Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Credible Reliability Prediction?

by Larry George 2 Comments

Credible Reliability Prediction?

Credible Reliability Prediction?

ASQ Reliability Division published “Credible Reliability Prediction” (CRP) in 2003. Harold Williams, Reliability Division monograph series editor, wrote, “[CRP] …delineates statistical methods that effectively extend MTBF prediction to complex, redundant, dependent, standby, and life-limited systems… This is the first text that describes a credible method of making age-specific reliability predictions…. This monograph presents insights and information inspired by real applications and [still] not covered in contemporary reliability textbooks.” 

In 2004, Fred Schenkelberg invited me to present CRP to Hewlett-Packard; so I did. Thanks Fred. Did anyone at HP actually do CRP? I did, for Brocade, Agilent, Violin Memory, and others. 

We need age-specific reliability predictions, not just MTBF predictions. We want reliability predictions for systems made complex by redundancy, new designs, repair, dependence, and maintenance. We want these predictions for:

  • Evaluating alternative designs and allocating reliability
  • Estimating warranty risk and setting warranty reserves
  • Providing early warning and statistical process control of excessive infant mortality or premature wearout
  • Forecasting service and spares requirements
  • Verifying improvements and evaluating and verifying fixes

We are paid for accurate, precise, and defendable predictions that give just cause for design, process, and service actions. So make the best reliability predictions possible, objectively, accurately, and precisely, using all available, relevant data and information (Walter Shewhart’s rule #1). 

The Field Determines Reliability!

“Credible Reliability Prediction” is not MTBF prediction a la MIL-HDBK-217, Bellcore TR-332, other vendors, and a freebie [George]. CRP predicts a credible nonparametric reliability function for a new product. What makes it credible? 

CRP uses field failure rate (actuarial) estimates a(t;OLD) of older, comparable parts and products, their MTBF predictions, and an MTBF prediction of the new product to predict reliability R(t;NEW) = exp(-INTEGRAL[a(s;NEW), s=0 to t]), where a(s;NEW) is the new product failure rate function. Generations of products have similar failure rate functions, because factors such as process, shipping, installation, training, environments, and customers remain the same even though designs may change. New products may even use old parts for which you may already have estimates of their field reliability and failure rate functions. For example, a credible a(t;NEW) prediction is a(t;OLD)*MTBF(OLD)/MTBF(NEW)), for one new and one old, comparable product.

Adjustment of failure rate functions is not an original idea. Real statisticians call this a “proportional hazards” model, Proportional hazards model – Wikipedia.  

Resistance to change? 

MTBF-prediction armchair exercises require only looking up part FITs (Failures In Time, also Failures In Thousands of millions of hours), multiplying  by part counts and (fudge) p-factors, adding the multiplication products, and inverting the sum. This simplicity has such strong appeal that the parts-count method persists despite out-of-date FITs data, invalid model assumptions, irrelevance of MTBF during useful life, and lack of credibility [Pandian et al., EPSMA, Jiang and Chen, George and Langfeldt]. MTBF prediction, given a credible reliability prediction R(t;NEW), is easy: MTBF = INTEGRAL[R(t;NEW), t=0 to infinity, life limit, or useful life].

Credible Reliability Prediction methods apply to complex, redundant, dependent, standby, and life-limited systems, using observed reliability of comparable products or parts. Finally, CRP adapts insurance credibility theory to update predictions as new-product user data becomes available. 

Try Credible Reliability Prediction?

URL Credible Reliability Prediction – Field Reliability (google.com) is the preface to CRP. Try the do-it-yourself spreadsheet CRPExamp.xlsx implementation in the List of Files. Take a look at the 2nd edition of Credible Reliability Prediction, CREDRP2020.PDF, at the bottom of that web page. I will help use it. Next article will be about the “User Manual for CRP.” 

Fred Schenkelberg suggests that you need to let me know what you think of these reliability-statistics articles and their applications. Comments get emailed to me, and I appreciate them.   

References

Guru Prasad Pandian, Diganta Das, Chuan Li , Enrico Zio, and Michael Pecht, “A critique of reliability prediction techniques for avionics applications, Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, Vol. 31, issue 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 10-20

EPSMA, “Guidelines to Understanding Reliability Prediction,” European Power Supply Manufacturers Association, June 2005

Mingxiao Jiang, Weiqiu Chen “Integrated Approach for Field Reliability Prediction Based on Accelerated Life Testing,” Quality Engineering, 27:317–328, 2015

George, L. L., “MTBF Prediction Workbook,” ASQ Reliability Review, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 18-23, March 2004

George, L. L. and Eva Langfeldt, “MTBF vs. Age-Specific Reliability Prediction,” ASQ Reliability Review, Vol. 21, No. 2, June 2001, pp 13-15. Translated and published in Gestion de Activos Industriales sometime after Sept., 2001

Filed Under: Articles, on Tools & Techniques, Progress in Field Reliability?

About Larry George

UCLA engineer and MBA, UC Berkeley Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering and Operations Research with minor in statistics. I taught for 11+ years, worked for Lawrence Livermore Lab for 11 years, and have worked in the real world solving problems ever since for anyone who asks. Employed by or contracted to Apple Computer, Applied Materials, Abbott Diagnostics, EPRI, Triad Systems (now http://www.epicor.com), and many others. Now working on actuarial forecasting, survival analysis, transient Markov, epidemiology, and their applications: epidemics, randomized clinical trials, availability, risk-based inspection, Statistical Reliability Control, and DoE for risk equity.

« Words (like ‘failure’) are important. But not as important as leadership.
Loss Analysis »

Comments

  1. Danny Taylor says

    June 24, 2022 at 8:15 AM

    I like how you stated the differences between credible reliability prediction and MTBF prediction. It was very helpful reading about the CPR and how it measures reliability. I have been wanting to learn about the CPR as I usually use MTBF prediction.

    Reply
    • Larry George says

      July 22, 2024 at 4:15 PM

      Sorry this reply is so long in coming. I am happy that you recognize the difference between MTBF and age-specific reliability predictions.
      There is a lot of criticism of MTBF predictions, and I am working on a revised version of MIL-HDBK-217G (George) that uses Paretos to improve MTBF predictions.
      I also offer help to make nonparametric estimates of field reliability and failure rate functions to help make Credible Reliability Predictions, without lifetime data [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vxzrQUQKciZ1uyB1ZF_O-m4VcK6oVZe8/view/]
      [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1za5KT_qsF2sCSzGO7xi2EoHONBz2PwtZ/view/]

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Articles by Larry George
in the Progress in Field Reliability? article series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • Gremlins today
  • The Power of Vision in Leadership and Organizational Success
  • 3 Types of MTBF Stories
  • ALT: An in Depth Description
  • Project Email Economics

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy