Reliability 2013 1

EM 105 (B) Process Reliability Engineering
Module I
Definition of reliability key elements; failure analysis failure density failure rate
probability of failure - bathtub curve - Basic reliability equations Reliability in terms of
failure rate failure density - relation between reliability, failure density and hazard
rate - Mean time to failure (MTTF) Integral equation of MTTF in terms of reliability
Module II
Hazard models constant hazard model linearly increasing hazard model expressions
for reliability, failure density, and probability of failure of these models problems
Module III
System reliability components connected in series components connected in parallel
mixed configuration reliability block diagrams (RBD) distinction between physical
configuration and logical configuration problems
Module IV
Reliability improvement methods Redundancy unit redundancies element
redundancies simplification of design parts derating operating environment; Cost of
reliability factors to be considered for optimizing the reliability cost
References
1. L.S.Srinath, Reliability Engineering, Affiliated East-West Press Ltd., 1985
2. E. Balaguruswamy, Reliability Engineering, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Co.,
1984
3. Charles E. Ebling, Reliability & Maintainability Engg., Tata McGraw Hill
Publishing Co., 1997
4. Alessandro Birolini Reliability Engineering Theory and Practice, Springer,
2007.
5. Lewis, E., Introduction to Reliability Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, 1995
EM 105 (B) Process Reliability Engineering

Definition of reliability
Reliability is the probability that an item will perform a required function for a specified
period of time under specified operating conditions.
This definition has four key elements:
1) The quantification of reliability in terms of probability.
2) A statement defining the required function as the function is defined in detail, it
becomes more clear which product failures impair the success of the mission and
which do not.
3) A statement specifying the period of time deterioration of materials and parts
with time is natural and consequently the performance level of the unit will also
go down with time. If the time period is not specified, probability is a meaningless
number for time oriented products.
4) A statement defining the operating condition and this could be with regard to
temperature, humidity, shock, vibration, and so on.
Failure data analysis
Reliability is defined as the probability of a device giving satisfactory performance for a
specified period under specified operating conditions. When a unit or system does not
perform satisfactorily, it is said to have failed. The pattern of failure can be obtained from
life test results. That is, by testing a fairly large number of models until failure occurs,
and observing the failure rate characteristics as a function of time. The first step,
therefore, is to link reliability with experimental or field failure data. These data will
also provide a basis for formulating or constructing mathematically a failure model for
general analysis.
The following data is related with a series of tests conducted under certain stipulated
conditions on 1000 electronic components. The total duration of the tests is 19 hours. The
number of components that fail during each hourly interval is noted and the results
obtained are tabulated below.
Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Subject handled by Dr.Shouri P. V., Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering, MEC, Cochin.
(for 1st year M.Tech. Mechanical Engineering batch)
Time (t)
No. of
failures
( f)
Cumulative
failures (F)
0
No. of
survivors
(S)
1000
130
1
130
870
213
787
288
712
356
644
83
2
418
474
525
571
429
612
388
649
351
683
317
41
9
714
742
806
882
118
944
56
984
16
62
16
996
0.101
0.046
0.101
0.526
0.475
0.429
0.100
0.388
0.100
0.351
0.101
0.317
0.031
0.103
0.028
0.103
0.064
0.283
0.076
0.486
0.286
0.258
0.194
0.118
1000
0.714
0.056
1.110
0.016
0.012
1.200
0.004
2.000
Total =1
Mean = 0.376
4
19
0.051
0.582
0.04
12
18
0.101
0.062
40
17
0.056
194
76
15
0.101
258
64
14
0.062
286
28
13
0.100
0.644
0.034
31
12
0.100
0.712
0.037
34
11
0.787
0.041
37
10
0.100
475
46
8
0.870
526
51
Reliability
(R)
1
582
56
6
0.139
0.068
62
5
0.130
0.075
68
4
Failure
rate (Z)
0.083
75
3
Failure
density
(fd)
0.004

4
The failure density, failure rate, reliability and probability of failure can be defined as
follows.
Failure density (fd)
This is the ratio of number of failures during a given unit interval of time to the total
number of items at the very beginning of the test (also called as initial population). For
the given data the failure density associated with the first unit interval is
130
f d1
0.13
1000
83
Similarly, f d 2
0.083 and so on.
1000
Failure rate (Z)
This is the ratio of number of failures during a particular unit time interval to the average
population during that interval. The average population during an interval is the average
of populations at the beginning and at the end of the interval. For the given data, failure
rate during the first unit interval is
130
Z (1)
0.139
1000 870
2
83
Similarly, Z (2)
0.100 and so on.
870 787
2
Reliability (R)
This is the ratio of survivors at any given time to the total initial population. Probability
of survival is another name for reliability. For the given data, reliability corresponding
to first hour is
870
R(1)
0.870
1000
787
R(2)
0.787 and so on.
1000
Probability of failure
Probability of failure can also be termed as unreliability factor. Since survival and failure
are complementary events, Probability of failure = 1- Probability of success (or
reliability).
For the given data, probability of failure corresponding to first hour = 1=R(1)
= 1-0.787
= 0.213
Similarly, probability of failure corresponding to fifth hour = 1=R(5)
= 1-0.582
= 0.418

0.14
Failure density
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
18
16
14
12
10
Time interval
2.5
Failure rate
2
1.5
1
0.5
18
16
14
12
10
Time interval
1.2
Reliability
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
18
16
14
12
10
Time
Variation of failure density, failure rate, and reliability with time

6
Conclusions
(i) Let f d 1 = failure density associated with the first unit time interval
f d 2 = failure density associated with the first unit time interval
.
.
f d l = failure density associated with the last unit time interval
Then, f d1
f d2
f dl
(ii) Let n 1 number of failed components during the first unit interval
n2 number of failed components during the second unit interval
.
.
nt number of failed components associated with the t th unit interval
N = Total initial population
Then, Reliability for the tth hour is the number of survivors till the t th hour divided by the
initial population.
N (n1 n2 nt )
n
n1 n2
That is, R(t )
1
t
N
N N
N
That is, R(t ) 1 f d1 f d 2 f d t
(iii) Probability of failure for t th hour = f
d1
f d 2
f dt
(iv) Failure rate or hazard rate associated with the tth hour, Z(t) =
Z (t )
Z (t )
NR(t 1) NR(t )
R(t 1) R(t )
(for unit time interval)
2
NR(t 1) NR(t )
R(t 1) R(t )
2
2 R(t
t ) R(t )
(for a time interval of t )
t R(t
t ) R(t )
Problem
Following table gives the results of tests conducted under severe conditions on 1000
safety valves. Obtain the failure density and hazard rates for various time intervals.
Time
0-4
4-8
8-12
12-16
16-20
20-24
interval
No. of
267
59
36
24
23
11
failures
7
Solution
Time
No. of failures
Failure density
Hazard rate
0
267
0.0668
0.00770
59
0.0150
0.00210
36
0.0090
0.0137
24
0.0060
0.0096
23
0.0058
0.0095
11
0.0028
0.0047
4
8
12
16
20
24
Sample calculation for time interval 0 4 is given below.
267
4 1000
fd
Z
4
1000
0.0668
267
(1000
2
267 )
0.0770
Probability density function

Consider the life testing of N components. The total test last for T hours, at the end of
which all specimens will have failed.
Let n1
n2
.
.
nl
Then,
fd 1
n1
f d2
n2
Number of components that failed during the 1st unit interval

Number of components that failed during the 2nd unit interval
Number of components that failed during the last unit interval

nl
1
N
f dl 1
where f d1 , f d 2 etc. are the failure densities associated with the respective intervals.
When the total population is large and the time interval is very small, the variation of
failure density with time will be a smooth curve and the summation can be represented by
integrals.
Therefore, with reference to the above figure,
f d ( )d
(where is a dummy variable)

That is, the probability that a specimen will fail in T hours is 1 (that is, a certainty).
In probability theory, the function f d ( ) is known as the probability density function. In
order to make this function more general, the upper limit T is replaced by
This means
that no specimen in any test will last for an infinite number of hours.
f d ( )d
Reliability and Probability of failure in terms of failure density

Reliability for the tth hour is the number of survivors till the t th hour divided by the initial
population.
N (n1 n2 nt )
n
n1 n2
That is, R(t )
1
t
N
N N
N
t
That is, R(t ) 1
f d1
f d2
f dt
fd
d (for very small time intervals)
0
t
Probability of failure 1 R(t )
fd
Reliability in terms of hazard rate

The hazard rate Z(t) can be expressed as
2 R(t
t ) R(t )
Z (t )
t R(t
t ) R(t )
9
When t is very small and tends to zero, the value of R(t) approaches that of
R(t
t ) and we get
R(t
t ) R(t )
Z (t ) Lt .
t 0
tR(t )
1 dR(t )
R(t ) d (t )
d
Z (t )
ln R(t )
dt
dR(t )
R(t
t ) R(t )
Lt .
t
0
d (t )
R(t )
d
1 dR(t )
ln R(t )
Since
dt
R(t ) d (t )
d
1
For example,
ln( 2 x)
2
dx
2x
Since
Integrating,
Z ( )d
ln R(t ) C
where C is a constant and

At t
0, Reliability 1
is a dummy variable.
Z ( )d
ln R(t )
0
t
R(t )
exp(
Z ( )d
0
Failure density in terms of failure rate and reliability
f d (t )
When
1 N R(t
t
t ) N R(t )
N
t is very small and tends to zero, f d (t )
1 dR(t )
Z (t ) R(t )
R(t ) d (t )
Combining above two equations we get,
f d (t ) Z (t ) R (t )
Also we have, Z (t )
Lt.
t
R(t
t ) R(t )
t
dR(t )
dt
dR(t )
dt
Mean Time To Fail (MTTF) and Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)
MTTF is the mean time to first failure and is used in case of components that are not
repaired when they fail, but are replaced by new components. On the other hand, MTBF
10
is the mean time between two successive component failures and is used with repairable
equipment or systems.
Note:
1) When the number of samples tested is small, it is possible to note the time to failure of each
sample and the mean failure rate is given by the formula
Z (T )
where,
1 N (0) N (T )
T
N (0)
Z(T) is the mean failure rate for T hours

N(T) is the population remaining at time T
N(0) is the population at T = 0
2) As the number of specimens tested becomes large it is tedious to record the time to failure of each
specimen. Instead, the number which fail during specific intervals of time are recorded. Here
mean time to failure for N specimens will be
1
n1 t 2n2 t 3n3 t l.nl t
N
t is the time interval
MTTF
where,
n1 is the number of specimens that failed during the 1st interval

n2 is the number of specimens that failed during the 2nd interval
.
.
n l is the number of specimens that failed during the last interval
That is, in general, MTTF
1
N
nK K t
K 1
Problem
In the life testing of 10 specimens of a mini-mixer, the time to failure of each specimen is
recorded as given in the following table. Calculate the mean failure rate for 900 hours and
the mean time to failure for all ten specimens.
Specimen
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Time to Failure
(hours)
805
810
815
820
825
832
842
856
875
900

11
Solution
The mean failure rate can be calculated using the expression:
1 N (0) N (T )
Z (T )
T
N (0)
Here, Z(900) is to be calculated and N(0)=10 ; N(900)=0
1 900 0
1
Z (900 )
1.11 10 3 (per hour)
900
900
900
Mean Time to Fail (MTTF)
1
(MTTF)
805 810 815 820 825 832 842 856 875 900
10
838 hours
Problem
Ten transformers were tested for 500 hours each within the prescribed operating
conditions, and one transformer failed exactly at the end of the 500 hours exposure. What
is the failure rate for this type of transformer?
Solution
The mean failure rate can be calculated using the expression:
1 N (0) N (T )
Z (T )
T
N (0)
1 10 9
1
Z (500 )
0.0002 failure / hour
500
10
5000
Mean Time to Fail (MTTF) in integral form
1 l
MTTF
nK K t
NK1
Also, by definition failure density fd can be expressed as f d
nK
, where n K is the
N t
number of failures associated with the K th time interval

nK
f dK t
N
Hence the expression for MTTF can be written as
l
MTTF
f d K ( tK ) t
K 1
Further K t is the elapsed time t and therefore the expression for the MTTF becomes
l
MTTF
tf d t
K 1
For very small time intervals, MTTF
tf d dt
0

12
In the above equation, upper limit l is the number of hours after which there are no
survivors. It is customary to replace this by infinity since all components will have failed
at the end of an infinite test period.
MTTF
tf d dt
0
t
Also we have, R(t ) 1
fd( )d
0
Differentiating with respect to time,

That is,
f d (t )
MTTF
t
0
dR(t )
dt
f d (t )
dR(t )
and substituting this in the equation for MTTF
dt
dR(t )
dt
dt
tdR(t )
0
Integrating by parts, MTTF
tR(t ) 0
udv uv
R(t )dt
0
MTTF
R(t )dt
{Since R(0) 1 and R( )
0}

vdu
13
Hazard Models
The data obtained from failure tests can be analyzed to obtain reliability, failure density,
hazard rate and other necessary information. Obviously, the behavioural characteristics
exhibited by one class of components differ from those exhibited by another class of
components. In order to compare different behavioural characteristics and also to draw
general conclusions from behavioural patterns of similar components, a mathematical
model representing the failure characteristics of the components becomes necessary. The
procedure involves assuming a function for hazard rate and thereby obtaining reliability
and failure density by using this failure rate function. The assumed function for the
hazard rate will be the hazard model. Some of the common hazard models are discussed
below.
Constant hazard model
Here the failure rate is assumed to remain constant with time.
That is, Z (t )
, a constant.
t
R(t )
exp
Z ( )d
0
exp
exp
t
0
exp
That is, for a constant hazard model, Reliability, R (t ) e t

Probability of failure, F (t ) 1 R(t ) 1 e t
e t
Failure density, f d (t ) Z (t ) R(t )
The variation of failure rate, reliability, probability of failure, and failure density with
respect to time for a constant hazard model is shown in the following figure.
Variation of failure rate, reliability, probability of failure, and failure density for a constant hazard model

14
It can be seen that, for a constant hazard model the mean time to failure is the reciprocal
of failure rate.
That is, MTTF
R(t )dt
0
dt
e0
0 1
The constant hazard model is also known as exponential reliability case.

Linearly increasing hazard model
Here the hazard rate is assumed to increase linearly with time.
That is, Z (t ) Kt , where K is a constant
t
R(t )
exp
Z ( )d
0
exp
K d
exp
K 2
2
exp
0
That is, for a linearly increasing hazard model, Reliability, R(t )

Probability of failure, F (t ) 1 R(t ) 1 e
Kt
2
Kt 2
2
Kt 2
2
Kt 2
2
Failure density, f d (t ) Z (t ) R(t ) Kt e

The variation of failure rate, reliability, probability of failure, and failure density with
respect to time for a linearly increasing hazard model is shown in the following figure.
Variation of failure rate, reliability, probability of failure, and failure density for a linearly increasing
hazard model
It can be seen from the failure density curve that the curve has a slope equal to K at
K
1
time t 0 . Also the value of f d (t ) reaches a maximum of
at time t
, and tends
K
e
to zero as t becomes larger.
15
The Weibul Model

1
This model is expressed as Z (t ) Kt m , m
Here K and m are parameters and if these are chosen appropriately, a variety of failurerate situations can be covered, including both the constant hazard and linearly increasing
hazard conditions.
If m 0 ; Z (t ) K - Constant hazard model
If m 1; Z (t ) Kt - Linearly increasing model
t
R(t )
exp
Z ( )d
exp
exp
That is, in case of Weibul model, Reliability, R(t )

Probability of failure, F (t ) 1 R(t ) 1 e
Failure density, f d (t )
K m1
m 1
Z (t ) R (t )
Kt e
exp
0
Kt m 1
m 1
Kt m 1
m 1
Kt m 1
m 1
Kt m 1
m 1
Following figure shows the variation of reliability in case of Weibul model for various
values of K and m
Variation of Reliability in case of Weibul model

16
Bath Tub Curve
Component failure rate as a function of age follows a curve that is concave upward, as
shown in the above figure. Because of its shape, this curve is also referred to as bath tub
curve. This curve exhibits three distinct zones. The first is the short initial period called
variously the early failure, infant mortality, or the burn in period. The decreasing but
greater failure rate early in life of the system is due to one or more of several potential
causes. The causes include inadequate testing or screening of components during
selection or acceptance, damage to components during production, assembly, or testing,
and choice of components which have too great a failure variability. It shall be a specific
goal of the supplier to ensure that the early failure period is rigorously controlled and
covered by a suitable warranty.
Bath tub curve
The failures in the second zone are termed service failures. During this period, the failure
or hazard rate is constant and it represents the effective life of the product.
The failures in the third zone are the wear-out failures. The incidence of failure in this
zone is high since most of the components will have exceeded their service life, and
consequently would have deteriorated. Hence, they are appropriately called wear-out
failures.
Note: Failure (death) rates for human beings are different by sex, race, nationality, and other factors but
all failure rate for humans appear to exhibit this distinctive bath tub curve. The failure rate for infants is
extremely high for the first few months, drops sharply, and remains fairly constant for many years and then
slowly climbs as the person ages.
System reliability
A system or a complex product is an assembly of a number of parts or components. The
components may be connected in series or in parallel, or it may be a mixed system, where
the components are connected in series as well as in parallel.
Series configuration
If the components of an assembly are connected in series the failure of any component
causes the failure of the assembly or system.
17
Let us consider a system consisting of n units which are connected in series as shown in
the following figure.
Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in series
Let the successful operation of these individual units be represented

by X 1 , X 2 , , X n
and
their
respective
probabilities
by P( X 1 ), P( X 2 ), , P( X n ) . For the successful operation of the system, it is
necessary that all n units function satisfactorily. Hence, the probability of the
simultaneous successful operation of all units is P( X 1 andX 2 and and. X n ) .
Therefore according to multiplication rule,
R(t )
P( X 1 andX 2 and and. X n )
R(t )
P( X 1 ) P( X 2 X 1 ) P( X 3 X 1 andX 2 ) P( X n X 1 andX 2 andX n 1 )
In this expression, P( X 2 X 1 ) represents the probability of the successful operation of unit

2 under the condition that unit 1 operates successfully. Similarly,
P( X n / X 1 andX 2 and X n 1 ) represents the probability of the successful operation
of unit n under the condition that all the remaining units 1,2,3,,n-1 are working
successfully.If the successful operation of each unit is independent of the successful
operation of the remaining units, then events X 1 , X 2 , , X n are independent and
the above equation becomes
R(t )
P( X 1 ) P( X 2 ) P( X n )
That is, R(t )
R1 R2 R3 Rn ,
where R1 R2 R3 Rn are component reliabilities.

Parallel configuration
Several systems exist in which successful operation depends on the satisfactory
functioning of any one of their n sub-systems or elements. They are said to be connected
in parallel. Let us consider a system consisting of n units which are connected in parallel
as shown in the following figure.

18
Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in parallel
Let X 1 , X 2 , , X n represent the successful operation of units 1,2,.,n

respectively. Similarly, let X 1 , X 2 , , X n represent the unsuccessful operation.
If P( X 1 ) is the probability of successful operation of unit 1, then P( X 1 ) is the probability
of its failure. Further, P( X 1 ) 1 P( X 1 )
For the complete failure of the system, all n units have to fail simultaneously. If F(t) is
the probability of failure of the system, then
F (t )
P ( X 1 and X 2 and and . X n )
F (t )
P( X 1 ) P( X 2 X 1 ) P( X 3 X 1 and X 2 ) P( X n X 1 and X 2 and X n 1 )
In this expression, P ( X 3 / X 1 and X 2 ) represents the probability of failure of unit 3 under

the condition that units 1 and 2 have failed. The other terms can also be interpreted in the
same manner. If the unit failures are independent of each other, then
F (t )
P( X 1 ) P( X 2 ) P( X n ) 1 R(t )
R(t ) 1
1 P X 1 (1 P X 2 1 P X n
That is, R(t ) 1
1 R1 (1 R2 ) (1 R n )
where R1 R2 R3 Rn are component reliabilities

19
Mixed configuration
If a system is having a mixed configuration, then it will have components connected in
parallel as well as in series and the following figure indicates a system having
components in series and parallel.
Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in parallel
If R1 , R2 , R3 , R4 , R5 and R 6 are the respective component reliabilities of the components in

the above configuration, then system reliability can be expressed as
R(t )
R1 R2 1 (1 R3 )(1 R4 )(1 R5 ) R6
Problem
A certain type of electronic component has a uniform failure rate of 0.00001 per hour.
What is the reliability for a specified period of service of 10,000 hours?
Solution
0.000001per hour
t 10000 hours
R(1000 ) e ( 0.00001)10000
0.1
0.90483 (or) 90.483%
Problem
Given a MTTF of 5000 hours and a uniform failure rate. What is the probability that the
system failure occurs within 200 hours?
Solution
1
(per hour)
5000
t = 200 hours
1
200
5000
R(200) e
0.96079 (or) 96.079%
F (200) 1 0.96079 0.03921 (or) 3.921%
20
Problem
The following reliability requirements have been set on the subsystems of a
communication system.
Subsystem
Receiver
Control System
Power Supply
Antenna
Reliability (for a 4 hour period)

0.970
0.989
0.995
0.996
What is the expected reliability of the overall system?

Solution
Assuming that all the four components are necessary for the successful operation of the
system, R(t ) R1 R2 R3 R4
R(t ) (0.970)(0.989)(0.995)(0.996) 0.950 (or) 95%
Problem
An element has a probability of successful operation of 60% over a given period of time.
If 4 such components are connected in parallel estimate the improvement factor
Solution
Reliability when 4 components (each having a reliability of 0.6) are connected in parallel
can be expressed as:
R(t ) 1 (1 0.6)(1 0.6)(1 0.6)(1 0.6) 0.9744
0.9744
1.624
If x is the improvement factor, then 0.6 x 0.9744 x
0.6
Problem
For the Reliability Block Diagram (RBD) shown in the following figure calculate the
system reliability. The respective component reliability values are also indicated in the
figure.
Reliability block diagram

21
Solution
R(t ) (0.95)( 0.96 ) 1 (1 0.95)(1 0.94 ) (0.90 ) 0.8183 (or) 81.83%
Problem
The MTBF of equipment is 500 hours. What is the failure rate expressed in
a) Failures / hour
b) Failures / 106 hours
c) % failures / 1000 hours
Is MTBF a guaranteed failure free period?
Solution
Failure rate,
1
MTBF
1
500
0.002 failures / hour
0.002 106
{Answer (a)}
2000 failures / 106 hours {Answer (b)}
0.002 1000 2 failures / 1000 hours

= 200 % failures / 1000 hours
{Answer (c)}
MTBF cannot be regarded as a guaranteed failure free period as it is only a mean value of
operating times between failures.
Reliability Increasing Techniques
One way of achieving high reliabilities is by introducing redundant parts. For example we
may have two parts in parallel such that the system operates if at least one part operates.
Here the probability that the system fails is equal to the probability both parts fail. If the
failures are assumed to be independent, then the system reliability will be R(t) = 1- (1R1)(1-R2), where R1 and R2 are the reliability of the two parts respectively. If the
reliability of each part is 0.95 at time t, then the reliability of the system is
R(t) = 1-(1-0.95)(1-0.95) = 0.9975
By adding a redundant part we have increased the reliability of system at time t from 0.95
to 0.9975
We have been assuming that both parts are operating whenever the system is on and the
failure of one part does not affect the operation of other part. This is some times called
hot standby and is not always practical. We may need to provide a cold stand by where
the second part is switched into service when the first one fails. Then we must also take
into account the reliability of the switch. If we assume we have, as before, two
components with reliability 0.95 at time t and a switching device with reliability 0.98 at
time t we have the system reliability at time t as
R(t) = 0.95 + (0.05)(0.98)(0.95) = 0.9966

22
The above equation is just the probability the first part is operating plus the probability
the first part fails times the probability the switch operates times the probability the
second part operates.
It is to be noted that there is a point of diminishing returns in using redundancy
configurations; an increase in the level of parallel redundancy employed increases size,
weight, cost and volume of the equipment and often requires complicated failure-sensing
devices whose reliability need to be considered.
As this figure illustrates, as the amount of dollars invested in reliability increases,

Operation and Support (OS) costs decrease. When the reliability is combined with OS,
the result is total cost. The objective is to reach the lowest point in the total cost curve at
which the benefits of reliability (expressed as total operating cost) are optimized with the
cost of obtaining that level of reliability.
It is usually necessary to perform trade- off calculations to determine the advisability of
parallel redundancy versus improvement of the reliability of the basic subsystem by other
means. Methods for improvement could include the following considerations:
1) Review the users needs to see if the function of the unreliable part is really
necessary to the user. If not eliminate these parts from the design. That is,
decrease the number of component parts for a system and believe in the vital few.
For a system that contains items connected in series, assuming independence of
their individual failures, the reliability of the system is the product of the
reliabilities of the individual items. If a product has 5 parts, each with reliability
5
0.59 whereas, if there would have been only
0.9, then system reliability is 0.9
three parts, the reliability of the system would be 0.9
0.73
2) Review the selection of any parts that are relatively new and unproven. Use
standard parts whose reliability has been proved. (However, be sure that the
conditions of previous use are applicable to the new product.)
23
3) Use derating to assure that stresses applied to the parts are lower than the stresses
the parts can normally withstand.
4) Use robust design methods that enable a product to handle unexpected
environments.
5) Control the operating environment to provide conditions that yield lower failure
rates Common examples are (a) potting electronic components to protect them
against climate and shock, and (b) use of cooling equipments to keep down
ambient temperatures.
6) Specify replacement schedules to remove and replace low-reliability parts before
they reach the wear-out stage.
7) Prescribe screening tests to detect infant-mortality failures and to eliminate
substandard components. The tests include burn in, accelerated life tests etc.
8) Conduct research and development to attain an improvement in the basic
reliability of those components which contribute most of the unreliability.


Reliability 2013 1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Reliability 2013 1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

EM 105 (B) Process Reliability Engineering

EM 105 (B) Process Reliability Engineering

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Variation of failure density, failure rate, and reliability with time

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Probability density function

Number of components that failed during the 1st unit interval

Number of components that failed during the last unit interval

Therefore, with reference to the above figure,

(where is a dummy variable)

Reliability and Probability of failure in terms of failure density

That is, R(t ) 1

d (for very small time intervals)

Probability of failure 1 R(t )

Reliability in terms of hazard rate

where C is a constant and

Failure density in terms of failure rate and reliability

t is very small and tends to zero, f d (t )

Z(T) is the mean failure rate for T hours

n1 is the number of specimens that failed during the 1st interval

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

number of failures associated with the K th time interval

For very small time intervals, MTTF

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Also we have, R(t ) 1

Differentiating with respect to time,

Integrating by parts, MTTF

{Since R(0) 1 and R( )

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

That is, for a constant hazard model, Reliability, R (t ) e t

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

The constant hazard model is also known as exponential reliability case.

That is, for a linearly increasing hazard model, Reliability, R(t )

Failure density, f d (t ) Z (t ) R(t ) Kt e

The Weibul Model

That is, in case of Weibul model, Reliability, R(t )

Variation of Reliability in case of Weibul model

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Bath tub curve

Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in series

Let the successful operation of these individual units be represented

P( X 1 andX 2 and and. X n )

P( X 1 ) P( X 2 X 1 ) P( X 3 X 1 andX 2 ) P( X n X 1 andX 2 andX n 1 )

In this expression, P( X 2 X 1 ) represents the probability of the successful operation of unit

That is, R(t )

where R1 R2 R3 Rn are component reliabilities.

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in parallel

Let X 1 , X 2 , , X n represent the successful operation of units 1,2,.,n

P ( X 1 and X 2 and and . X n )

P( X 1 ) P( X 2 X 1 ) P( X 3 X 1 and X 2 ) P( X n X 1 and X 2 and X n 1 )

In this expression, P ( X 3 / X 1 and X 2 ) represents the probability of failure of unit 3 under

That is, R(t ) 1

where R1 R2 R3 Rn are component reliabilities

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering

Reliability block diagram of a system having n components connected in parallel

If R1 , R2 , R3 , R4 , R5 and R 6 are the respective component reliabilities of the components in

0.90483 (or) 90.483%

Reliability (for a 4 hour period)

What is the expected reliability of the overall system?

Reliability block diagram

Lecture notes on Process Reliability Engineering