Reliability in Design

Reliability in Design

 The reliability of a product is strongly influenced by decisions made during the design
process.
 Deficiencies in design affect all items produced and are progressively more expensive
to correct as development proceeds.
 It is often not practicable or economic to change a design once production has started.
 It is therefore essential that design disciplines are used which minimize the possibility
of failure and which allow design deficiencies to be detected and corrected as early as
possible.
 The basic requirements for failure-free design were laid down, i.e. adequate safety
margins, protection against extreme load events and protection against strength
degradation. The design must also take account of all other factors that can affect
reliability, such as production methods, use and maintenance, and failures not caused
by load.
 The design process must therefore be organized to ensure that failure-free design
principles are used and that any deviations from the principles are detected and
corrected.
 Failure-free design is the only acceptable principle for any reliability conscious
project team. Anything less will be reflected in the acceptance of failures
throughout the development and production cycle, and a low rate of improvement.
 The designer must produce designs which will not fail if manufactured and used as
specified. In order to be able to do this test data may be needed to reduce
uncertainties.
 Any subsequent failures can then be firmly classified as design deficiencies which
escaped the review or test system, or as being due to manufacturing failures or
overload. Failure-free design therefore involves prevention, check and cure.
COMPUTER-AIDED ENGINEERING (CAE)

 CAE methods assist in a wide variety of design tasks.

 Increasing availability due to reduced costs of computing equipment and software.
 Facilitates the creation of complex and economic designs.
 In electronic design, CAE is referred to as Electronic Design Automation (EDA).

Benefits of CAE:
 Improves engineering productivity and design reliability.
 Enables rapid assessment of different design options.
 Provides the ability to test and simulate designs virtually.
 Enhances product quality by optimizing designs.
CAE Applications:

•Electronic Circuit Design:

 Uses SPICE analog simulation programs for designing and testing electronic circuits.
 Provides performance evaluation under different operating conditions.
 Allows dynamic and static testing of circuit operations.
 Mechanical Engineering:
 Stress analysis through Finite Element Analysis (FEA).
 Analysis of mechanical and thermal stresses, vibrations, and load responses.
 Drafting software for manufacturing drawings and machine tool instructions.
 Design optimization for mechanical components and mechanisms.

Multi-Technology Applications:
 Specialist CAE software for hydraulic, magnetic, and microwave electronic systems.
 Facilitates mixed-technology design and analysis.

Key Features of CAE:

 Provides rapid assessment of different design alternatives.

 Enables testing of designs under various tolerances, variations, and failure modes.
 Facilitates cost-effective and reliable designs.
 Enhances design documentation and analysis for improved productivity.
 Limitations of CAE:
• CAE models are not completely accurate in real-world scenarios.
•Electronic Circuit Design:
 May ignore electromagnetic interference between components.
•Mechanical Design:
 May not account for stress or temperature-induced distortions.
•Engineers must be aware of practical limitations to avoid design errors.

Importance of Practical Knowledge:

 Effective application of CAE requires practical knowledge of design limitations.
 Engineers should not entirely rely on CAE models.
 Proper documentation and critical analysis of results are necessary.

• CAE is a powerful tool for design optimization and cost-effective product development.
• Proper understanding of limitations is crucial for accurate and reliable designs.
• Ensures enhanced productivity and optimized design solutions in engineering.
ENVIRONMENTS

 Assessment of Product Environment:

 Evaluate storage, operation, and maintenance environments.
 Assess severity and duration of environmental exposure.
 Consider all factors affecting product operation, safety, and reliability.
 Physical Environmental Factors:
 Temperature (extremes and rates of change).
 Vibration and shock.
 Humidity and pressure variations.

 Other Environmental Conditions:

 Corrosive atmospheres.
 Electrical interference.
 Power supply variations.
 Combined conditions (e.g., temperature with corrosion, vibration with contamination).
 Human Interaction with the Product:
 Consider handling, storage, operation, and maintenance effects.
 Address potential misuse or mishandling.
 Systematic Environmental Review:
 Conduct thorough assessments of all environmental aspects.
 Document the review process for reference and validation.

 Protective Measures:
 Identify appropriate protection for storage, transport, and use.
 Implement packaging solutions and warning labels.
 Use protective surface treatments and design features for durability.
 Testing for Environmental Resistance:
 Validate environmental resistance through testing.
 Confirm product performance under expected conditions before deployment.
LOAD PROTECTION

 Need for Load Protection:

 Protection against extreme loads is not always feasible but should be considered when
practicable.
 In some cases, maximum loads can be pre-determined, eliminating the need for special
protection.

 Common Cause of Failure:

 Failure often occurs when safety factors are designed based on average conditions.
 Lack of consideration for extreme conditions increases failure probability.

 Protection Against Extreme Loads:

 Extreme external loads can occur in certain situations and require protection.
 Standard products are available for load protection, such as:
•Overpressure Protection: For hydraulic or pneumatic systems.
•Impact Load Protection: For sudden mechanical shocks.
•Electrical Overload Protection: For electrical systems.
 Reliability Analysis with Load Protection:
 When load protection is provided, reliability analysis should consider the maximum
anticipated load.
 Tolerances of the protection system must be taken into account.
 In cases where the protection system may fail, potential loads during failure should
also be analyzed.
 Designing Without Load Protection:
 In practical scenarios, it is often sufficient to design a product to withstand a
predetermined load.
 Loads exceeding the design capacity may cause failure, which should be accepted if
protection is impractical.
 A reliability analysis should determine the probability of such extreme loads.
 Load Data and Prediction:
 Determining the distribution of extreme loads may not always be practical.
 Available data sources include:
•Failure records from similar items.
•Test data or historical records.
 Worst-Case Load Estimation:
 In absence of credible data, the worst design load case should be estimated and
specified.
 Avoid using safety factors based only on average conditions without considering
extreme conditions.
PROTECTION AGAINST STRENGTH DEGRADATION

 Challenges in Strength Degradation:

 Strength degradation is one of the most difficult factors to consider in design
reliability analysis.
 It occurs due to various factors like fatigue, corrosion, wear, and combined stresses.
 Strength Degradation Due to Fatigue:
 Fatigue in metals is well-documented and can be analyzed reliably.
 Fatigue limits are affected by:
•Stress raisers (notches, corners, holes, surface finish).
•Combined loading conditions.
 Designs can be:
•Operated below fatigue limits for indefinite life.
•Designed for a defined safe life.
 Complex Weakening Mechanisms:
 Other weakening mechanisms like corrosion and wear are difficult to predict.
 Combined stresses can accelerate damage or lower fatigue limits.
 Strength degradation depends heavily on:
•Environmental conditions.
•Lubrication quality.
 Maintenance Procedures:
 When complete protection against degradation is not possible, designers should:
•Specify maintenance procedures such as:
•Regular inspection.
•Lubrication.
•Scheduled replacement of components.
 Proper maintenance can significantly reduce strength degradation.
 Reliability Analysis Challenges:
 Performing reliability analysis for complex weakening processes is often
impracticable.
 Predicting the effects of wear, corrosion, and environmental factors is difficult.
 Testing for Strength Degradation:
 When reliability analysis is impractical, tests should be conducted to generate failure
data.
 Testing must be done under known loading conditions to gather reliable data for
strength degradation.
 Design Considerations:
 Designers should always account for potential weakening mechanisms.
 Use available data, perform fatigue analysis, and ensure protective measures for
maximum reliability.
 Design life should be defined considering potential degradation factors.
DESIGN ANALYSIS METHODS

 Despite discipline, training, and care, occasional oversights or errors in new designs
are inevitable.
 Design analysis methods help highlight critical aspects and identify potential
shortfalls.
 Although sometimes considered tedious and expensive, these analyses ensure design
reliability.
 Most analyses confirm that nearly all aspects of the design are satisfactory.
 The discovery of a few deficiencies early can prevent costly modifications later.
 Well-managed design analyses are highly cost-effective.
 Planning, preparation, and computerized methods can reduce effort and expense.
 This section describes key design analysis techniques, their role in the design review
process, and their management.
Main Reliability Design Analysis Techniques

 Quality Function Deployment (QFD) – Ensures customer requirements are

systematically translated into design specifications.
 Reliability Prediction – Estimates the expected reliability of a design based on
historical data and statistical models.
 Load-Strength Analysis – Compares applied loads to component strength to assess
failure risks.
 Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) – Identifies potential
failure modes, their effects, and criticality to improve design reliability.
 Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) – Uses a logical diagram to identify and analyze failure
pathways in a system.
 Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOP) – Systematically examines processes to
detect potential safety and operational hazards.
 Parts, Materials, and Process Review – Evaluates the suitability and reliability
of components, materials, and manufacturing processes.
 Other Considerations – Includes human factors, manufacturing aspects,
maintenance strategies, and other relevant aspects.
Quality Function Deployment (QFD)

 Definition:
 QFD is a systematic technique to identify factors affecting a design’s ability to
satisfy customer requirements.
 It ensures control over design and production processes by defining responsibilities
and methods.
 Though QFD covers aspects beyond reliability, such as customer preferences (feel,
appearance, etc.), it plays a crucial role in ensuring design reliability.
 Process:
 A cross-functional team (marketing, design, production, reliability, and quality
staff) reviews the project plan or specification.
 Identifies:
 Features requiring control.
 Applicable control methods.
 Responsible personnel.
 Constraints, risks, and necessary resources.
  No detailed analysis or planning is performed at this stage—only methods
likely to be applied are identified.
QFD Charts:
• Lists requirements and tabulates controls, responsibilities, and constraints.
• Shows relationships between design features and customer requirements.
• Uses importance ratings (1-5) to evaluate design features based on their
contribution to each requirement.
• Critical design features (e.g., bearing selection, housing construction, mounting
design) are highlighted based on total ratings.
• Correlation matrices:
• Positive correlation: Indicated by plus signs (+).
• Negative correlation: Indicated by minus signs (-), showing conflicting
requirements.
• Identifies variables for further modelling or experimentation.
 The ‘House of Quality’ Concept:
•The shape of the QFD chart resembles a house, leading to its name.
•"Quality" includes all aspects influencing product reputation and cost.
•Top-level charts provide an overview, while lower-level charts analyze:
•Detailed design and component characteristics.
•Production processes and tolerances.
•Evaluates every aspect of design and production (analysis, testing, process control,
inspection, packaging, maintenance).
 Benefits:
•Systematically evaluates and plans for critical requirements.
•Helps in cost reduction and reliability improvement by highlighting unimportant
features.
Quality Function Deployment for
electric motor design
This Figure represents a Quality Function Deployment (QFD) "House of Quality"
chart used to systematically evaluate how different design features impact key
customer requirements.
 Customer Requirements (Left Column):
• Lists critical product attributes like starting torque, low noise, cost, durability,
reliability, weight, and replacement time.
• Each requirement is assigned an importance rating (1-5).
 Design Features (Top Row):
• Features such as magnet material, bearings, brush pressure, housing
construction, stator winding, terminal attachment, and mounting design are
evaluated.
 Matrix (Middle Section):
• Shows how each feature contributes to different requirements using numerical
ratings (higher values indicate stronger influence).
• The total rating at the bottom ranks design features by importance.
 Correlation Matrix (Roof):
• Displays interactions between design features.
• "+" (Positive Correlation): Features complement each other.
• "-" (Negative Correlation): Features conflict with each other.
 Options (Bottom Row):
• Suggests potential materials, manufacturing methods, and experimental
approaches for improving design reliability and cost-effectiveness.
• This QFD chart helps in prioritizing design improvements and ensuring product
quality aligns with customer needs.
Load-Strength Analysis (LSA)

Load-Strength Analysis (LSA) is a systematic procedure used to ensure that all aspects of
load and strength have been thoroughly evaluated in the design process. It is also useful
for planning reliability tests. LSA helps engineers identify potential failure points and
implement preventive measures to enhance product reliability.

Steps in Load-Strength Analysis (LSA):

 Determine Worst-Case Load and Strength Variations:
 Identify the maximum expected loads and minimum material strengths.
 Consider environmental conditions that could influence loads (e.g., temperature,
pressure, vibration).
 Evaluate Safety Margins for Reliability:
 Calculate the Safety Factor (SF) using:
SF=Strength/Applied Load
 Ensure the design meets reliability standards under extreme conditions.
 Determine Protection Methods:
 Implement techniques such as:
 Load Limits – Restrict operational loads to prevent overstress.
 Derating – Use components with ratings exceeding normal operating conditions.
 Screening – Conduct quality control tests to ensure uniform material properties.
 Identify and Analyze Strength Degradation Modes:
 Consider how factors like fatigue, wear, corrosion, and material aging affect long-
term performance.
 Use predictive maintenance strategies to mitigate degradation risks.
 Test to Failure and Analyze Results:
 Perform stress tests by applying extreme loads until failure occurs.
 Use failure data to refine the design and enhance product reliability.
 Implement Corrective and Control Measures:
 Based on test results, apply corrective actions such as:
 Redesign – Modify geometry, material selection, or reinforcements.
 Safe-Life Design – Define a usage limit before mandatory replacement.
 Quality Control – Enhance inspection and material selection processes.
 Maintenance Plans – Schedule regular inspections and servicing.
Load-Strength Analysis Example

Item (Material, Worst Case Frequency/Pro Data Source Combined Strength Remarks
Function) Load/Combine bability of Effect
d Load Occurrence
Rivet (x4) 1. 50 N Total, Continuous (See Operating Data Combine with Plastic Frame is Life test
(Aluminium, Axial Load 2. 40 load distribution axial and lateral Weak Link required to
fixing bracket to N Lateral Impact in Annex 1) loads for total confirm
plastic frame) 3. Temperature: stress durability.
0-35°C estimation. Critical feature
may be the
plastic frame's
thickness at the
bracket
attachment.
Solenoid Coil 1. 32 V (at 1/10 h (Once Data on Power Evaluate NIL Effect No immediate
27°C) 2. 45°C every 10 hours) Supply Variation overvoltage strength concern
Ambient effects and noted under
Temperature possible thermal regular
degradation. operating
voltage.
However,
overvoltage
protection or
enhanced
cooling may be
required.
 Rivet Analysis:
 The rivets are made of aluminium and are used to fix a bracket to a plastic
frame.
 The worst-case scenario includes a combined load of 50 N axial force and 40
N lateral impact, which could pose stress on the rivets and the frame.
 The plastic frame is identified as the weak link due to its limited strength
compared to the aluminium rivets.
 Since the loading is continuous, fatigue failure may occur over time.
 A life test is recommended to validate the durability of the plastic frame.
Additionally, design modifications such as increasing frame thickness may
enhance strength.
  Solenoid Coil Analysis:
 The solenoid coil operates at 32 V under normal conditions and is subjected
to an ambient temperature of 45°C.
 With a failure probability of 1/10 hours, it is essential to monitor power
supply variations.
 While the solenoid coil has no immediate effect from minor overvoltage or
temperature changes, prolonged exposure could lead to degradation.
 There is a recommendation for overvoltage protection or improved
cooling to mitigate the risk of failure in extreme conditions

The table highlights potential weaknesses in both the rivet and solenoid coil
applications. The primary concern for the rivet is the plastic frame's structural integrity
under continuous stress. For the solenoid coil, overvoltage protection and better thermal
management could prevent insulation failure. Regular monitoring and preventive
measures can enhance the longevity and safety of the system.
FAILURE MODES, EFFECTS AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS (FMECA)

Failure modes effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) (or failure modes and
effects analysis (FMEA)), is probably the most widely used and most effective design
reliability analysis method. The principle of FMECA is to consider each mode of failure
of every component of a system and to ascertain the effects on system operation of each
failure mode in turn. Failure effects may be considered at more than one level, e.g., at
subsystem and at overall system level. Failure modes are classified in relation to the
severity of their effects.

An FMECA may be based on a hardware or a functional approach. In the hardware

approach actual hardware failure modes are considered (e.g. resistor open circuit, bearing
seizure). The functional approach is used when hardware items cannot be uniquely
identified or in early design stages when hardware is not fully defined. In this approach
function failures are considered (e.g. no feedback, memory lost). Note that a functional
failure mode can become a hardware failure effect in a hardware-approach FMECA. An
FMECA can also be performed using a combination and hardware approaches.
 Table 1 show worksheets taken from US MIL-HBBK-1629. Method 101 is a non-
quantitative method, which serves to highlight failure modes whose effects would be
considered important in relation to severity, detectability, maintainability or safety.
Based on MIL-STD-1629A (Method 101 - Functional Approach)
Date______________________________
System________________________________
Sheet ______________of______________
Indenture level_________________________
Compiled by________________________
Reference drawing______________________
Approved by________________________
Mission_______________________________

System Indentu Referen Mission Item/F Identifi Functio Failure Mission Failure Next End Failure Compe Severit Remar
re ce unction cation n Modes Phase / Effects Higher Effects Detecti nsating y Class ks
Level Drawin al Numbe and Operati Level on Provisi
g Identifi r Causes onal Effects Method ons
cation (Nomen Mode
clature)

Exampl Level 2 RD-001 Primary Power PSU- Provide Overvol Standby Circuit Loss of System Voltage Overvol Critical Needs
e Supply 123 power tage due mode damage power shutdow monitor tage redunda
System Unit to to n ing protecti ncy
regulato subsyste alarm on
r failure ms circuit
 Method 102 maintainability or safety. (criticality analysis) includes consideration of failure
rate or probability, failure mode ratio and a quantitative assessment of criticality, in order to
provide a quantitative criticality rating for component or function of the failure mode criticality
numbers for the item.
Based on MIL-STD-1629A (Method 102 - Hardware Approach)

System________________________________ Date______________________________
Indenture level_________________________ Sheet ______________of______________
Reference drawing______________________ Compiled by________________________
Mission_______________________________ Approved by________________________

Identifica Item/Fun Function Failure Mission Severity Failure Failure Failure Failure Failure Operating Failure Item Remarks
tion ctional Modes Phase/Op Class Probabilit Rate Data Effect Mode Rate (λₚ) Time (t) Mode Criticality
Number Identifica and erational y Source Probabilit Ratio (a) (β) Criticality (Cr =
tion Causes Mode y (Cm = Σ(Cm))
(Nomencl βaλₚ)
ature)
001 Power Provides Overheati Normal II 0.02 Manufactu 0.95 0.7 0.001 1000 0.7 × 0.7 + Needs
Supply power to ng due to operation (Critical) rer Data 0.001 × Other Cm cooling
Unit system overload 1000 = 0.7 system

002 Sensor Detects Signal Standby III 0.05 Field Data 0.85 0.6 0.0005 2000 0.6 × 0.6 + Regular
Module environme drift due mode (Marginal) 0.0005 × Other Cm calibration
ntal to aging 2000 = 0.6 required
changes
 The failure mode criticality number is
𝐶𝑚 = 𝛽𝛼𝜆𝑝 𝑡
Where β= Conditional probability of loss of function or mission,
α=failure mode ratio,
𝜆𝑝 =part failure or hazard rate,
t=operating or at-risk time of item

𝜆𝑝 𝑡 can be replaced by failure probability, 1 − 𝑒 −𝛼𝜆𝑝 𝑡 .

The item criticality number is the sum of the failure mode criticality numbers for the
item.
Steps in Performing an FMECA

 Understanding the System

 Conducted by an engineer or team with thorough system knowledge.
 Gather design-related information such as specifications, drawings, CAE data,
stress analysis, and test results.
 For criticality analysis, reliability prediction data must be available or generated.
 Prepare Functional and Reliability Block Diagrams
 Develop system functional block diagrams if not available.
 Create a reliability block diagram to serve as a foundation for FMECA.
 Consider Operational Phases and Redundancies
 If the system has multiple operational phases, analyze each phase separately.
 Assess redundancy effects by considering failures when the redundant subsystem
is or isn't available.
 Define the Viewpoint of Analysis
 FMECA can focus on different aspects such as safety, mission availability,
repair costs, detectability, etc.
 Clearly state the chosen viewpoint in the analysis.
 Conduct the FMECA Using an Appropriate Worksheet
 Work at the item or sub-assembly level, depending on design data and
objectives.
 For new designs with high reliability concerns, analyze all failure modes of all
components.
 For existing modular designs, consider functional failure modes of sub-
assemblies.
 Perform FMECA Iteratively
 Start early in the design phase and update as the design evolves.
 Influence design decisions by analyzing different design options separately.
 Update analysis with test results to improve accuracy.
 Challenges and Use of CAE Tools
 FMECA is time-consuming and complex, sometimes requiring weeks of effort.
 CAE or EDA software can assist in tracing low-level failures in complex
systems.
 Some designs, like digital electronic systems, may not be suitable for traditional
FMECA due to dynamic failure effects.
 Limitations of FMECA
 Not applicable for software design failures.
 Digital electronic systems with highly unlikely and dynamic failures may not
benefit from FMECA.
 Industry Applications and Standardization
 Used in critical industries like military, aerospace, automotive, and medical
equipment.
 Standards like MIL-STD-1629 and automotive industry guidelines exist
but may be rigid for modern digital electronics.
 Use standardized approaches only when contractually required or
technologically relevant.

Uses of FMECA

FMECA (Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis) is a powerful tool used
primarily to identify safety or reliability-critical failure modes and their effects. In
addition to this primary function, it serves several other important purposes,
including:
 Defining Test Program Features
 Helps in identifying critical aspects that should be included in the test
program.
 Developing Diagnostic Routines
 Used to create diagnostic flowcharts or fault-finding tables.
 Provides a structured listing of failure modes, their effects, and the likelihood
of occurrence, making troubleshooting easier.
 Planning Preventive Maintenance
 Evaluates failure effects and likelihood to determine the need for scheduled
inspections, servicing, or part replacements.
 Items with negligible safety or operational impact may be replaced only upon
failure rather than at scheduled intervals to minimize unnecessary
maintenance.
 Designing Built-In Test (BIT), Failure Indications, and Redundancy
 Assists in designing systems with built-in failure detection, redundancy, and
self-diagnosis capabilities.
 Ensures failure detectability is effectively integrated into system design.
 Analyzing Testability
 Particularly useful for electronic subassemblies and systems.
 Ensures that hardware can be efficiently tested and failures can be diagnosed
using manual or automated test equipment.
 Developing Software for Automatic Testing and BIT
 Provides insights that aid in developing software for automated test procedures
and built-in testing.
 Maintaining Formal Safety and Reliability Records
 Serves as documented evidence of safety and reliability analyses.
 Can be used in reports to customers or as supporting documentation in product
safety litigation.
 Identifying Production-Induced Failures
 Helps assess the likelihood of production-related issues, such as incorrect
component orientation (e.g., wrong diode placement).
 A production-focused FMECA can improve test planning and facilitate
design modifications for manufacturability.

Ensuring Effective Use of FMECA

To maximize the benefits of FMECA, it is crucial to:
 Coordinate FMECA-related activities across different teams.
 Ensure timely availability of FMECA results to relevant personnel.
 Integrate findings into design, testing, maintenance, and production processes
effectively.
Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOPS)

A Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOPS) is a systematic technique for identifying

potential hazards and operability issues in a system. It assesses possible deviations from
the design intent and evaluates their potential consequences. HAZOPS is widely used
in industries like petrochemical plants, railway systems, and other complex engineering
environments as part of the mandatory safety approval process.

Guidewords for HAZOPS

To facilitate the identification of potential failures or deviations, a set of guidewords is
applied. These guidewords include:
 No/Not: Absence of a function or parameter.
 More: Excessive value of a parameter.
 Less: Insufficient value of a parameter.
 As Well As: Presence of unintended elements.
 Part Of: Partial completion or action.
 Reverse: Opposite action occurs.
 Other Than: Unexpected action or result.
 Table: HAZOPS on Motion System (Partial)

Component/Function Failure/Deviation Possible Causes Consequences/Even Safeguards Action

t No
Electrical Power No Power 1. Main power System failure (1) Provide standby System design
failure power?
2. Connector failure

Hydraulic Supply Main AND Standby 1. Main and pressure System failure (2) Checks on Maintenance
Fail sensor failure maintenance schedule
2. Main and
changeover valve fail

PWM Circuit Permanent 'On' See FMEA System failure (3) To be determined Analysis, test

Solenoid Valve Stuck Open Corrosion System failure (3) To be determined Test

 Component/Function: Lists the specific system components being analyzed.

 Failure/Deviation: Identifies the possible failure modes or deviations from normal operations.
 Possible Causes: Describes the causes of the failure, including technical or environmental factors.
 Consequences/Event No: Specifies the resulting consequence or system failure, referenced by a numbered event.
 Safeguards: Suggests existing or recommended safeguards to mitigate the risk.
 Action: Details the corrective or preventative actions, including system redesign, maintenance adjustments, or
further testing.
This table serves as a clear example of how a Hazard and Operability Study (HAZOPS) is conducted to ensure system
safety and reliability.
Parts, Materials, and Processes (PMP) Review

All new parts, materials, and processes used in the design should be identified. In this
context, "new" refers to those unfamiliar to the particular design and production
organization. Designers often assume that a part or material will perform as specified in
the brochure and that processes can be controlled to comply with the design.
The reliability and quality assurance (QA) staff must ensure that this assumption is
well-founded. New parts, materials, and processes must be assessed or tested before
application. This ensures proper training for production personnel, establishes quality
control safeguards, and identifies alternative sources. Additionally, all new parts,
materials, and processes must receive formal approval for production and be added to
the approved lists.
Reliability Considerations

When assessing materials and processes for reliability, the following key
considerations should be evaluated:
 Cyclical Loading:
 Whenever loading is cyclical, particularly with frequent impact loads,
fatigue must be carefully considered.
 External Environment:
 Environmental conditions during storage and operation must be taken into
account, including factors like corrosion and extreme temperature effects.
 Wear:
 The wear properties of materials must be assessed, especially for
components in continuous contact with other parts.
Material Selection

Due to the wide variation in material properties, even within categories like steels,
aluminum alloys, plastics, and rubbers, it is impractical to generalize material
reliability. Therefore, materials should be selected based on several factors.
The design review process must ensure that the reliability implications receive
appropriate attention for the specific application.
Non-Material Failure Modes

While most reliability engineering focuses on material failure caused by load-strength

interference and strength degradation, there is a significant category of failure modes
unrelated to material failure. Despite their non-material nature, these failures can result
in severe consequences

Examples of Non-Material Failure Modes

 Insecure Fasteners:

 Essential panels can be improperly secured due to wear or left unfastened

without detection.

 Seal Wear:

 Seals may deteriorate, causing low-pressure leaks in hydraulic systems.

 Electrical Contact Issues:

 Arcing and oxidation can increase the resistance of electrical contacts.

 Protective Surface Failures:
 Protective coatings like paints, metal plating, or anodized surfaces may degrade,
leading to corrosion.
 Connector Issues:
 Electrical multipin connectors may experience pin distortion or intermittent
contact.
 Electronic Component Drift:
 Parameters of electronic components may drift over time, leading to
malfunctions.
 Electromagnetic Interference (EMI):
 Systems can experience interference or timing issues caused by EMI.
 Personnel-Induced Failures:
 Maintenance errors, such as omitting to charge electrolytic capacitors during
storage, can reduce charge capacity during use.
 Subsystem Interface Problems:
 Tolerance mismatches between subsystems can lead to interface failures.
Reliability in Design Considerations

Non-material failures are often reported through failure reporting systems. However,
due to subjective interpretation and variability in factors like skill levels, personal
attitudes, and maintenance procedures, the detection and diagnosis of these failures can
be challenging — particularly for complex equipment.

These types of failures are often difficult to assess at the design stage and may not be
evident during testing programs. Therefore, design reliability assessments should
proactively address non-material failure modes. While predicting their frequency of
occurrence may not always be practical, a thorough evaluation of potential failure
scenarios is essential for enhancing overall system reliability.
Human Reliability
The term "human reliability" refers to situations where human actions, whether by
operators or maintainers, impact the correct or safe operation of systems. People are
inherently fallible, and their actions can contribute to component or system failures in
various ways.
Importance of Human Reliability in Design

Human reliability must be a key consideration in any design where human errors could
affect reliability or safety. During design analyses such as Failure Modes, Effects, and
Criticality Analysis (FMECA) or Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), special attention should
be given to human factors. Key factors to evaluate include

 Ergonomics: Ensuring the design is user-friendly and minimizes the likelihood

of mistakes.

 Operational Factors: Assessing the ability of personnel to detect and respond

to system failures
  Maintenance Challenges: Evaluating how easily maintainers can access and
service components.

 Effectiveness of Instructions and Warnings: Ensuring clear and unambiguous

instructions are provided.

Quantifying Human Error

Although various attempts have been made to quantify human error probabilities, these
estimates should be approached with caution. Human behavior is highly variable and
cannot be reliably predicted using historical data alone. Several factors influence
human error probability, including:
 Training: Well-structured and consistent training programs can significantly
reduce human errors.
 Supervision: Effective oversight ensures procedures are followed correctly.

 Motivation: Engaged and well-motivated personnel are less likely to make

mistakes
Design Considerations for Human Reliability

To enhance human reliability, design organizations should:

 Minimize the need for complex human intervention.
 Provide clear and intuitive interfaces.
 Implement independent verification checks for critical tasks.
 Ensure comprehensive and accessible training.
 Develop clear operational procedures and maintenance manuals.
By proactively addressing human reliability in the design phase, the likelihood of
human error can be minimized, enhancing both system reliability and operational
safety.