1

1 CHAPTER
Product Effectiveness and Worth
Harold S. Balaban, Ned Criscimagna, Michael Pecht
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The ultimate goal for any product or system is that it perform some intended func-
tion as affordably and as well as possible. The function may be described as some
output characteristic, such as satisfactory message transmission in a communication
system, cargo tonnage for a transportation system, or the accuracy of weather identi-
fcation for airborne weather radar. The term for the overall capability of a product to
meet customer objectives is product effectiveness. If the product is effective, it car-
ries out the intended function well; if it is not effective, defcient attributes must be
improved. The term for the overall cost, including purchase price, costs associated
with operation maintenance, and repair and disposal costs, is product worth.
CONTENTS
1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Attributes Affecting Product Effectiveness ...................................................... 2
1.3 Programmatic Factors Affecting Product Effectiveness................................... 3
1.3.1 Product Effectiveness ........................................................................... 5
1.3.2 Operational Readiness and Availability............................................... 6
1.3.3 Dependability ....................................................................................... 7
1.3.4 Capability.............................................................................................. 8
1.3.5 Reliability ............................................................................................. 8
1.3.6 Maintainability ................................................................................... 10
1.3.7 Relationships Among Time Elements ................................................ 13
1.4 Assignment of Responsibility ......................................................................... 13
1.4.1 Administrative Time........................................................................... 14
1.4.2 Logistics Time .................................................................................... 15
1.4.3 Active Repair Time and Operating Time ........................................... 15
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
1.2 ATTRIBUTES AFFECTING PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS
Product effectiveness is a function of many product attributes and external factors.
For an automobile, dependability, safety, ease of repair, and comfort are among the
attributes a buyer might cite as important. In terms of product worth, purchase price,
economic operation, and good resale value may be additional attributes. A success-
ful blend of these attributes results in a car that is perceived to be of high value. For
any specifc product, a distinct blend of attributes is needed to achieve high product
effectiveness and worth.
Good product design and development require that members of the design team
(and the customer, if appropriate) evaluate and discuss all pertinent attributes affect-
ing product effectiveness during the appropriate phases of the products life cycle:
concept formulation, research and development, production, operation, and disposal.
For many productsparticularly those with a long lifethe highest cost is to oper-
ate, support, and maintain the product. Many of the tasks and decisions arising
early in the life cycle of a product affect the product at later stages and affect costs
throughout product life. Table 1.1 shows how the cost of decisions made early in
development affects downstream costs. For example, although only 3 to 5% of the
total development and production costs may be expended in the concept defnition
phase, from 40 to 60% of the total cost may be committed as a result of decisions and
actions taken during that period.
Table 1.2 lists some attributes that affect product effectiveness in terms of per-
formance, availability, and affordability. The term performance represents opera-
tional, physical, or functional characteristics. Availability represents the likelihood
of having the product in a usable state; affordability relates to the economic conse-
quences associated with product development, purchase, and operation.
Overall product effectiveness and worth can theoretically be improved by trading
off attributes, which is an extremely complex process. For example, an automobile
manufacturer wants to maximize profts and may feel this is best done by increasing
market share through offering a new car that provides maximum affordability and reli-
ability. Affordability is a function of how cheaply the car can be manufactured; features
that would make the car easy to maintain might have to be compromised or eliminated
to achieve ease of manufacture. Under the hood of todays automobiles, manufacturing
cost and maintenance trade-offs are apparent compared with the cars of, say, 20 years
ago. New design approaches, such as electronic ignition, are more reliable than those
Table 1.1 Product Development and Production Costs
Percent of Total Costs
Development Process Phase Incurred Committed
Concept defnition 35% 4060%
Design 58% 6080%
Testing 810% 8090%
Process planning 1015% 9095%
Production 15100% 95100%
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 3
of the past and the use of computer diagnostics balances the repair challenge presented
by todays complex engines and transmissions. A good design team knows that attri-
butes sometimes support each other and are sometimes contradictory; and that, conse-
quently, trade-offs become a necessary part of the development process.
1.3 PROGRAMMATIC FACTORS AFFECTING
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS
A typical history of the development of a new product reveals a number of steps in
the progression from original concept to an acceptable production model. These steps
are particularly marked if the equipment represents a technical innovationthat is,
if it pushes the state of the art by introducing entirely new functions or by perform-
ing established functions in an entirely new way. The marketplace (or an existing
customer base) defnes the need for new or improved technical performance. The
design and development team executes a multitude of operations leading to accom-
plishment of program objectives, primarily the production of a system or product
that will perform as intended, with minimum breakdowns and rapid repair. This
must be done within acceptable development, production, and support budgets and
within an established schedule.
The three program criteriaperformance, cost, and scheduleimpose severe
pressures on a company. Just as compromises among product attributes are required
to achieve desired product effectiveness, compromises are often necessary among
program objectives. These compromises begin early in the development process,
usually in the basic research and concept validation phases. For example, the time
allocated to develop needed technologies or to prove concept feasibility may be cur-
tailed to meet a schedule driven by a competitive challenge.
Table 1.2 Example Attributes Affecting Product Effectiveness and Product Worth
Performance Availability Affordability
Operational: Reliability: Cost to:
Range Failure-free operation Develop or buy
Speed Redundancy or graceful degradation
Accuracy Mean time to failure Own or operate
Vulnerability
Payload Maintainability: Maintain
Output power Ease of repair (access, time to repair)
Required resources (manpower, tools). Fault Dispose
Physical: Detection and isolation (testability)
Volume and density
Weight Logistics supportability:
Input power Sparing
Environment Training
Facilities
Functional:
Safety Time to develop
Mission success rate
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
4 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
After preliminary work on a typical product, a prototype model is built; ide-
ally, it represents the fnal product as closely as possible. Its purpose is to establish
the initial feasibility of satisfying critical effectiveness attributes. This model could
be a hardware or software prototype, or a computer simulation of the system, key
subsystems, or components. The prototype may be crude in appearance, unsuitable
for production line manufacturing, subject to frequent failure, or repairable only by
skilled technicians using expensive equipment and considerable time. Early atten-
tion to manufacture, quality, and reliability can save time and money later in the
product development program. As the program moves forward, changes to improve
reliability become more diffcult and expensive, the schedule becomes more infex-
ible, and budgets become tighter. Despite increased emphasis on reliability, many
new products experience serious growing pains during their frst years of operation
as designers undertake extraordinary and sometimes frantic efforts to determine
causes of failure and to eliminate them through modifcations, upgrades, or changes
in operating and maintenance procedures.
Factors important in the development of a new product (revolutionary change) also
apply to modifcation or development programs integrating proven equipment (evolu-
tionary change). For both revolutionary and evolutionary development, reliability is a
key attribute affecting product effectiveness and should be considered from the outset.
Figure 1.1 shows the major components of product effectiveness: availability,
dependability, and capability. In turn, availability and dependability have reliability,
maintainability, and logistics supportability as their major constituent elements.
Product Enectiveness
A measure of how well the
product does its job
Availability
A measure of the
products condition
when rst required to
perform
Dependability
A measure of the
products condition
during the
performance of its
function
Capability
A measure of how
well the products
performance meets
objectives
Reliability~Failure Propensity
Maintainabilityrestoration capability
Logistic supportexternal factors
Figure 1.1 Major components of product effectiveness.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 5
1.3.1 Product Effectiveness
Product effectiveness can be formally defned as the ability of a product to meet
an operational demand when operated under specifed conditions. Effectiveness is
infuenced by how a product is used and maintained, as well as by the design and
production processes. It can also be infuenced by the logistics support system, com-
pany policies, regulations and laws governing product use, fscal constraints, and
other administrative policy decisions.
For single-use systems, such as missiles, torpedoes, and fuses, operating time
and calendar time during the operational phase are relatively unimportant, as is
repair of failed units. However, these time elements are critical in determining the
effectiveness of a multi-use product, which also may have to accommodate the repair
of failures. A product fails if it does not operate when called upon to perform or if it
fails to operate successfully (that is, does not complete its function or mission). Both
multi-use and one-shot products must be operated and supported under specifed
conditions defned by the customer or supplier. If a product is pushed to operate at
higher stresses for uses unforeseen by the design team, product effectiveness may be
decreased.
The U.S. Air Forces experience with the B-52 aircraft exemplifes how a change
in usage environment can affect system effectiveness. The B-52 was originally
designed as a high-altitude bomber, but changing needs required the Air Force to
include low-altitude penetration as one of the aircrafts missions. Because low-al-
titude fight imposed higher stresses on the airframe, additional modifcations were
necessary to strengthen the structure and maintain the desired service life.
Specifed conditions also include whether the product is used in continuous or
cyclic operation. In continuous operation, maintenance is performed after a failure
occurs, and any failure reduces product effectiveness. For products operated cycli-
cally, such as a car or an airplane, in windows of time when product operation is not
critical, maintenance can be performed. Potential failures can be averted through a
planned preventive maintenance program. Removing the product from the readiness
state for a portion of each day to perform maintenance may increase effectiveness.
However, if the percentage of equipment that becomes inoperable prior to demand
for use is insensitive to preventive maintenance, it is best to maintain a continual
state of readiness and perform only corrective maintenance.
Another infuence on product effectiveness is a change in operational require-
ments (technical performance attributes). For example, the vulnerability of a target
may be reduced by a change in target design, such as the addition of armor or elec-
tronic countermeasures in a military system. The effectiveness of the system intended
to counter the target would decrease then even though no degradation of the system
itself had occurred. Consider a race car designed to attain a top speed of 200 miles
per hour. If competitors cars are able to attain top speeds of 210 miles per hour, all
other factors being equal, the effectiveness of the slower car has decreased.
The terms design effectiveness and use effectiveness are sometimes used to
describe the performance of a product. Design effectiveness measures how well the
product meets specifc performance requirements under test conditions that minimize
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
6 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
operator, maintenance, and logistic infuences. Use effectiveness is at the other end
of the effectiveness spectrum. It attempts to assess how well the product meets the
demands placed on it, even if such demands exceed specifcations. Although a sports
car and a station wagon both provide transportation, the use effectiveness of the
sports car for cargo carrying is not very high, just as the station wagon may not meet
handling or acceleration requirements very well.
Product effectiveness measures how well the product does the job for which it
was purchased. It is a function of availability (the likelihood that the product is ready
to start the job), dependability (likelihood that the product will operate in states that
will produce output designed to do the job), and capability (how well the designed
outputs actually accomplish the necessary tasks, given the states in which the prod-
uct operated).
Each of these topicsavailability, dependability, and capabilitywill now be
addressed, followed by a discussion of the three major components of availability
and dependability: reliability, maintainability, and logistics supportability.
1.3.2 Operational Readiness and Availability
The capability of a product to perform its intended function when called upon is its
operational readiness or its operational availability.* The difference between readi-
ness and availability is that the latter includes only operational and downtimes, while
the former also includes free and storage timesthat is, periods when the product
is not needed. Operational readiness or availability differs from product effective-
ness in several ways. Its emphasis is on the when called upon aspect, rather than
on the completion of the task or mission. This emphasis focuses on a probability at
a point in time rather than over an interval, as is the case with the mission success
rate (the percentage of successfully completed missions). This interval of time can be
extremely long, as in the case of a satellite on a long-term mission to another planet;
the satellite may be operationally available at launch time, but that does not ensure
that it will operate successfully for the duration of its mission. For products that are
continually used and are providing useful output, availability is often estimated by
calculating the fraction of total need time in which the product is operational or
capable of providing useful output.
Another difference between operational availability and product effectiveness
is that the performance attributes of the latter include designed-in capabilities, such
as accuracy, power, and weight. Operational availability typically excludes detailed
examination of these characteristics by addressing only the products readiness to
perform its intended function at a particular point in time. Depending on the intended
use, one or more performance attributes may apply to availability. The difference
between a products being operational or not is often a function of the customers
defnition of failure, which depends on the use of the product. If the performance
* Although terms such as availability were at one time closely associated with military systems, they are
now more widely used in commercial industry. The availability of an off-shore oil rig, for example, is
of extreme importance.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 7
related to a critical attribute is not satisfactory, the customer may consider the prod-
uct to be down, and readiness or availability from that point until the need ends or
until the defciency is corrected is zero.
For example, if a radar set has a specifed range of 50 miles, should the radar be
considered down if it is effective only to 45 miles? If the 50-mile range is the abso-
lute minimum needed to avoid midair collisions, the aircraft on which the radar is
installed would be considered unfyable, and the radar would be considered unavail-
able for the mission. If the 50-mile range is a goal value and 20 miles is the absolute
minimum, a 45-mile range might be acceptable. An availability calculation could
be based on a defnition that includes as uptime all periods for which the range is at
least 20 miles.
Operational availability and readiness, therefore, relate uptime and downtime to the
conditions under which the product will be used. The following defnitions are used:
The operational availability of a system or product is the probability that it is oper-
ating satisfactorily at any point in time when used under stated conditions, where
the total time considered includes operating time, active repair time, administrative
time, and logistic time.
The operational readiness of a system or product is the probability that, at any point
in time, it is either operating satisfactorily or is ready to be placed in operation
on demand when used under stated conditions, including allowable warning time.
Total calendar time is the basis of computation.
A subset of operational availability is intrinsic or inherent availability. Like
the design effectiveness concept, this measure attempts to minimize the effects of
external infuences by considering only active repair time and required use time.
Thus, free time when the product is not needed and downtimes due to logistic and
administrative delays are excluded. Intrinsic availability is a built-in capability; thus,
the design and production engineers frst must address discovered problems, assum-
ing that operating conditions are compatible with design specifcations. If these
engineers cannot resolve the problem, then the product operations manager may be
assigned to reduce administrative or logistics delays or to utilize and maintain the
product more effciently.
1.3.3 Dependability
Most products can be in any one of a number of different states during their opera-
tion. Dependability measures the likelihood of each possible product state. If a prod-
uct contains n identifable components and each component can be in only one of
two states (say, success or failure), then the product can be in any one of 2
n
states. For
example, a product with 10 components has 1,024 possible states, if each component
is either up or down.
We do not usually quantify dependability by a single number as we may do
for availability, but rather use the dependability concept to quantify effectiveness.
However, dependability quantifcation is possible for simple cases. For example, for
our sample product, we may defne a subset of the 1,024 states as success states; the
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
8 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
product is considered dependable if it operates within this subset. However, not all of
the success states will necessarily result in the same level of acceptable output; in such
cases, the capability measure has to be considered, as discussed in the next section.
From a more analytical point of view, the dependability concept describes how
the product transitions from one state to another. For example, the failure of a com-
ponent will generally transition the product from its present state to a less capable
state. If repair during operation is possible, there may be a transition back to the more
productive state. If an item failure brings the product down, then no useful output
may be produced until repairs are made.
1.3.4 Capability
Capability measures how well the product accomplishes the task it is assigned. It is
normally a state-dependent measure. If the product is not operating, then its capability
would normally be zero, but not always. Consider a tank protecting an enclave from rebel
troops. The tank may not be able to fre, but if the enemy sees the tank and is unaware of
its state, its protective mission may still be accomplished while repairs are undertaken.
On the other hand, a product that is operating as it is supposed to may not have the high-
est capability. An optical aerial camera may not get a desired picture because of cloud
cover, even though all components are operating perfectly. Products that have backup or
redundant modes of operation will have a number of states that can produce useful out-
put. For each state, a capability measure exists. For example, the speed, range, and fuel
consumption of a multi-engine aircraft depend on the number of engines operating.
The units of measure of capability depend on the product and its tasks. The capa-
bility measure may be directly related to such product output as picture resolution,
number of messages delivered, kilowatts of power produced, or the amount of damage
to the enemy. When it is diffcult to defne or to quantify such a measure, an ordinal
scale may be usedfor example, from 0 to 100, with 100 representing the best possi-
ble output. A probability measure may also be used in some cases. Each of the possible
product states is determined to be either a success or a failure. Then the product capa-
bility is the probability that the product operates within the class of success states.
1.3.5 Reliability
A critical attribute determining product effectiveness is reliability, which is a mea-
sure of the products ability to avoid failure. A reliability defciency will eventually
result in an impaired or lost performance, compromised safety, and the need for
such restorative actions as diagnosis, repair, spare replenishment, and maintenance.
High-reliability products will operate longer, allowing resources to be focused on
improving performance.
Within a product effectiveness context, satisfactory operation is normally associ-
ated with a defned envelope of satisfactory outputs. If all the product outputs are
within this envelope, then the product is operating reliably. Note that reliable opera-
tion by this defnition does not imply satisfactory results. An optical aerial camera
operating in a cloudy environment is an example.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 9
Observed reliability is the ratio of items operating within specifcations for the
stated period to the total number of items in the sample. A reliability function is this
same probability expressed as a function of the time period. Figure 1.2 is an example
of a reliability function.
Products that have built-in test equipment (BITE) to monitor output and warn the
operator when one or more outputs are out of tolerance can be continually accessed
for reliability. BITE is now a common design practice for industrial products, and it
is becoming more prevalent for consumer products, especially for electronic items.
Nevertheless, the assessment of product performance often has to be made by the
operator, and distinguishing between a capability and a reliability problem is not
always easy. A washing machine user may easily determine that the washing machine
has failed because water is fooding the laundry room. A more diffcult assessment is
determining the reason that the washed clothes do not appear to be as clean as they
should. Whether the problem is one of reliability (e.g., failure of the motor to agitate
the water properly) or capability (e.g. insuffcient motor capacity for the wash load),
the usual decision is to assign the problem to reliability unless a specifc analysis of
effectiveness is conducted.
Mission reliability is usually defned as the probability that a product will
operate successfully for the duration of the mission, given that it is ready to start
the mission when called upon to do so. Mission reliability, therefore, is the prob-
ability that no failure will occur during the mission that prevents the mission
from being satisfactorily completed. For a one-time operation, this probability
is a point on the reliability function curve corresponding to a time equal to the
mission time. If repeated missions are undertaken and wearout may be occur-
ring, adjustments must be made for cumulative operating or stress time following
the most recent maintenance or restoration. All the alternative modes of opera-
tion required for mission completion must be considered in mission reliability.
Alternative modes include operations using redundant or backup units that take
over for failed units.
1.0
0
R(t)
Time
Figure 1.2 A typical reliability function.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
10 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
Logistic reliability, on the other hand, is concerned not only with mission
accomplishment but also with all failures that place a demand on the logistic system,
regardless of when the failures occur or whether they affect mission accomplish-
ment, require maintenance, require spare parts, or all three. Thus, component redun-
dancy, which normally increases mission reliability, almost always decreases logistic
reliability. A natural measure of logistic reliability is the demand rate, which tracks
the demand events occurring when a failure triggers the logistics support system.
1.3.6 Maintainability
Maintainability addresses the ease and economy with which the maintenance actions
necessary to restore a failed product to a satisfactory state can be taken. Following
a failure, restoration involves isolating the source of the failure, correcting the prob-
lem, checking out the product, removing test equipment and tools, securing all
access doors and panels, and making the product acceptably available to perform its
required function. The statistical average for downtime during restoration actions is
called mean downtime (MDT). MDT comprises diagnostic time, active repair time,
logistic delay, and administrative delay.
The relative ease with which a product can be kept in operational condition or
restored to it after failure is typically embodied in the maintainability characteris-
tic. Maintainability, which comprises all active repair time, is a fundamental design
attribute; most of the effort to affect this attribute favorably is expended in the design
phase. For a product to be highly maintainable, the design should not be complex;
equipment should be easy to access, remove, and replace; the types of fasteners
should be as uniform as possible; few special tools should be needed; and so forth.
Such factors are the responsibility of the design engineer. The most general defni-
tion of maintainability is the probability that, when maintenance is initiated under
stated conditions, a failed product will be restored to operational effectiveness within
a given period of time, excluding downtime due to logistic or administrative delay.
A subset of maintainability is testability. Testability is defned in terms of fail-
ure detection and source isolation. The defnition may be expanded by including
the rapidity and accuracy of detection and isolation. Ideally, all failures (and only
failures) are detected as soon as they occur, allowing the operator to take appropri-
ate action (for example, turning the product off to prevent further damage). Failures
can be detected by human observation (for example, the operator may see smoke or
an invalid product response) or by the product itself using a built-in test. Similarly,
the maintainer can isolate the source of failure and identify the cause using manual
or semiautomatic methods to check various components until the failure is found or
using automatic built-in tests. In practice, some failures are intermittent and diffcult
to detect and isolate.
Defnitions for the time divisions are given in Table 1.3. Time is of fundamental
importance for quantifying product or system properties because it permits measure-
ment rather than qualitative description. The usual measures of timeyear, month,
day, and hournormally form the basis for the computation of reliability, maintain-
ability, and availability parameters. However, because there are so many ways of
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 11
Table 1.3 Defnitions of Time Elements
Time Element Defnition
Operating time Time during which the product is operating in a manner acceptable
to the operator; this element includes the time when the customer is
dissatisfed with the manner of operation, but not so dissatisfed
that the product must be shut down for repair or, if repair will not
satisfy customer needs, discarded
Downtime Total time during which the product is not in an acceptable
operating condition or is not operationally ready
Realization time Time that elapses before the fault condition becomes apparent
Active repair time Portion of downtime during which actual maintenance takes place;
included is the time to prepare the product for repair, locate the
fault, correct the fault, and check out the product
Logistic delay That portion of downtime during which repair is delayed
(waiting time) solely because a part or unit needed to make a repair
is not available
Administrative delay That portion of downtime not covered by active repair or logistic time
Free time Time during which operational use of the product is not required; it
may or may not be depending on downtime or on whether the
product is in operable condition; during free time periods, downtime
is not included in operational availability calculations
Standby time Time during which the product is operable but is being held as a
spare; standby time is the time during which the product is operable
but is not being used to perform a useful function; the product can be
called upon to operate at any random point of time during the period
Access time Time from realizing that a fault exists to making contact with
displays and test points and commencing fault fnding; this does not
include travel or preparation; access time refects the removal of
covers and shields and the connection of test equipment and is
determined largely by mechanical design
Diagnosis time Fault-fnding time, including the adjustment test equipment (e.g.,
setting up an oscilloscope or generator), carrying out checks (e.g.,
examining wave forms for comparisons with a handbook),
interpreting information (this may be aided by algorithms), verifying
conclusions, and deciding upon corrective action
Replacement time Time for removing the faulty line replaceable assembly (LRA),
followed by connecting and wiring a replacement as appropriate; the
LRA is the replaceable item beyond which fault diagnosis does not
continue; replacement time is largely dependent on the choice of LRA
and on mechanical design features, such as the choice of connectors
Supply delay Time required from the point of identifying the need for a
maintenance part or assembly (LRA) until that part or assembly is
in the hands of the maintenance technician; supply delay can be
factored into elements such as time to remove the part from the
maintenance technicians tool kit, time to obtain the part from a
supply bin, time to receive the part from a warehouse at another
site, or time to procure the part from a manufacturer
Checkout time Time of verifying that the fault condition no longer exists and that the
product is operational; it may be possible to restore the product to
operation before completing the checkoutin which case, although
it is a repair function, all of checkout time does not constitute
downtime; adjustments may be required when a new module is
inserted into the product; as in the case of checkout, some or all of
the alignment time may fall outside the downtime window
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
12 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
delineating these time intervals, the method adopted in each investigation must be
carefully developed in order to provide the desired results.
In general, the time interval of interest is the total calendar time during which the
product is in use. As shown in Figure 1.3, this interval may be divided into available
time and unavailable time. During available time, the product is available for use by
the intended user; during unavailable time, the product is being supplied, repaired,
or restored and is not available for use.
Thus, there are really two time-division criteria: the equipments state of oper-
ability and the demand for its use. These criteria are outlined as follows:
criterion 1: product state of operability
operable/inoperable
administrative delay
logistic delay
realization time
repair time
criterion 2: demand for product use
use required
use not required
storage time
free time
standby time
Complaint
Repair
U
n
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
Calendar time
Usage
R
e
a
d
y
R
e
a
d
y
S
t
a
n
d
b
y
S
t
a
n
d
b
y
S
t
a
n
d
b
y
O
p
e
r
a
t
e
O
p
e
r
a
t
e
O
p
e
r
a
t
e
Usage
W
a
i
t
i
n
g
P
o
w
e
r

o
f
P
o
w
e
r

o
f
P
o
w
e
r

o
n
P
o
w
e
r

o
n
Figure 1.3 Principal divisions of calendar time.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 13
1.3.7 Relationships Among Time Elements
An examination of the relationships among the various time elements can provide
additional insight into the properties of the product effectiveness components. As an
aid in doing this, Figure 1.4 shows how various time intervals combine and infuence
the product effectiveness components. Note that capability is not normally a time-
dependent parameter and therefore no time factors are shown to infuence it.
1.4 ASSIGNMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY
Even before discussing quantitative measurement for the concepts displayed in
Figure 1.4, it is possible to demonstrate how such measures can be helpful in locat-
ing trouble areas and assigning responsibility for remedial action to improve effec-
tiveness. These concepts can provide information for comparative evaluation of
competing equipment or systems and for determining the particular characteristics
responsible for the differences.
The property of the time breakdown that leads to these results is the relation-
ship between the lengths of various time intervals and the responsibilities of vari-
ous personnel groups. It is apparent that administrative personnel are responsible
for controlling free time, storage time, administrative time, and logistic time, while
production and design engineers are responsible to a large degree for operating time
Product efectiveness
Dependability Readiness
Free time Storage time Availability Maintainability
Capability
Reliability
Operation time
Down time
Logistics time Active repair time
Intrinsic availability
Administrative time
Figure 1.4 Relationships among the time elements as they infuence product effectiveness.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
14 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
(failure frequency) and active repair time. Of course, maintenance and design engi-
neers share the responsibility for active repair time.
To achieve the outmost effectiveness, it is necessary to maximize operating
time and minimize downtime. The role of non-use time (free time and storage
time) is to serve as a safety valve. Maximum free time means minimum pressure
for product use; storage time results from the existence of spares to carry the opera-
tional load in case of emergency. Because the deterioration rate during storage may
be different from that during use and because, by error, some inoperable equipment
may be placed in storage, this time element must be considered in determining
operational readiness.
Large amounts of free time result when a product has a short operating time
for example, when equipment is needed relatively infrequentlyand there is frm
scheduling of the need. It can also happen if working hours are restricted instead of
continuous. For example, banks need time locks on safes at night but not during the
day. Some communication equipment regularly has free time. Automatic answering
services are needed only when the operator is absent. Some television stations have
regular hours during which there is no telecast. It is clear that operational readiness
can be enhanced by using free time for maintenance, and free time can thus compen-
sate to some extent for poor maintainability and poor reliability.
The important point with respect to free time and storage time is that they pro-
vide administrative fexibility to help alleviate the effects of equipment inadequa-
cies and thus to gain operational readiness. However, it is important to note that free
time and storage time have no connection with improving poor equipment. They
provide an inferior but sometimes necessary alternative to the preferred solution
of obtaining better equipment. They are a substitute for quality, but not a way of
achieving it.
It follows from the foregoing discussion that the more signifcant indicators of
equipment characteristics are to be found in times other than free time and storage
time. Figure 1.4 shows that these other types of time are all involved in the con-
cept of availability, which combines operating time with total downtime, includ-
ing the three subcategories of downtime: administrative time, logistic time, and
active repair time. These subcategories involve both administrative and engineering
responsibilities.
1.4.1 Administrative Time
The administrative time category is almost entirely determined by administrative
decisions about the processing of records and the personnel policies governing main-
tenance engineers, technicians, and those engaged in associated clerical activities.
Establishing effcient methods of monitoring, processing, and analyzing repair activ-
ities is the responsibility of administration.
In addition, administrative time has been defned to include wasted time because
such time is the responsibility of administration. It is independent of engineering as
such and is not the responsibility of the equipment manufacturer.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 15
1.4.2 Logistics Time
Logistic time is the time consumed by delays in repair due to the unavailability
of replacement parts. This is a matter largely under the control of administration,
although the requirements for replacements are determined by operating conditions
and the built-in ability of the equipment to withstand operating stress levels. Policies
determined by procurement personnel can, if properly developed, minimize logistic
time. Therefore, the responsible administrative offcials in this area are likely to be
different from those who most directly infuence the other time categories. This jus-
tifes separate consideration of logistic time.
1.4.3 Active Repair Time and Operating Time
Active repair time and operating time are both determined principally by the built-in
characteristics of the equipment, and hence are primarily the responsibility of the
equipment manufacturer. Improvement in this area requires action to reduce the fre-
quency of failure, to increase the ease of repair, or both. Operating time and active
repair time are associated with the concepts of reliability and repairability, respec-
tively, which are related through the concept of intrinsic availability.
Administration can do little to reduce active repair time or increase operating
time (i.e., failure-free time). Administrators can infuence these time elements to a
limited extent by assuring that operating stress levels are within design specifca-
tions and that the maintenance shop is supplied with proper tools and adequately
trained personnel.
Because products are generally purchased, most customers want to buy products
that perform their intended function at the lowest total cost. Cost studies show that
the total cost of ownership (including initial and operating costs for the service life
of the equipment) can be materially reduced if proper attention is given to reliability
and maintainability early in the design of the product. These considerations lead to
the concept of product worth, which is illustrated in Figure 1.5, and relate product
effectiveness to total cost, scheduling, and personnel requirements.
Product worth
Efectiveness
Personnel
requirements
Development,
production,
and installation
schedule
Cost (initial
and operating)
Figure 1.5 Concepts associated with product worth.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
16 PRODUCT RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AND SUPPORTABILITY HANDBOOK 2E
To optimize product worth, program managers face the diffcult task of striking
balances to maximize product effectiveness while minimizing total cost, development
time, and personnel requirements (see Chapter 13). Cost, schedule, and personnel
are constraints faced by both military and commercial program managers. In the
commercial world, time to market and staying up with the competition are addi-
tional constraints. The political constraints surrounding most military programs
are unique to the military manager. In practice, managers from both communities
select from several alternatives of the most promising product or component for
which development effort is required. This selection can be facilitated by forming
technical development plans, as outlined in Figure 1.6. At this point it should be
noted that the product effectiveness applies to the operation of a product in its use
environment and is capable of being measured. However, because the actual use
environment is often unknown or beyond the control of the product manufacturer,
only certain elements of the product effectiveness concept can be specifed for con-
tractual purposes. From a practical point of view, a mission or use analysis must be
conducted to determine the required level of intrinsic availability, as well as the
needed performance characteristic (design capability). The problem of specifying
product requirements becomes increasingly complex if redundant or multimodal
operation is employed.
For example, to achieve the required level of availability at the optimum cost level,
the product design team may have to consider several alternative approaches. Should
several redundant systems be used so that one or more spare systems will always be
available and the failed system can be repaired under less pressing circumstances,
or should one highly reliable product be developed that can be repaired quickly?
In many cases, improved reliability and repairability by the use of higher quality
parts, redundant circuitry, plug-in assemblies, and simplifed or semiautomatic fault
Technical development plan
Cost (initial and
operating) and
schedule requirements
Personnel
requirements
Technical
requirements
Dependability
plan (reliability,
maintainability)
Test and evaluation plan
Development,
production,
delivery, and
installation plan
Personnel
requirements and
training plan for
system development
and utilization
Operability
and
supportability
plan
Product
design plan
Figure 1.6 Outline of requirements for a technical development plan.
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
PRODUCT EFFECTIVENESS AND WORTH 17
isolation devices can do much to improve availability and reduce total downtime.
Trade-off analyses, therefore, are often essential in determining the minimum
requirements for achieving the required availability with the optimum expenditure
of money, personnel, and time among which trade-offs will also be required.
Historically signifcant reliability improvements in electronic systems were made
as industries transitioned from vacuum tubes to solid-state components to micro-
chips. New materials and approaches to design and stress analysis contributed to
reducing failures. As reliability problems were attacked and alleviated, the need to
address maintainability, logistics, and cost issues became more evident.
Product effectiveness provides an approach to product operation, support, and
performance. For example, reliability engineers working on redundancy in the early
1960s found that, by adding additional components and a switching mechanism
to a functionally duplicate operating component, reliability could theoretically be
improved. But, as these designs were implemented, it became clear that penalties
were incurred in such areas as power, weight, maintainability, and cost. Of what value
is adding a duplicate transmitter circuit if the power requirements of a redundant
design cause a signifcant increase in the failure rate of the power supply? Product
effectiveness and product worth, which account for cost and resource usage, provide
a conceptual framework for determining how best to direct design and development
to achieve the desired performance more effciently and effectively.
212.4 214.0 212.6 213.9 212.8 212.0
212.3 211.9 212.7 213.2 211.9 212.2
212.3 214.5 213.0 212.0 213.5 211.8
212.1 212.5 212.3 212.9 213.0 212.8
212.7 212.5 212.7 213.7 214.2 212.1
First
observation
Sixth
observation
Tirtieth
observation
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2009 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC