Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Teaching Notes
1. 2. 3. The Main topics of this chapter are Quantifying Reliability Role of Redundancy Availability Reliability is a measure of the ability of a product, part, or system to perform its intended function under a prescribed set of conditions. Quantitative methods include the use of probabilities addition, multiplication, complements! in determining reliability and the use of "#ponential and $ormal distributions in determining the mean time bet%een failures used in availability!. &tudents seem to have some difficulty %ith "#ponential distribution, especially if they have not had it in their statistics courses. The coverage of "#ponential distribution can be omitted %ithout loss of continuity. The $ormal distribution should be included because it paves the %ay for later use of inventory management and 'uality control sampling theory.
So$ tions
1. a. / operate! , .+2 , .-1 b. .+ .+ .+ .+ 0.+* 1 .1* .+*!2 0.+* 1 .1* .+*!2 , .+-*1
c. 0.+* 1 .++ .1*! .+*!22 , .+3-3 2. 3. .+4 # .+4 # .++ # .++ , .+*33 53 , .+2 # , .+324
63
Solutions (continued) 7. 8 , 1*/! 2 per component 2 1*/! 2 , 133 1**/2 , -4.6 /2 , .-46 / , .+3 a. +3 # .+3 # .++ , .+316 b. .+316 1 1 9 .+316! # .+316 , .++63 0i.e., / %or.! 1 / not %or.! # / bac.up %or.s!2 c. .+316 1 0 1 9 .+316! # .+- # .+3162 , .++7 0i.e., / %or.! 1 0/ not %or.! # / s%itch %or.s! # / bac.up %or.s!2 4. a. .+- # .+6 # .+7 # .+* , .3-34 b. (f 1st: 0.+- 1 1 9 .+-! # .+-2 # .+6 # .+7 # .+* , .-*37 (f 2nd: .+- # 0.+6 1 1 9 .+6! # .+62 # .+7 # .+* , .-23* (f 3rd: .+- # .+6 # 0.+7 1 1 ; .+7! # .+72 # .+* , .-37+ (f 7th: .+- # .+6 # .+7 # 0.+* 1 1 9 .+*! # .+*2 , .-447 0i.e., for any case, / all other %or.! # / that one fails! # / bac.up %or.s!2 The fourth component should be bac.ed up. c. The one %ith a reliability of .+* since it poses the greatest ris. of failure. The system reliability %ill then be .-4-17. 3. a. <1: /line , .++ # .+4 # .+3 , .--3+ / line %or.s! 1 / line fails! # / bac.up %or.s! , .--3+ 1 0 1 9 .--3+! # .--3+!2 , .+-46 <2:
.++ .++ .+4 .+4 .++ .++ .+4 .+4 .+3 .+3
6.
.+3 .+3
/: .++ 1 0 1 9 .++! # .++2 .+4 1 0 1 9 .+4! # .+42 , .++++ , .++-7 =verall: .++++ # .++-7 # .++61 , .++37 /lan 2 is better .++37 > .+-46!
b. (n <1 the system %ill fail if any one original and any one bac.up fail. (n <2 the system %ill fail only if a component and its bac.up fail. c. &pace for a line versus space for individual bac.ups, ease of shifting to bac.ups %hen needed, possible cost differences.
67
-.
a.
, .+-76
The decrease in reliability is .+-46 9 .+-76 , .**2 a. Rsystem , .++ 1 0 1 9 .++! # .+- # .++2! .+4 1 0 1 9 .+4! # .+- # .+42! .+3 1 0 1 9 .+3! # .
1*.
11.
12.
c. T 1! 2! 3! 7! 13.
1; e;T?MT@)! 6*A -6A +6A ++A approx .3 1.+ 3.* 7.4 21 mo. 63 +* 13-
MT@) , 3* months a. T , 3* months 3* T ? MT@) = = 1 .* 3* 1 ; e;T?MT@) , 1 ; .343+ , .4321 b. 1 ; e;T?MT@) , .1*, so e;T?MT@) , .+*. Bence, T?MT@) , .1* T , .1* 3* months! , 3 months.
66
1,*** = .2 6,***
*
.1-13
.6136
1;e , 1 ; .-1-3 , .1-13 c. / 1,*** # 4,***! , .-1-3 ;.3*12 .6136 16. MT@) , 4 years T a. >+ b. C12 c. +CTC12 d. >21 , 71 mo. , 7 mo. a. b.
< 3- : D =
.3*12
1,***
4,***
hours
T?MT@) e;T?MT@) ) T! 1.6 .2231 2.* 1 ; .1363 , .-473 .-473 ; 1 9 .2231! ,.*-33.6 .*3*2
.-473
.2231
.*3*2 .*-3-
14.
12
21
years
3- 71 = .36. /robability , .2244 )rom App. @ Table @! 7 7* 71 = .26. /robability , .6 9 .7*13 , .*+-3 )rom App. @ Table @! 7
7* < T < 76 : D = D 76 =
71 c.
b.
.*+-3 .3713
.1+16
3-
71
7* 71
76
3+ 71 73
64
.1+16
Solutions (continued) 13. , 4 years , .6 years a. 1! 64 = 2.** .6 1 .*22- = .+332 Appendi# @, Table @! > 6 yr : z = > 6 yr : z = 44 = *.** .6 = .6***
.6*** .+332
.++-3
92
2!
3.6 4 = +3.** 3! .6 = .++-3( "ppen#ix $, %a&le $) 3 ! yr : z = 74 = 7.** .6 Therefore, appro#imately Dero. a. 2A: )ind 2A in App. A Table @: D is 92.*66. 1 D , 4 9 2.*66 .6! , 7.+3 yr. b. 6A: )ind 6A in App. A Table @: D is 91.476. 1 D , 4 9 1.476 .6! , 6.1- yr. b. 1-. ' 7 yr : z =
2A 92.*66 7.+3 * 4
D9scale yr9scale
97
6A 91.476 6.1* 4
D9scale yr9scale
MT@) MT@) + MTR MT@) Availability = MT@) + MTR 172 Availability A = = .+63 172 + 3 46 Availability @ = = .+3* 46 + 2 Availability =
8urrent Availability =
a.
22.
63
a. (ncrease in MT@) , .*6! 1**! , 6 hrs. $e% MT@) , 1** 1 6 , 1*6 hrs. 1*6 1*6 Availability = = = .+433 1*6 + 7 1*+ b. Reduction in MTR , .1! 7 hrs.! , .7 hrs. $e% MTR , 7 hrs 9 .7 hrs , 3.4 hrs. 1** Availability = = .+463 1** + 3.4 &ince .+463 > .+433, designer should choose to reduce MTR, especially because it costs less. ) = ( 7 7.3 = = 2.33 .3 *() 2.33) = .**++ (from Appendi# @, Table @)
23.
a.
Ee %ould e#pect appro#imately 1A of the batteries to fail before the %arranty period ends. b. &ince 67 months , 7.6 years, 5 , 7.6. ) = ( 7.6 7.3 = = .43 .3 *() .43) = .2617 (from Appendi# @, Table @)
Ee %ould e#pect appro#imately 26A of the batteries to fail before the %arranty period ends. Therefore, for each individual battery, the company %ould have to charge 26 ; 1 , 27A of price of the battery 1 F6! more. c. (n addition to price of the battery, the company should consider: 1. /ossible lost future sales of this type of battery as %ell as lost sales of other products manufactured and sold by the company due to a high volume of replaced batteriesG 2. /ossible loss of good %ill, reputation, and poor image in the mar.et due to higher failure rateG 3. The capacity to handle the additional load of battery production and battery e#changes due to failuresG 7. The amount of additional business generated as a result of adding the premium battery. (n other %ords the company must consider the trade9off bet%een the additional business generated from the premium battery vs. the cannibaliDation of the current base and the e#isting batteries.!
6-