacy, state of the art, operating time and environment.


Back to message list Topics List About this forum
Reply to this message