Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.stat.math.independent

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

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

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Richard Ulrich

Posts: 2,866
Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Posted: Nov 15, 2013 1:29 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:03:22 -0800 (PST), mr.fred.ma@gmail.com wrote:

>On Monday, November 11, 2013 5:47:01 PM UTC-5, Rich Ulrich wrote:
>>On Sun, 10 Nov 2013, paul.....@gmail.com wrote:
>>> I think I should have been clearer about the fact that I'm not
>>> trying to model second order systems. Rather, I'm trying to find a
>>> reference for the failure rate with time of an ensemble of parts
>>> with Poisson failure rates, each of which are replaced upon
>>> failure. I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that it is well-known and
>>> iconic, since it shows up in reliability material that I alluded to
>>> in my original post.

>>
>> I've looked back at your original post. You do mention there,
>> correctly, that there is a curve that becomes asymptotically
>> "Poison" in distribution of failures counted in small time
>> intervals; the failures eventually tend to occur uniformly.
>>
>> I think you have a serious misunderstanding of the vocabulary, and
>> of the point being made in your source.
>>
>> EVERY curve with a continuous, increasing failure rate is going to
>> have some a defined MTTF. This is not peculiar to some single
>> failure curve. If you replace every failure as it occurs with a
>> "new" part, the curve is going to be "damped" when you look at later
>> peaks, and the curve is going to evolve toward a uniform rate of
>> failures as the starting points become heterogeneous. It is
>> "uniform rate" that invokes "Poisson" as one of the possible
>> descriptors.

>
>I could very well have some vocabulary wrong, but I don't see where it
>is from our discussion so far. The situation of interest in my case
>is that of an ensemble of (let's say) identical parts with identical
>MTBF (if they are repaired as good as new upon failure) or MTTF if
>they are simply replaced upon failure. And specifically, the parts
>failure follows a Poisson process. Admittedly, the fact that they are
>repaired as good as new almost makes the Poisson aspect immaterial,
>since MTTF=MTBF in this scenario (replaced or repaired as good as
>new). Is that what you are referring to?
>
>In any case, I haven't had a chance to eke out the derivation from
>scratch.



This shows me your problem: "And specifically, the parts'
failure follows a Poisson process."

In general, in the real world, the expected failure for one
part is never Poisson. Poisson is a discrete distribution, so
you might say that it is not even a candidate for describing
what curve it is that failures follow for a part.

Yes, Poisson can describe what is observed when the
observed failures (eventually?) occur at a uniform rate.

With proper parameterization, it is probably an example of
the Central Limit Theorem. "Uniform" is where you end up
when you average together a large number of starting points.


Read what I wrote before -- if you instantly replace every failure,
then the curve of "failures" will flatten out, becoming uniform
as the starting points become heterogeneous. That is true
as a pretty wide generality, if it is not universally true.

Poisson is the end, regardless of where you start. If you are
seeking an example of something being damped, you need to
start out with something that *has* a peak to be damped.


Given all that: Do you still have a question?


--
Rich Ulrich







Date Subject Author
11/4/13
Read Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/4/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/5/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/5/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/6/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/6/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/7/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/7/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/10/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/11/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/15/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
mr.fred.ma@gmail.com
11/15/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/15/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/17/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to step function
Richard Ulrich
11/18/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Paul
11/5/13
Read Re: Failure rate of population of components: Underdamped response to
step function
Dan Heyman

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.