Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function

Replies: 15   Last Post: Nov 18, 2013 10:15 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Richard Ulrich Posts: 2,961 Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Posted: Nov 5, 2013 5:33 PM

On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 07:26:18 -0800 (PST), paul.domaskis@gmail.com
wrote:

>On Monday, November 4, 2013 7:26:07 PM UTC-5, Rich Ulrich wrote:
>>On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 10:03:47 -0800 (PST), paul wrote:
>> How are curves obtained? Industries probably observed the
>> picture before they described it mathematically. Ball-bearings.
>> Light-bulbs. Lots of experience. Set in your numbers and
>> simulate it.

>
>I have to cite a reference for completeness because I allude to it in a report.

I was never very good at remember citations for stuff that seems
pretty easy and obvious.

Here is a treatment that should be easy enough to understand;
and HERE IT IS, posted online. Look at the headers for the
message ID. It can be recovered through Google-groups.

Consider a simple system where the time to one failure is

t1= N(10,1); thus for failure 2, 3, ... the SD increases
linearly, and the variance as the square of the number
t2= N(20,4)
t3= N(30,9)
..
t25= N(250, 625)

If you plot the first three of them, you will see that there if
very, very little overlap between "second failure" for a device
and "first failure", and not much for "third failure". But the peak
is lower at each successive failure, for that unit of time, and the
spread about each peak is increasing in width. For looking at
the times of 1, 2, or 3 failures, you can have a pretty exact picture
by simply overlaying the three curves.

_________9________5________3___ ... (Number: height of peak)

Depending on how particular you are, you can't just overlay the
graphs to show "all failures" after the 3rd or 4th failure; you want
to add the densities.

Clearly, by the time you have reached the time of the 25th failure
on-the-average, many devices will be on an earlier or later count,
because the SD is now 25, and the peak is no longer prominent.

--
Rich Ulrich

Date Subject Author
11/4/13 Paul
11/4/13 Richard Ulrich
11/5/13 Paul
11/5/13 Richard Ulrich
11/6/13 Paul
11/6/13 Richard Ulrich
11/7/13 Paul
11/7/13 Richard Ulrich
11/10/13 Paul
11/11/13 Richard Ulrich
11/15/13 mr.fred.ma@gmail.com
11/15/13 Richard Ulrich
11/15/13 Paul
11/17/13 Richard Ulrich
11/18/13 Paul
11/5/13 Dan Heyman