Methods for Reliability Improvement and Risk Reduction.

Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Contents -- Preface -- Chapter 1 Domain‐Independent Methods for Reliability Improvement and Risk Reduction -- 1.1 The Domain‐Specific Methods for Risk Reduction -- 1.2 The Statistical, Data‐Driven Approach -- 1.3 The Physics‐of‐Failure Approach -- 1.4 Reliability Improvement and TRIZ -- 1.5 The Domain‐Independent Methods for Reliability Improvement and Risk Reduction -- Chapter 2 Basic Concepts -- 2.1 Likelihood of Failure, Consequences from Failure, Potential Loss, and Risk of Failure -- 2.2 Drawbacks of the Expected Loss as a Measure of the Potential Loss from Failure -- 2.3 Potential Loss, Conditional Loss, and Risk of Failure -- 2.4 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk -- 2.5 Resilience -- Chapter 3 Overview of Methods and Principles for Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk That Can Be Classified as Domain‐Independent -- 3.1 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Preventing Failure Modes -- 3.1.1 Techniques for Identifying and Assessing Failure Modes -- 3.1.2 Effective Risk Reduction Procedure Related to Preventing Failure Modes from Occurring -- 3.1.3 Reliability Improvement and Risk Reduction by Root Cause Analysis -- 3.1.3.1 Case Study: Improving the Reliability of Automotive Suspension Springs by Root Cause Analysis -- 3.1.4 Preventing Failure Modes by Removing Latent Faults -- 3.2 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by a Fault‐Tolerant System Design and Fail‐Safe Design -- 3.2.1 Building in Redundancy -- 3.2.1.1 Case Study: Improving Reliability by k‐out‐of‐n redundancy -- 3.2.2 Fault‐Tolerant Design -- 3.2.3 Fail‐Safe Principle and Fail‐Safe Design -- 3.2.4 Reducing Risk by Eliminating Vulnerabilities -- 3.2.4.1 Eliminating Design Vulnerabilities -- 3.2.4.2 Reducing the Negative Impact of Weak Links.

3.2.4.3 Reducing the Likelihood of Unfavourable Combinations of Risk‐Critical Random Factors -- 3.2.4.4 Reducing the Vulnerability of Computational Models -- 3.3 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Protecting Against Common Cause -- 3.4 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Simplifying at a System and Component Level -- 3.5 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Reducing the Variability of Risk‐Critical Parameters -- 3.5.1 Case Study: Interaction Between the Upper Tail of the Load Distribution and the Lower Tail of the Strength Distribution -- 3.6 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Making the Design Robust -- 3.6.1 Case Study: Increasing the Robustness of a Spring Assembly with Constant Clamping Force -- 3.7 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Built‐in Reinforcement -- 3.7.1 Built‐In Prevention Reinforcement -- 3.7.2 Built‐In Protection Reinforcement -- 3.8 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Condition Monitoring -- 3.9 Reducing the Risk of Failure by Improving Maintainability -- 3.10 Reducing Risk by Eliminating Factors Promoting Human Errors -- 3.11 Reducing Risk by Reducing the Hazard Potential -- 3.12 Reducing Risk by using Protective Barriers -- 3.13 Reducing Risk by Efficient Troubleshooting Procedures and Systems -- 3.14 Risk Planning and Training -- Chapter 4 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Separation -- 4.1 The Method of Separation -- 4.2 Separation of Risk‐Critical Factors -- 4.2.1 Time Separation by Scheduling -- 4.2.1.1 Case Study: Full Time Separation with Random Starts of the Events -- 4.2.2 Time and Space Separation by Using Interlocks -- 4.2.2.1 Case Study: A Time Separation by Using an Interlock -- 4.2.3 Time Separation in Distributed Systems by Using Logical Clocks -- 4.2.4 Space Separation of Information.

4.2.5 Separation of Duties to Reduce the Risk of Compromised Safety, Errors, and Fraud -- 4.2.6 Logical Separation by Using a Shared Unique Key -- 4.2.6.1 Case Study: Logical Separation of X‐ray Equipment by a Shared Unique Key -- 4.2.7 Separation by Providing Conditions for Independent Operation -- 4.3 Separation of Functions, Properties, or Behaviour -- 4.3.1 Separation of Functions -- 4.3.1.1 Separation of Functions to Optimise for Maximum Reliability -- 4.3.1.2 Separation of Functions to Reduce Load Magnitudes -- 4.3.1.3 Separation of a Single Function into Multiple Components to Reduce Vulnerability to a Single Failure -- 4.3.1.4 Separation of Functions to Compensate Deficiencies -- 4.3.1.5 Separation of Functions to Prevent Unwanted Interactions -- 4.3.1.6 Separation of Methods to Reduce the Risk Associated with Incorrect Mathematical Models -- 4.4 Separation of Properties to Counter Poor Performance Caused by Inhomogeneity -- 4.4.1 Separation of Strength Across Components and Zones According to the Intensity of the Stresses from Loading -- 4.4.2 Separation of Properties to Satisfy Conflicting Requirements -- 4.4.3 Separation in Geometry -- 4.4.3.1 Case Study: Separation in Geometry for a Cantilever Beam -- 4.5 Separation on a Parameter, Conditions, or Scale -- 4.5.1 Separation at Distinct Values of a Risk‐Critical Parameter Through Deliberate Weaknesses and Stress Limiters -- 4.5.2 Separation by Using Phase Changes -- 4.5.3 Separation of Reliability Across Components and Assemblies According to Their Cost of Failure -- 4.5.3.1 Case Study: Separation of the Reliability of Components Based on the Cost of Failure -- Chapter 5 Reducing Risk by Deliberate Weaknesses -- 5.1 Reducing the Consequences from Failure Through Deliberate Weaknesses -- 5.2 Separation from Excessive Levels of Stress -- 5.2.1 Deliberate Weaknesses Disconnecting Excessive Load.

5.2.2 Energy‐Absorbing Deliberate Weaknesses -- 5.2.2.1 Case Study: Reducing the Maximum Stress from Dynamic Loading by Energy‐Absorbing Elastic Components -- 5.2.3 Designing Frangible Objects or Weakly Fixed Objects -- 5.3 Separation from Excessive Levels of Damage -- 5.3.1 Deliberate Weaknesses Decoupling Damaged Regions and Limiting the Spread of Damage -- 5.3.2 Deliberate Weaknesses Providing Stress and Strain Relaxation -- 5.3.3 Deliberate Weaknesses Separating from Excessive Levels of Damage Accumulation -- 5.4 Deliberate Weaknesses Deflecting the Failure Location or Damage Propagation -- 5.4.1 Deflecting the Failure Location from Places Where the Cost of Failure is High -- 5.4.2 Deflecting the Failure Location from Places Where the Cost of Intervention for Repair is High -- 5.4.3 Deliberate Weaknesses Deflecting the Propagation of Damage -- 5.5 Deliberate Weaknesses Designed to Provide Warning -- 5.6 Deliberate Weaknesses Designed to Provide Quick Access or Activate Protection -- 5.7 Deliberate Weaknesses and Stress Limiters -- Chapter 6 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Stochastic Separation -- 6.1 Stochastic Separation of Risk‐Critical Factors -- 6.1.1 Real‐Life Applications that Require Stochastic Separation -- 6.1.2 Stochastic Separation of a Fixed Number of Random Events with Different Duration Times -- 6.1.2.1 Case Study: Stochastic Separation of Consumers by Proportionally Reducing Their Demand Times -- 6.1.3 Stochastic Separation of Random Events Following a Homogeneous Poisson Process -- 6.1.3.1 Case Study: Stochastic Separation of Random Demands Following a Homogeneous Poisson Process -- 6.1.4 Stochastic Separation Based on the Probability of Overlapping of Random Events for More than a Single Source Servicing the Random Demands.

6.1.5 Computer Simulation Algorithm Determining the Probability of Overlapping for More than a Single Source Servicing the Demands -- 6.2 Expected Time Fraction of Simultaneous Presence of Critical Events -- 6.2.1 Case Study: Expected Fraction of Unsatisfied Demand at a Constant Sum of the Time Fractions of User Demands -- 6.2.2 Case Study: Servicing Random Demands from Ten Different Users, Each Characterised by a Distinct Demand Time Fraction -- 6.3 Analytical Method for Determining the Expected Fraction of Unsatisfied Demand for Repair -- 6.3.1 Case Study: Servicing Random Repairs from a System Including Components of Three Different Types, Each Characterised by a Distinct Repair Time -- 6.4 Expected Time Fraction of Simultaneous Presence of Critical Events that have been Initiated with Specified Probabilities -- 6.4.1 Case Study: Servicing Random Demands from Patients in a Hospital -- 6.4.2 Case Study: Servicing Random Demands from Four Different Types of Users, Each Issuing a Demand with Certain Probability -- 6.5 Stochastic Separation Based on the Expected Fraction of Unsatisfied Demand -- 6.5.1 Fixed Number of Random Demands on a Time Interval -- 6.5.2 Random Demands Following a Poisson Process on a Time Interval -- 6.5.2.1 Case Study: Servicing Random Failures from Circular Knitting Machines by an Optimal Number of Repairmen -- Chapter 7 Improving Reliability and Reducing Risk by Segmentation -- 7.1 Segmentation as a Problem‐Solving Strategy -- 7.2 Creating a Modular System by Segmentation -- 7.3 Preventing Damage Accumulation and Limiting Damage Propagation by Segmentation -- 7.3.1 Creating Barriers Containing Damage -- 7.3.2 Creating Weak Interfaces Dissipating or Deflecting Damage -- 7.3.3 Reducing Deformations and Stresses by Segmentation -- 7.3.4 Reducing Hazard Potential by Segmentation.

7.3.5 Reducing the Likelihood of Errors by Segmenting Operations.

Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.

Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, 2024. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries.