可靠性预测——继续依赖于一种误导性的方法

C. Jais, B. Werner, D. Das
{"title":"可靠性预测——继续依赖于一种误导性的方法","authors":"C. Jais, B. Werner, D. Das","doi":"10.1109/RAMS.2013.6517751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reliability prediction methodologies, especially those centered on Military Handbook (MIL-HDBK) 217 and its progeny are highly controversial in their application. The use of reliability predictions in the design and operation of military applications have been in existence since the 1950's. Various textbooks, articles, and workshops have provided insight on the pros and cons of these prediction methodologies. Recent research shows that these methods have produced highly inaccurate results when compared to actual test data for a number of military programs. These inaccuracies promote poor programmatic and design decisions, and often lead to reliability problems later in development. Major reasons for handbook prediction inaccuracies include but are not limited to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely soley on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles. Rather than rely on inaccurate handbook methodologies, a reliability assessment methodology is recommended. The reliability assessment methodology includes utilizing reliability data from comparable systems, historical test data, and leveraging subject-matter-expert input. System developers then apply fault-tree analysis (or similar analyses) to identify weaknesses in the system design. The elements of the fault tree are assessed against well-defined criteria to determine where additional testing and design for reliability efforts are needed. This assessment methodology becomes a tool for reliability engineers, and ultimately program managers, to manage the risk of their reliability program early in the design phase when information is limted to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely solely on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles.","PeriodicalId":189714,"journal":{"name":"2013 Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","volume":"186 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability predictions - continued reliance on a misleading approach\",\"authors\":\"C. Jais, B. Werner, D. Das\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RAMS.2013.6517751\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reliability prediction methodologies, especially those centered on Military Handbook (MIL-HDBK) 217 and its progeny are highly controversial in their application. The use of reliability predictions in the design and operation of military applications have been in existence since the 1950's. Various textbooks, articles, and workshops have provided insight on the pros and cons of these prediction methodologies. Recent research shows that these methods have produced highly inaccurate results when compared to actual test data for a number of military programs. These inaccuracies promote poor programmatic and design decisions, and often lead to reliability problems later in development. Major reasons for handbook prediction inaccuracies include but are not limited to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely soley on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles. Rather than rely on inaccurate handbook methodologies, a reliability assessment methodology is recommended. The reliability assessment methodology includes utilizing reliability data from comparable systems, historical test data, and leveraging subject-matter-expert input. System developers then apply fault-tree analysis (or similar analyses) to identify weaknesses in the system design. The elements of the fault tree are assessed against well-defined criteria to determine where additional testing and design for reliability efforts are needed. This assessment methodology becomes a tool for reliability engineers, and ultimately program managers, to manage the risk of their reliability program early in the design phase when information is limted to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely solely on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":189714,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2013 Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)\",\"volume\":\"186 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2013 Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAMS.2013.6517751\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAMS.2013.6517751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

可靠性预测方法,特别是以《军事手册》(MIL-HDBK) 217及其衍生版本为中心的可靠性预测方法在应用中存在很大争议。自1950年代以来,在军事应用的设计和操作中使用可靠性预测已经存在。各种教科书、文章和研讨会都对这些预测方法的优缺点提供了见解。最近的研究表明,与许多军事项目的实际测试数据相比,这些方法产生的结果非常不准确。这些不准确性导致了糟糕的编程和设计决策,并经常导致开发后期的可靠性问题。手册预测不准确的主要原因包括但不限于:1)手册数据库跟不上电子工业的快速发展。2)只解决了整个系统故障率的一小部分3)预测方法仅依赖于简单的启发式,而不是考虑合理的工程设计原则。与其依赖不准确的手册方法,不如推荐一种可靠性评估方法。可靠性评估方法包括利用来自可比系统的可靠性数据、历史测试数据以及利用主题专家的输入。然后系统开发人员应用故障树分析(或类似的分析)来识别系统设计中的弱点。根据定义良好的标准对故障树的元素进行评估,以确定需要在哪些地方进行额外的可靠性测试和设计。这种评估方法成为可靠性工程师的工具,最终成为项目经理,在信息有限的设计阶段早期管理可靠性项目风险的工具:1)手册数据库无法跟上电子工业的快速发展。2)只解决了整个系统故障率的一小部分3)预测方法仅依赖于简单的启发式,而不是考虑合理的工程设计原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability predictions - continued reliance on a misleading approach
Reliability prediction methodologies, especially those centered on Military Handbook (MIL-HDBK) 217 and its progeny are highly controversial in their application. The use of reliability predictions in the design and operation of military applications have been in existence since the 1950's. Various textbooks, articles, and workshops have provided insight on the pros and cons of these prediction methodologies. Recent research shows that these methods have produced highly inaccurate results when compared to actual test data for a number of military programs. These inaccuracies promote poor programmatic and design decisions, and often lead to reliability problems later in development. Major reasons for handbook prediction inaccuracies include but are not limited to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely soley on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles. Rather than rely on inaccurate handbook methodologies, a reliability assessment methodology is recommended. The reliability assessment methodology includes utilizing reliability data from comparable systems, historical test data, and leveraging subject-matter-expert input. System developers then apply fault-tree analysis (or similar analyses) to identify weaknesses in the system design. The elements of the fault tree are assessed against well-defined criteria to determine where additional testing and design for reliability efforts are needed. This assessment methodology becomes a tool for reliability engineers, and ultimately program managers, to manage the risk of their reliability program early in the design phase when information is limted to: 1) The handbook database cannot keep pace with the rapid advances in the electronic industry. 2) Only a small portion of the overall system failure rate is addressed 3) Prediction methodologies rely solely on simple heuristics rather than considering sound engineering design principles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信