Crow Extended
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
In a previous chapter, we discussed the most widely used traditional reliability growth tracking model, Crow-AMSAA (NHPP). Using this model for reliability growth analysis assumes that the corrective actions for the observed failure modes are incorporated during the test (test-fix-test). However, in actual practice, fixes may be delayed until after the completion of the test (test-find-test) or some fixes may be implemented during the test while others are delayed (test-fix-find-test). At the end of a test phase, two reliability estimates are of concern: demonstrated reliability and projected reliability. The demonstrated reliability, which is based on data generated during the test phase, is an estimate of the system reliability for its configuration at the end of the test phase. The projected reliability measures the impact of the delayed fixes at the end of the current test phase.
Most of the reliability growth literature has been concerned with procedures and models for calculating the demonstrated reliability and very little attention has been paid to techniques for reliability projections. The procedure for making reliability projections utilizes engineering assessments of the effectiveness of the delayed fixes for each observed failure mode. These effectiveness factors are then used with the data generated during the test phase to obtain a projected estimate for the updated configuration by adjusting the number of failures observed during the test phase. The process of estimating the projected reliability is accomplished using the Crow Extended model. The Crow Extended model allows for a flexible growth strategy that can include corrective actions performed during the test, as well as delayed corrective actions. The test-find-test and test-fix-find-test scenarios are simply subsets of the Crow Extended model.
Background
When a system is tested and failure modes are observed, management can make one of two possible decisions, either to fix or not fix the failure mode. Therefore, the management strategy places failure modes into two categories: A modes and B modes. A modes are all failure modes such that when seen during the test no corrective action will be taken. This accounts for all modes for which management determines that it is not economically or otherwise justified to take a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC modes are corrected during the test and the corrective actions for BD modes are delayed until the end of the test. The management strategy is defined by how the corrective actions, if any, will be implemented. In summary, the classifications are defined as follows:
- • A indicates that no corrective action was performed or will be performed (management chooses not to address for technical, financial or other reasons).
- • BC indicates that the corrective action was implemented during the test. The analysis assumes that the effect of the corrective action was experienced during the test (as with other test-fix-test reliability growth analyses).
- • BD indicates that the corrective action will be delayed until after the completion of the current test.
Figure CrowExtend1 shows an example of data entered for the Crow Extended model.
As you can see, each failure is indicated with A, BC, or BD in the Classification column. In addition, any number or text can be used to specify the mode. In Figure CrowExtend1, numbers were used in the Mode column for simplicity, but you could just as easily use Seal Leak, or whatever designation you deem appropriate for identifying the failure mode.
Reliability growth is achieved by decreasing the failure intensity. The failure intensity for the A failure modes will not change. Therefore, reliability growth can only be achieved by decreasing the BC and BD mode failure intensity. It is also clear that, in general, the only part of the BD mode failure intensity that can be decreased is that which has been seen during testing, since the failure intensity due to BD modes that were unseen during testing still remains. BC failure modes are corrected during test and the BC failure intensity will not change any more at the end of test.
It is very important to note that once a BD failure mode is in the system it is rarely totally eliminated by a corrective action. After a BD mode has been found and fixed, a certain percentage of the failure intensity will be removed, but a certain percentage of the failure intensity will generally remain. For each BD mode, an effectiveness factor (EF) is required to estimate how effective you will be in eliminating the failure intensity due to the failure mode. The EF is the fractional decrease in a mode's failure intensity after a corrective action has been made and must be a value between 0 and 1. A study on EFs showed that an average EF [math]\displaystyle{ d }[/math] was about 70 percent. Therefore, typically about 30 percent, i.e. 100 [math]\displaystyle{ (1-d) }[/math] percent, of the BD mode failure intensity will remain in the system after all of the corrective actions have been implemented. However, individual EFs for the failure modes may be larger or smaller than the average. Figure efffact1 displays RGA's Effectiveness Factor window where the effectiveness factors for each unique BD failure mode can be specified.
Template loop detected: Template:Test-find-test rga
Test-Fix-Find-Test
Traditional reliability growth models provide assessments for two types of testing and corrective action strategies: test-fix-test and test-find-test. In test-fix-test, failure modes are found during testing and corrective actions for these modes are incorporated during the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA model, described in Chapter 5. In test-find-test, modes are found during testing but all of the corrective actions are delayed and incorporated after the completion of the test. Data from this type of test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow-AMSAA Projection model, described in Section 9.2. However, a common strategy involves a combination of these two approaches, namely some corrective actions are incorporated during the test and some corrective actions are delayed and incorporated at the end of the test. This strategy is referred to as test-fix-find-test. Data from this test can be modeled appropriately with the Crow Extended reliability growth model, which is described next.
Recall that B failure modes are all failure modes that will receive a corrective action. In order to provide the assessment and management metric structure for corrective actions during and after a test, two types of B modes are defined. BC failure modes are corrected during the test and BD failure modes are delayed until the end of the test. Type A failure modes are defined as before; i.e. those failure modes that will not receive a corrective action, either during or at the end of the test.
Development of the Crow Extended Model
Let [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{BD}} }[/math] denote the constant failure intensity for the BD failure modes and let [math]\displaystyle{ h(t|BD) }[/math] denote the first occurrence function for the BD failure modes. In addition, as before, let [math]\displaystyle{ K }[/math] be the number of BD failure modes, let [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] be the effectiveness factor for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD failure mode and let [math]\displaystyle{ \overline{d} }[/math] be the average effectiveness factor.
The Crow Extended model projected failure intensity is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{EM}}={{\lambda }_{CA}}-{{\lambda }_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{K}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}}){{\lambda }_{i}}+\overline{d}h(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}}=\lambda \beta {{T}^{\beta -1}} }[/math] is the achieved failure intensity at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] .
The Crow Extended model projected MTBF is:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{EM}}=1/{{\lambda }_{EM}} }[/math]
This is the MTBF after the delayed fixes have been implemented. Under the extended reliability growth model, the demonstrated failure intensity before the delayed fixes is the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\lambda }_{CA}} }[/math] . The demonstrated MTBF at time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] before the delayed fixes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{CA}}\text{ }={{[{{\lambda }_{CA}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
If you assume that there are no delayed corrective actions (BD modes) then the model reduces to the special case of the Crow-AMSAA model (the first term only in Eqn. (extendl)) and the achieved MTBF equals the projection. That is, there is no jump. If you assume that there are no corrective actions during the test (BC modes) then the model reduces to the test-find-test scenario described in the previous section.
Estimation of the Crow Extended Model
In the general estimation of the Crow Extended model, it is required that all failure times during the test are known. Furthermore, the ID of each A, BC and BD failure mode needs to be entered.
The estimate of the projected failure intensity for the Crow Extended model is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{EM}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T}+\overline{d}\widehat{h}(T|BD) }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{i}} }[/math] is the total number of failures for the [math]\displaystyle{ {{i}^{th}} }[/math] BD mode and [math]\displaystyle{ {{d}_{i}} }[/math] is the corresponding assigned EF. In order to obtain the first term, [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}} }[/math] , fit all of the data (regardless of mode classification) to the Crow-AMSAA model to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] , thus:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
The remaining terms are analyzed with the Crow Extended model, which is applied to only the BD data.
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \begin{align} & \widehat{h}(T|BD)= & {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}{{T}^{{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}-1}} \\ & = & \frac{M{{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}}}{T} \end{align} }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\beta }}_{BD}} }[/math] is the unbiased estimated of [math]\displaystyle{ \beta }[/math] for the Crow-AMSAA model based on the first occurrence of [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] distinct BD modes.
The structure for the Crow Extended model includes the following special data analysis cases:
- 1. Test-fix-test with no failure modes known or with BC failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the traditional Crow-AMSAA analysis described previously.
- 2. Test-find-test with BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the Crow Extended model will take the form of the Crow-AMSAA Projection analysis described in Section 9.2.
- 3. Test-fix-find-test with BC and BD failure modes known. With this type of data, the full capabilities of the Crow Extended model will be applied, as described in the following sections.
Reliability Growth Potential and Maturity Metrics
The growth potential and some maturity metrics for the Crow Extended model are calculated as follows.
• Initial system MTBF and failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I}}=\frac{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }} \right)}{{{\widehat{\lambda }}^{\tfrac{1}{\widehat{\beta }}}}} }[/math]
- and:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}={{[{{\widehat{M}}_{I}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for all data regardless of the failure mode classification (i.e. A, BC or BD).
• A mode failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}=\frac{{{N}_{A}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{A}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Initial BD mode failure intensity are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}=\frac{{{N}_{BD}}}{T} }[/math]
• BC mode initial failure intensity and MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{A}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{I(BC)}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{I(BC)}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
• Failure intensity [math]\displaystyle{ h(T|BC) }[/math] and instantaneous MTBF [math]\displaystyle{ M(T|BC) }[/math] for new BC failure modes at the end of test time [math]\displaystyle{ T }[/math] are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{h}(T|BC)=\widehat{\lambda }\widehat{\beta }{{T}^{\widehat{\beta }-1}} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{M}(T|BC)={{[\widehat{h}(T|BC)]}^{-1}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\beta } }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ \widehat{\lambda } }[/math] are the estimators of the Crow-AMSAA model for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes.
• Average effectiveness factor for BC failure modes is given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}}=\frac{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{N}_{BC}}}{\left[ \tfrac{N_{BC}^{\left( \tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)}}{\Gamma \left( 1+\tfrac{1}{{{{\hat{\beta }}}_{BC}}} \right)} \right]-{{M}_{BC}}} }[/math]
where [math]\displaystyle{ {{N}_{BC}} }[/math] is the total number of observed BC modes, [math]\displaystyle{ {{M}_{BC}} }[/math] is the number of unique BC modes and [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}} }[/math] is the MLE for the first occurrence of distinct BC modes. If [math]\displaystyle{ {{\hat{\beta }}_{BC}}\ge 1 }[/math] then [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{d}}_{BC}} }[/math] equals zero.
• Growth potential failure intensity and growth potential MTBF are given by:
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}={{\widehat{\lambda }}_{CA}}-{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{BD}}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{\mathop \sum }}\,(1-{{d}_{i}})\frac{{{N}_{i}}}{T} }[/math]
- [math]\displaystyle{ {{\widehat{M}}_{GP}}={{[{{\widehat{\lambda }}_{GP}}]}^{-1}} }[/math]
Template loop detected: Template:Failure mode management strategy rga
Template loop detected: Template:Confidence bounds crow extended rga
Template loop detected: Template:Grouped data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Mixed data rga
Template loop detected: Template:Multiple systems with event codes rga
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
General Examples
Example 8
Three systems were subjected to a reliability growth test to evaluate the prototype of a new product. Once the test was completed a failure analysis was done and, based on this, a management strategy was able to be defined. It was determined that all corrective actions will be delayed until after the test. The collected data set is shown in Table 9.6 and the associated effectiveness factors for each unique BD mode are presented in Table 9.7. The prototype is required to meet a projected MTBF goal of 55 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Based on the current management strategy what is the projected MTBF?
- 3) If the projected MTBF goal is not met, alter the current management strategy to meet this requirement with as little adjustment as possible and without changing the EFs of the existing BD modes. Assume an EF = 0.7 for any newly assigned BD modes.
| Table 9.6 - Multiple Systems (Concurrent Operating Times) data for Example 8 | |||
| System 1 | System 2 | System 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start Time | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| End Time | 541 | 454 | 436 |
| Times-to-Failure | 83 BD37 | 26 BD25 | 23 BD30 |
| 83 BD43 | 26 BD43 | 46 BD49 | |
| 83 BD46 | 57 BD37 | 127 BD47 | |
| 169 A45 | 64 BD19 | 166 A2 | |
| 213 A18 | 169 A45 | 169 BD23 | |
| 299 A42 | 213 A32 | 213 BD7 | |
| 375 A1 | 231 BD8 | 213 BD29 | |
| 431 BD16 | 231 BD25 | 255 BD26 | |
| 231 BD27 | 369 A33 | ||
| 231 A28 | 374 BD29 | ||
| 304 BD24 | 380 BD22 | ||
| 383 BD40 | 415 BD7 | ||
| Table 9.7 - Effectiveness factors for Example 8 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 30 | 0.75 |
| 43 | 0.5 |
| 25 | 0.5 |
| 49 | 0.75 |
| 37 | 0.9 |
| 19 | 0.75 |
| 46 | 0.75 |
| 47 | 0.25 |
| 23 | 0.5 |
| 7 | 0.25 |
| 29 | 0.25 |
| 8 | 0.5 |
| 27 | 0.5 |
| 26 | 0.75 |
| 24 | 0.5 |
| 22 | 0.5 |
| 40 | 0.75 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
Solution to Example 8
- 1) Figure CrowExtend2 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) There are a couple of ways to calculate the projected MTBF, but the easiest is via the Quick Calculation Pad (QCP), as shown in Figure CrowExtend3.
- 3) From the previous question, the projected MTBF is estimated to be 53.9390 hours, which is below the goal of 55 hours. To reach our goal, or to see if we can even get there, the management strategy must be changed. The effectiveness factors for the existing BD modes cannot be changed, however it is possible to change an A mode to a BD mode. But which A mode(s) should be changed? To answer this question, you can view the Individual Mode Failure Intensity plot with just the A modes displayed as shown in Figure CrowExtend4. As you can see from the plot, failure mode A45 has the highest failure intensity. Therefore, among the A modes this particular failure mode is having the greatest negative effect in regards to the system MTBF. So change A45 to BD45. Be sure to change all instances of A45 to a BD mode. Enter an effectiveness factor for BD45 equal to 0.7 and recalculate the parameters of the Crow Extended model. Now go back to the QCP to calculate the projected MTBF as shown in Figure CrowExtend5. The projected MTBF is now estimated to be 55.5903 hours. Based on the change in the management strategy, the projected MTBF goal is now expected to be met.
Example 9
A reliability growth test was conducted for 200 hours. Some of the corrective actions were applied during the test while others were delayed until after the test was completed. The data set is given in Table 9.8. The effectiveness factors for the BD modes are given in Table 9.9. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) Determine the average effectiveness factor of the BC modes using the Function Wizard.
- 3) What percent of the failure intensity will be left in the system due to the BD modes after implementing the delayed fixes?
| Table 9.8 - Grouped Failure Times data for Example 9 | |||
| Number at Event | Time to Event | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 25 | BC | 1 |
| 1 | 25 | BD | 9 |
| 1 | 25 | BC | 2 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 50 | BD | 11 |
| 1 | 75 | BD | 12 |
| 1 | 75 | BC | 3 |
| 2 | 75 | BD | 13 |
| 1 | 75 | A | |
| 1 | 100 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 100 | BD | 14 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 15 |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | A | |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 5 |
| 1 | 125 | BD | 10 |
| 1 | 125 | BC | 6 |
| 1 | 150 | A | |
| 1 | 150 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 4 |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 8 |
| 1 | 175 | A | |
| 1 | 175 | BC | 7 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 16 |
| 1 | 200 | BC | 3 |
| 1 | 200 | BD | 17 |
| Table 9.9 - Effectiveness factors for Example 9 | |
| BD Mode | Effectiveness Factor |
|---|---|
| 9 | 0.75 |
| 10 | 0.5 |
| 11 | 0.9 |
| 12 | 0.6 |
| 13 | 0.8 |
| 14 | 0.8 |
| 15 | 0.25 |
| 16 | 0.75 |
| 17 | 0.8 |
Solution to Example 9
- 1) Figure CrowExtend6 shows the estimated parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) After inserting a General Spreadsheet into the Folio, the Function Wizard can be accessed via the Tools menu. Once the Function Wizard is loaded, select Average Effectiveness Factor from the list of available functions and under Avg. Eff. Factor select BC modes as shown in Figure CrowExtend7. Click OK and the result will be placed into the General Spreadsheet. The average effectiveness factor for the BC modes is 0.6983.
- 3) The percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes can be determined using the Failure Mode Strategy plot as shown in Figure CrowExtend8. Therefore, the percent of the failure intensity left in the system due to the BD modes is 1.79%.
Example 10
Two prototypes of a new design are tested simultaneously. Whenever a failure was observed for one unit, the current operating time of the other unit was also recorded. The test was terminated after 300 hours. All of the design changes for the prototypes were delayed until after completing the test and the data set is given in Table 9.10. Assume a fixed effectiveness factor equal to 0.7. The MTBF goal for the new design is 30 hours. Do the following:
- 1) Estimate the parameters of the Crow Extended model.
- 2) What is the projected MTBF and growth potential?
- 3) Under the current management strategy, is it even possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours?
| Table 9.10 - Multiple Systems (Known Operating Times) data for Example 10 | ||||
| Failed Unit ID | Time Unit 1 | Time Unit 2 | Classification | Mode |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 16.5 | 0 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 17 | 0 | A | |
| 2 | 20.5 | 0.9 | A | |
| 2 | 25.3 | 3.8 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 28.7 | 4.6 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 41.8 | 14.7 | BD | bearing |
| 1 | 45.5 | 17.6 | A | |
| 2 | 48.6 | 22 | A | |
| 2 | 49.6 | 23.4 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 51.4 | 26.3 | A | |
| 1 | 58.2 | 35.7 | BD | seal leak |
| 2 | 59 | 36.5 | A | |
| 2 | 60.6 | 37.6 | BD | hose |
| 1 | 61.9 | 39.1 | BD | seal leak |
| 1 | 76.6 | 55.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 81.1 | 61.1 | A | |
| 1 | 84.1 | 63.6 | A | |
| 1 | 84.7 | 64.3 | A | |
| 1 | 94.6 | 72.6 | A | |
| 2 | 100 | 78.1 | BD | valve |
| 1 | 104 | 81.4 | BD | bearing |
| 2 | 104.8 | 85.9 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 105.9 | 87.1 | BD | operator error |
| 1 | 108.8 | 89.9 | BD | hose |
| 2 | 132.4 | 119.5 | BD | spring |
| 2 | 132.4 | 150.1 | BD | operator error |
| 2 | 132.4 | 153.7 | A | |
Solution to Example 10
- 1) Figure CrowExtend9 shows the estimated Crow Extended parameters.
- 2) One possible method to calculate the projected MTBF and growth potential is to use the Quick Calculation Pad, but you can also view these two values at the same time by viewing the Growth Potential MTBF plot, which is displayed in Figure CrowExtend10. From the plot, the projected MTBF is equal to 16.87 hours and the growth potential is equal to 18.63 hours.
- 3) The current projected MTBF and growth potential MTBF are both well below the required goal of 30 hours. To check if this goal can even be reached, you can set the effectiveness factor equal to 1. In other words, if all of the corrective actions were to remove the failure modes completely then what would be the projected and growth potential MTBF? After changing the fixed effectiveness factor to 1, the parameters are recalculated and the Growth Potential plot is refreshed. The refreshed plot is shown in Figure CrowExtend11. Even if you assume an effectiveness factor equal to 1, the growth potential is still only 27.27 hours. Based on the current design process, it will not be possible to reach the MTBF goal of 30 hours. Therefore, there are basically two options: start a new design stage or reduce the required MTBF goal.
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]
[math]\displaystyle{ }[/math]