Download - Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard
![Page 1: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
127 June 2002
Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program
Data Transfer Format Standard
A Quick Look at the Major Problems Affecting R&M Assessments in Today’s Space Industry and How a New
Standard Might Provide a Practical Solution for the Future
Tyrone Jackson; Working Group Coordinator
![Page 2: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
227 June 2002
Distant Background
• Data collected in 2000 and 2001 to evaluate top-10 Reliability Program problems and causes– Surveyed several Reliability Engineering experts working for NASA
and private sector– Participated in development of a IEEE Reliability Program
Standard, a IEEE Reliability Prediction Guide, and a SAE FMECA Guide (Draft)
• Paper published in January 2001 titled: Finding Answers to Space Industry’s Top-10 Reliability Problems
• Evaluated AIAA Collection of Preferred Space-Related Standards (CPSRS) Project in 2000 and 2001– Concluded CPSRS Project’s output would provide little value to
Reliability community– AIAA cancelled project in 2001
![Page 3: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
327 June 2002
Recent Background
• In October 2001, Dr. Patrick Larter, President of Society of Reliability Engineers (SRE), requested a plan for reactivating Los Angeles Chapter of SRE
• In November 2001, Mike Canga of NASA Johnson Space Center expressed a strong interest in requiring that all R&M assessment tools used in development of production version of Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) be compliant with a Data Transfer Format (DTF) standard– Standard should provide a single framework for linking different
R&M assessment tools
• In January 2002, Tyrone Jackson received approval from SRE Board of Directors to form a working group to write a R&M DTF standard
![Page 4: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
427 June 2002
Recent Background (Continued)
• In March 2002, Tyrone coordinated first bi-weekly teleconference meeting of working group. WG participants come from Aerospace, TRW, Boeing, Spectrum Astro, Northrop Grumman, Cal State Long Beach Graduate Engineering College, and three R&M assessment tool developers
• In June 2002, Jim French of AIAA informed Tyrone that AIAA Standards Board would vote in August 2002 to sponsor WG to write draft standard– AIAA sanctioning is contingent on draft standard being renamed,
“Space Systems - Data Transfer Formats Standard”
![Page 5: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
527 June 2002
Commercial Reliability Standards Failed to Meet Needs of Space Community
• Commercial reliability standards provide inadequate guidance for establishing, implementing, and monitoring High-Reliability Programs for space systems
– Several commercial Reliability Program standards were published by IEEE, SAE, and IEC, but effectiveness of Space Systems Reliability Programs has steadily declined since military standards were discontinued in 1994
– Commercial standards provide no guidance for selecting appropriate reliability assessment methods (or tools) for specific objectives of Space Systems Engineering Process
– Commercial standards do not define a consistent criteria for implementing or evaluating reliability assessment methods (or tools)
![Page 6: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
627 June 2002
Cluster of Major Failures in 1998-1999 Exposed Reliability Program Weakness
FAILED SPACE & LAUNCH VEHICLE MISSIONS DATE OF FAILURE
Titan IV A-20/Centaur 08/12/98
Titan IV B-27/Inertial Upper Stage 04/09/99
Titan IV B-32/Centaur 04/30/99
Delta III 259/Galaxy-X 08/26/98
Delta III 269/Orion-3 05/04/99
Mars Climate Orbiter 09/23/99
Mars Polar Lander 12/03/99
STEX 04/15/99
Argos 02/20/99
PanAmSat Galaxy 4 05/19/98
• Spike that occurred in cumulative hazard rate of space systems during 1998-1999 was result of forgotten or ignored lessons learned
![Page 7: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
727 June 2002
WG List of Space Industry’s Top-10 Reliability Program Problems
1. Valuable RMA lessons learned often are not in a format that is readily assessable or useable by Reliability Program, or they have become “lessons lost” in an over-whelming mass of engineering information. For example, a useful lesson learned might never be linked to equipment that it applies if name that is used to search for information is different than name recorded in database.
2. Sometimes a Reliability Critical Item becomes (1) a “weakest link” because a design weaknesses was uncovered too late to implement a design change, or (2) an “unknown failure” because a critical failure mode was not identified, or (3) an “underestimated failure” because a failure cause or failure mechanism was unknown or not understood, or (4) an “escaped failure” because a fault slipped pass Test.
3. System reliability predictions often do not include probability of occurrence estimates for all relevant failure modes, failure mechanisms, and failure causes. For example, probability of induced faults during manufacture or probability of damage during assembly usually is not included in a reliability prediction.
![Page 8: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
827 June 2002
WG List of Space Industry’s Top-10 Reliability Program Problems (Cont.)
4. Sometimes, assumed adequacy of R&M requirements or accuracy of R&M predictions is not supported by input data.
5. Job openings for reliability analysts are steadily decreasing, and as a result, number of filled positions is insufficient to adequately support an increasing number of space system development projects. This situation is leading to reliability assessment methods being improperly applied, untimely, or not cost-effective.
6. Many commercial R&M assessment tools have major shortcomings that may not be obvious to casual users. For example, tools may have inaccurate models, unverifiable modeling parameters, high misapplication rates, etc.
7. Often, lack of design-relevant Technical Performance Measurements (TPMs) for R&M tasks leads to insufficient funding to perform tasks necessary for a High-Reliability Program. For example, a customer or manager might believe that High-Reliability can be tested-in more cost-effectively than it can be designed-in.
![Page 9: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
927 June 2002
WG List of Space Industry’s Top-10 Reliability Program Problems (Cont.)
8. Throughout space industry, identical R&M tasks are being called by different names and vise versa. Inconsistency among reliability practices has become a major problem since DoD canceled military standards in mid 90’s.
9. Some customers believe that all Reliability, Dependability, and Availability predictions for satellite constellations are too conservative. Basis of this belief is rooted in historical evidence that shows contingency procedures of ground operations are very effective for extending useful life of satellites far beyond their predicted mean-life. This phenomenon has resulted in many customers buying more satellites than necessary to meet mission requirements.
10. Often it is difficult for an organization to assure that latest versions of the R&M assessment models match latest configuration of space system design. Part of this problem is because reliability assessment tools generally do not label every element in the model with date and time it was created.
![Page 10: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
1027 June 2002
Scope of Space Systems Dependability DTF Standard
• Scope of Dependability DTF standard covers:– Space Systems Engineering processes used for
generating Dependability data– Extensible Markup Language (XML) definitions used
for transferring Dependability data to and from a database
• Standard applies to both hardware and software Dependability data
![Page 11: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
1127 June 2002
Purpose of Space Systems Dependability DTF Standard
• Purpose of Dependability DTF Standard is to:1. Provide space systems producers with a High-Reliability
Program model that is proven effective
2. Provide space systems producers with criteria for selecting appropriate R&M assessment tools
3. Provide space systems producers with a single model for building databases that are proven effective for achieving High-Reliability requirements for space systems
4. Provide space systems customers and producers with consistent criteria for measuring effectiveness of a High-Reliability Program
5. Provide tool developers with a common DTF for R&M assessment data
![Page 12: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
1227 June 2002
Structure of Space Systems Dependability DTF Standard
DependabilityRequirements Datato Functional Model
Mapping2.4.2
Functional &Physical to StressParameters Model
Mapping2.4.9
Functional, Physical, StressParameters & Maintainability/Failure Analysis to Reliability
Analysis/FMECA ModelMapping
2.4.7, 2.4.8, 2.4.9, 2.4.10
Rel Analysis/FMECA &Maint/Failure Analysis to
Mission EffectivenessAnalysis Model Mapping
2.4.10
Dependability Assessment Model Flow
Functional, Physical, StressParameters & Reliability
Analysis/FMECA toMaintainability/Failure
Analysis Model Mapping2.4.10
DependabilityRequirements Data
Models2.4.1
Similar System/Component Design
Models2.4.3
DEPENDABILITY DATA TRANSFER FORMAT GROUPS:
A - Dependability Requirements Models
B - Functional Models
C - Physical Models
D - Stress Parameters Models
E - Reliability Analysis/FMECA ModelsE1 - Reliability Analysis ModelsE2 - FMECA Models
DependabilityRequirements Data &Functional to Physical
Model Mapping2.4.2, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6
F - Maintainability/Failure Analysis ModelsF1 - Maintainability Analysis ModelsF2 - Failure Analysis Models
G - Mission Effectiveness Analysis ModelsG1 - Operational Dependability Analysis ModelsG2 - Operational Availability Analysis Models
H - Similar System/Component Design ModelsH1 - Dependability Design Concerns & Rules ModelsH2 - Sneak Design Clues Models
Format H
Format B Format A
Format C
Format D
Format E
Format F
Format G
Test & Field Failure Data
![Page 13: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
1327 June 2002
Dependability DTF Groups
A - Requirements Models
B - Functional Models
C - Physical Models
D - Stress Parameters Models
E1 - Reliability Analysis Models
E2 - FMECA Models
F1 - Maintainability Analysis Models
F2 - Failure Analysis Models
G1 - Operational Dependability Analysis Models
G2 - Operational Availability Analysis Models
H1 - Dependability Design Concerns & Rules Models
H2 - Sneak Design Clues Models
![Page 14: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
1427 June 2002
General Format for Transferring Reliability Requirements Data
RELREQ (Reliability Requirement Model)
REQTYPE (Requirement Type) = SYSTEM or ALLOCATED
REQSOURCE (Requirement Source)
RELFUNC (Specified Reliability Value) = Real
ENVIR (Specified Mission Environment)
PROFILE (Specified Mission Profile)
FAILDEF (Specified System Failure Definitions)
VERIFY (Requirements Verification Methods)
![Page 15: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
1527 June 2002
General Format for Transferring Mission Environment Data
ENVIR (Mission Environment)
EMODE (Environment Mode) = Operation, Storage, or Transport)
TEMPRANGE (Temperature Range) = Real Range
TPUNIT (Temperature Units) = Alphabetic (Celsius, Fahrenheit, Absolute)
HUMRANGE (Humidity Range) = Real Range
HUMUNIT (Humidity Units) = Alphabetic
ALTRANGE (Altitude Range) = Real Range
DUNIT (Distance Units) = (Kilometers, Miles, Feet)
BPRANGE (Barometric Pressure Range) = Real Range
PUNIT (Pressure Units) = Alphabetic (Inches HG, Atmospheres, PSI)
MAXWIND (Maximum Wind Speed) = Real
VUNIT (Velocity Units) = Alphabetic (MPH, KM per Second, etc.)
RADIATION (Radiation) = Real
![Page 16: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
1627 June 2002
General Format for Transferring Reliability Block Diagram Data
RELBLOCK (Reliability Block Diagram Model)
RELNAME (Reliability Block Diagram Model Name) = Alphanumeric
OUTLINK (Model Output Link Name) = Alphanumeric
INLINK (Model Input Link #1 Name) = Alphanumeric
:
RELCONFIG (RBD Math Model) = SERIES or PARALLEL or BINOMIAL or…
RELBLOCK (Child Reliability Block Diagram Model) and/or
RELFUNC (Reliability Function Model #1) = Real and/or
RELDATA (Empirical, Analytical, or Simulation Data Table #1) = Real and/or
RELSTATE (Reliability State Transition Diagram #1) = Real and/or
:
ENVIR (RBD Model Mission Environment)
PROFILE (RBD Model Mission Profile)
FAILDEF (RBD Model Failure Definition)
![Page 17: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
1727 June 2002
Format for Transferring Weibull Function Probability Data
RELFUNC (Weibull Function Probability) = Real
WEIBULL
RELNAME (Weibull Function Name) = Alphanumeric
PREDTYPE (Prediction Type) = FIELD, TEST, PHYSICS, or HDBK
SOURCE (Prediction Source) = Alphabetic
SHAPE = Real
SCALE = Real
STARTTIME (Start Time) = Real
ENDTIME (End Time) = Real
TIMEUNITS (Time Units) = Alphabetic (Hours, Years, Days, etc.)
LCONFIDENCE (Lower Confidence Bound) = Real or UNK or NA
Legend: UNK means confidence bound is unknown
NA means parameter values are based on assumptions
![Page 18: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
1827 June 2002
Format for Transferring Exponential Function Probability Data
RELFUNC (Exponential Function Probability) = Real
EXPONENTIAL
RELNAME (Exponential Function Name) = Alphanumeric
PREDTYPE (Prediction Type) = FIELD, TEST, PHYSICS, or HDBK
SOURCE (Prediction Source) = Alphabetic
MTBF (Mean Time To/Between Failures) = Real
STARTTIME (Start Time) = Real
ENDTIME (End Time) = Real
TIMEUNITS (Time Units) = Alphabetic (Hours, Years, Days, etc.)
LCONFIDENCE (Lower Confidence Bound) = Real or UNK or NA
Legend: UNK means confidence bound is unknown
NA means MTBF value is based on assumption
![Page 19: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
1927 June 2002
Format for Transferring Mean Failure Free Operating Period Data
RELFUNC (Exponential Function Probability) = Real
EXPONENTIAL
RELNAME (Exponential Function Name) = Alphanumeric
PREDTYPE (Prediction Type) = FIELD, TEST, PHYSICS, or HDBK
SOURCE (Prediction Source) = Alphabetic
MTBF (Mean Time To/Between Failures) = Real
STARTTIME (Start Time) = Real
ENDTIME (End Time) = Real
TIMEUNITS (Time Units) = Alphabetic (Hours, Years, Days, etc.)
LCONFIDENCE (Lower Confidence Bound) = Real or UNK or NA
Legend: UNK means confidence bound is unknown
NA means MTBF value is based on assumption
![Page 20: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
2027 June 2002
Progress of WG to Date
• Completed survey identifying top-10 Reliability Program Problems
• Completed draft outline for standard• Started drafting write-up for some sections in draft
standard
![Page 21: Overview of AIAA Proposed Project to Develop a Reliability Program Data Transfer Format Standard](https://reader035.vdocument.in/reader035/viewer/2022062500/56815566550346895dc33043/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
2127 June 2002
Conclusions
• New standard will: Provide space systems developers with a process for solving
top-10 Reliability Program Problems Provide space systems producers with a High-Reliability
Program model that is proven effective Provide space systems producers with criteria for selecting
appropriate R&M assessment tools Provide space systems producers with a single model for
building databases that are proven effective for achieving High-Reliability requirements for space systems
Provide space systems customers and producers with consistent criteria for measuring effectiveness of a High-Reliability Program
Provide tool developers with a common DTF for R&M assessment data