Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Reliability allocation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Applicability and Limitations of Reliability Allocation Methods

Reliability allocation process may be described as the process of assigning reliability requirements to individual components within a system to attain the specified system reliability. For large systems, the allocation process is often performed at different stages of system design. The allocation process often begins at the conceptual stage. As the system design develops, more information about components and the operating environment becomes available, different allocation methods can be considered. Reliability allocation methods are usually divided into two categories: weighting factors and optimal reliability allocation. When properly applied, these methods can produce reasonable approximations. Reliability allocation techniques have limitations and implied assumptions that need to be understood by system engineers. Applying reliability allocation techniques without understanding their limitations and assumptions can produce unrealistic results. This report addresses weighting factors, optimal reliability allocation techniques, and identifies the applicability and limitations of each reliability allocation technique.

Reliability allocation↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evolving Reliability and Maintainability Allocations for NASA Ground Systems

This paper describes the methodology that was developed to allocate reliability and maintainability requirements for the NASA Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program's subsystems. As systems progressed through their design life cycle and hardware data became available, it became necessary to reexamine the previously derived allocations. Allocating is an iterative process; as systems moved beyond their conceptual and preliminary design phases this provided an opportunity for the reliability engineering team to reevaluate allocations based on updated designs and maintainability characteristics of the components. Trade-offs in reliability and maintainability were essential to ensuring the integrity of the reliability and maintainability analysis. This paper will discuss the value of modifying reliability and maintainability allocations made for the GSDO subsystems as the program nears the end of its design phase.

allocations↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evolving Reliability and Maintainability Allocations for NASA Ground Systems

This paper describes the methodology and value of modifying allocations to reliability and maintainability requirements for the NASA Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) programs subsystems. As systems progressed through their design life cycle and hardware data became available, it became necessary to reexamine the previously derived allocations. This iterative process provided an opportunity for the reliability engineering team to reevaluate allocations as systems moved beyond their conceptual and preliminary design phases. These new allocations are based on updated designs and maintainability characteristics of the components. It was found that trade-offs in reliability and maintainability were essential to ensuring the integrity of the reliability and maintainability analysis. This paper discusses the results of reliability and maintainability reallocations made for the GSDO subsystems as the program nears the end of its design phase.

reliability↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evolving Reliability and Maintainability Allocations for NASA Ground Systems

This paper describes the methodology and value of modifying allocations to reliability and maintainability requirements for the NASA Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program’s subsystems. As systems progressed through their design life cycle and hardware data became available, it became necessary to reexamine the previously derived allocations. This iterative process provided an opportunity for the reliability engineering team to reevaluate allocations as systems moved beyond their conceptual and preliminary design phases. These new allocations are based on updated designs and maintainability characteristics of the components. It was found that trade-offs in reliability and maintainability were essential to ensuring the integrity of the reliability and maintainability analysis. This paper discusses the results of reliability and maintainability reallocations made for the GSDO subsystems as the program nears the end of its design phase.

allocations↗
NASA NTRS2016

Addressing Uniqueness and Unison of Reliability and Safety for a Better Integration

Over time, it has been observed that Safety and Reliability have not been clearly differentiated, which leads to confusion, inefficiency, and, sometimes, counter-productive practices in executing each of these two disciplines. It is imperative to address this situation to help Reliability and Safety disciplines improve their effectiveness and efficiency. The paper poses an important question to address, "Safety and Reliability - Are they unique or unisonous?" To answer the question, the paper reviewed several most commonly used analyses from each of the disciplines, namely, FMEA, reliability allocation and prediction, reliability design involvement, system safety hazard analysis, Fault Tree Analysis, and Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The paper pointed out uniqueness and unison of Safety and Reliability in their respective roles, requirements, approaches, and tools, and presented some suggestions for enhancing and improving the individual disciplines, as well as promoting the integration of the two. The paper concludes that Safety and Reliability are unique, but compensating each other in many aspects, and need to be integrated. Particularly, the individual roles of Safety and Reliability need to be differentiated, that is, Safety is to ensure and assure the product meets safety requirements, goals, or desires, and Reliability is to ensure and assure maximum achievability of intended design functions. With the integration of Safety and Reliability, personnel can be shared, tools and analyses have to be integrated, and skill sets can be possessed by the same person with the purpose of providing the best value to a product development.

Huang, Zhaofeng↗
NASA NTRS1992

Probabilistic design applications for the Space Transportation Main Engines

All of the current rocket engine designs are based on deterministic design analysis methods. The most recently designed engine, Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSME), was designed and developed using these techniques in the 1970's and 80's. The Space Transportation Main Engine (STME) design objective is to use a robust design methodology and to pro-actively assess and improve the design during the design process. The design approach is a combination of the traditional deterministic methodologies and recently developed probabilistic methodologies. The designer must use a more rigorous structural criteria, conduct pro-active reliability assessments (reliability allocations, failure modes and effects analysis, reliability growth studies, and design reliability assessment), use a damage tolerant design philosophy and perform probabilistic analyses. Rigorous application of this structured methodology will develop a better engine product.

Ohara, Kevin↗
NASA NTRS2012

Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability: Consideration During the Design Phase in Ground Systems to Ensure Successful Launch Support

The future of Space Exploration includes missions to the moon, asteroids, Mars, and beyond. To get there, the mission concept is to launch multiple launch vehicles months, even years apart. In order to achieve this, launch vehicles, payloads (satellites and crew capsules), and ground systems must be highly reliable and/or available, to include maintenance concepts and procedures in the event of a launch scrub. In order to achieve this high probability of mission success, Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) has allocated Reliability, Maintainability, and Availability (RMA) requirements to all hardware and software required for both launch operations and, in the event of a launch scrub, required to support a repair of the ground systems, launch vehicle, or payload. This is done concurrently with the design process (30/60/90 reviews).

Gillespie, Amanda M.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Future challenges in V/STOL flight propulsion control integration

A survey of propulsion control requirements forming part of an advanced V/STOL control requirements study has to date determined, among other findings: (1) that the dependence of V/STOL flying qualities on propulsive lift makes it necessary to identify propulsion control requirements early in a development program; (2) that V/STOL controls of the future should relieve the pilot of control functions and elevate him to the position of a flight operations manager, with substantial gains in capability and/or safety; and (3) that research is required to define the V/STOL control system reliability requirements and specific component reliability allocations. An interactive, integrated design process for the realization of these objectives is also described.

Roth, S. P.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Reliability of photovoltaic modules

In order to assess the reliability of photovoltaic modules, four categories of known array failure and degradation mechanisms are discussed, and target reliability allocations have been developed within each category based on the available technology and the life-cycle-cost requirements of future large-scale terrestrial applications. Cell-level failure mechanisms associated with open-circuiting or short-circuiting of individual solar cells generally arise from cell cracking or the fatigue of cell-to-cell interconnects. Power degradation mechanisms considered include gradual power loss in cells, light-induced effects, and module optical degradation. Module-level failure mechanisms and life-limiting wear-out mechanisms are also explored.

Ross, R. G., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Reliability growth/burn-in - The allocation of testing resources

A sequential component test procedure is proposed. It is assumed that there is some knowledge of the initial failure rate parameter of each component. This knowledge is modified by the results of the first one or two tests. The remaining component test time is allocated adaptively (sequentially) to the components so as to maximize the system MTBF. In other words, the components will compete among themselves for limited test resources.

Truelove, A. J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Ultra Reliable Closed Loop Life Support for Long Space Missions

Spacecraft human life support systems can achieve ultra reliability by providing sufficient spares to replace all failed components. The additional mass of spares for ultra reliability is approximately equal to the original system mass, provided that the original system reliability is not too low. Acceptable reliability can be achieved for the Space Shuttle and Space Station by preventive maintenance and by replacing failed units. However, on-demand maintenance and repair requires a logistics supply chain in place to provide the needed spares. In contrast, a Mars or other long space mission must take along all the needed spares, since resupply is not possible. Long missions must achieve ultra reliability, a very low failure rate per hour, since they will take years rather than weeks and cannot be cut short if a failure occurs. Also, distant missions have a much higher mass launch cost per kilogram than near-Earth missions. Achieving ultra reliable spacecraft life support systems with acceptable mass will require a well-planned and extensive development effort. Analysis must determine the reliability requirement and allocate it to subsystems and components. Ultra reliability requires reducing the intrinsic failure causes, providing spares to replace failed components and having "graceful" failure modes. Technologies, components, and materials must be selected and designed for high reliability. Long duration testing is needed to confirm very low failure rates. Systems design should segregate the failure causes in the smallest, most easily replaceable parts. The system must be designed, developed, integrated, and tested with system reliability in mind. Maintenance and reparability of failed units must not add to the probability of failure. The overall system must be tested sufficiently to identify any design errors. A program to develop ultra reliable space life support systems with acceptable mass should start soon since it must be a long term effort.

Jones, Harry W.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Optimum allocation of redundancy among subsystems connected in series

This analysis considers the optimum allocation of redundancy in a system of serially connected subsystems in which each subsystem is of the k-out-of-n type. Redundancy is optimally allocated when: (1) reliability is maximized for given costs; or (2) costs are minimized for given reliability. Several techniques are presented for achieving optimum allocation and their relative merits are discussed. Approximate solutions in closed form were attainable only for the special case of series-parallel systems and the efficacy of these approximations is discussed.

Bien, D. D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design for Reliability (DfR) in Space Life Support

The engineering process of Design for Reliability (DfR) is well established in the automotive and aerospace industries. DfR should be useful in the future development of space life support systems. DfR is a sequence of tasks that develop system requirements and plan reliability analysis and testing. First and fundamentally, the reliability requirement is defined. Next the system reliability model is developed, often using a reliability block diagram. The overall system reliability requirement is allocated to the subsystems and an estimate of the attainable reliability is made. This expected reliability can be improved by simplifying the design by removing components or by replacing less reliable components. Improving reliability can require difficult compromises, such as reducing performance requirements, increasing budget, or extending testing. The actual system reliability can be determined only by testing, which should continue long enough to provide the required confidence in the measured value. New systems often have unexpected design errors that cause failures in early testing. The usual reliability improvement process of testing, finding the failure modes, and redesigning to remove them reduces the failure rate and is referred to as “reliability growth.” After redesign has been completed, the system should be further tested to determine the actual achieved reliability more accurately. If the final system failure rate is too high, redundant systems can be used to improve overall operational reliability. Adding redundancy simply to increase the one- or two-fault tolerance metric may sometimes reduce reliability. Reliability can be improved in three ways: redesigning the system to include more reliable subsystems and components, reliability growth testing and failure mode removal, and by using parallel redundant systems. DfR should combine these approaches to achieve the required reliability while managing performance, cost, and schedule.

Reliability↗