可靠性度量和REMM模型

I. James, J. Marshall, M. Evans, B. Newman
{"title":"可靠性度量和REMM模型","authors":"I. James, J. Marshall, M. Evans, B. Newman","doi":"10.1109/RAMS.2004.1285493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses differences in the understanding and application of current reliability metrics across engineering disciplines within an aerospace environment. Differences in the interpretation of these metrics by designers, project managers and product support engineers within an organization may compromise the effectiveness of any technical or commercial decision-making that is based upon reliability prediction and field return data analysis. The same concern is true for customer and supplier interfaces with the organization, where reliability requirements and contractual guarantees, such as spares provision, are defined. The main issues appear to be related to an inadequate understanding of reliability requirement objectives. The process of negotiating and agreeing to requirements between a supplier and customer appears to be flawed in many cases by a lack of knowledge regarding the assumptions associated with the chosen metric. Holistic approaches to reliability such as REMM (reliability enhancement methodology & modeling) can provide alternative metrics from those traditionally used in the engineering community. This paper outlines the metrics available from such techniques and compares them with the more commonly used engineering metrics such as removal rate, mean time between failure (MTBF) and mean time between removal (MTBR). In conclusion, without a shared and agreed understanding of the reasons for specific reliability requirements, products may be designed to meet a customer specification without actually meeting the real reliability objectives.","PeriodicalId":270494,"journal":{"name":"Annual Symposium Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 - RAMS","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability metrics and the REMM model\",\"authors\":\"I. James, J. Marshall, M. Evans, B. Newman\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RAMS.2004.1285493\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper discusses differences in the understanding and application of current reliability metrics across engineering disciplines within an aerospace environment. Differences in the interpretation of these metrics by designers, project managers and product support engineers within an organization may compromise the effectiveness of any technical or commercial decision-making that is based upon reliability prediction and field return data analysis. The same concern is true for customer and supplier interfaces with the organization, where reliability requirements and contractual guarantees, such as spares provision, are defined. The main issues appear to be related to an inadequate understanding of reliability requirement objectives. The process of negotiating and agreeing to requirements between a supplier and customer appears to be flawed in many cases by a lack of knowledge regarding the assumptions associated with the chosen metric. Holistic approaches to reliability such as REMM (reliability enhancement methodology & modeling) can provide alternative metrics from those traditionally used in the engineering community. This paper outlines the metrics available from such techniques and compares them with the more commonly used engineering metrics such as removal rate, mean time between failure (MTBF) and mean time between removal (MTBR). In conclusion, without a shared and agreed understanding of the reasons for specific reliability requirements, products may be designed to meet a customer specification without actually meeting the real reliability objectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":270494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual Symposium Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 - RAMS\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-08-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual Symposium Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 - RAMS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAMS.2004.1285493\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Symposium Reliability and Maintainability, 2004 - RAMS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RAMS.2004.1285493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本文讨论了在航空航天环境中,跨工程学科对当前可靠性度量的理解和应用的差异。设计人员、项目经理和产品支持工程师对这些指标的不同解释可能会影响基于可靠性预测和现场返回数据分析的任何技术或商业决策的有效性。对于与组织的客户和供应商接口,也存在同样的问题,其中定义了可靠性要求和合同保证,例如备件供应。主要问题似乎与对可靠性需求目标的理解不足有关。在许多情况下,由于缺乏与所选度量相关的假设的知识,供应商和客户之间协商和同意需求的过程似乎存在缺陷。可靠性的整体方法,如REMM(可靠性增强方法和建模),可以提供工程界传统使用的替代指标。本文概述了这些技术的可用度量,并将它们与更常用的工程度量(如去除率、平均故障间隔时间(MTBF)和平均清除间隔时间(MTBR))进行了比较。总之,如果对特定可靠性要求的原因没有共同和一致的理解,产品可能被设计成满足客户规格,而实际上却没有达到真正的可靠性目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability metrics and the REMM model
This paper discusses differences in the understanding and application of current reliability metrics across engineering disciplines within an aerospace environment. Differences in the interpretation of these metrics by designers, project managers and product support engineers within an organization may compromise the effectiveness of any technical or commercial decision-making that is based upon reliability prediction and field return data analysis. The same concern is true for customer and supplier interfaces with the organization, where reliability requirements and contractual guarantees, such as spares provision, are defined. The main issues appear to be related to an inadequate understanding of reliability requirement objectives. The process of negotiating and agreeing to requirements between a supplier and customer appears to be flawed in many cases by a lack of knowledge regarding the assumptions associated with the chosen metric. Holistic approaches to reliability such as REMM (reliability enhancement methodology & modeling) can provide alternative metrics from those traditionally used in the engineering community. This paper outlines the metrics available from such techniques and compares them with the more commonly used engineering metrics such as removal rate, mean time between failure (MTBF) and mean time between removal (MTBR). In conclusion, without a shared and agreed understanding of the reasons for specific reliability requirements, products may be designed to meet a customer specification without actually meeting the real reliability objectives.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信