Product Reliability, Hazard, and Risk
Author(s):
Dr. Joseph H. Wujek, P.E.
Introduction
You work for Ajax Health Instruments, Inc. Ajax is
developing an implantable patient-monitoring device. The device
is implemented on a single-chip: Chip X. The user ("patient")
may download health data by telephone to the hospital. Any mode
of failure of this memory chip can be extremely hazardous to
the patient because of incorrect data, data loss, and unknown
or unidentified hazards. Most of the patients using the implant
are over 50 years of age.
Field data for Chip X, under environmental stress conditions
similar to Ajax's intended use, show six failures in 1.77
million part-hours. From this, a colleague has computed the
point-estimate of the failure rate:

Under the robust assumption of constant failure rate, the
Mean Time To F (m) is the reciprocal of failure rate, so: m =
2.95 (105) hours.
Upon seeing this result, the Chief Engineer exclaims, "Wow,
that's wonderful! The instrument operates continuously, so
that's 8,760 hours per year. So on average we can operate our
unit without failures from the part for 34 years!"
- What fraction of installed Chip X can be expected to fail
after 1 year?
- If failure of Chip X results in patient death one out of
three times, what is the probability of death due to Chip X
failure of one or more patients after 2 years? Assume that
the entire patient population had the device installed at the
same time, and that no other patient fatalities occur in the
2-year interval.
- Compute the two-sided 60% confidence limits (lower 20%,
upper 80%) of failure rate.
- Repeat (c) for two-sided confidence limits of: 80%, 90%,
and 95%.
- On semi-log paper carefully plot the results of (c) and
(d). Use failure rate as the variable of the log-axis.
- Repeat part (a) but now using the upper 90% one-sided
confidence limit of failure rate.
- The Marketing Department of Ajax wants to run an ad in
journals read by physicians. They intend to show prominently:
"Reliability of 34 years!" Comment on this. Consider in your
comments how the ethics code of one or more engineering
societies may be invoked.
- Is Chip X suitable for the intended application? What
considerations should be evaluated, and how?
Back to Top
Solutions
- For constant failure rate, the fraction survived as a
function of time is: R(t) = 1 - exp(-λ t), with
λ =3.39E-6, and t = (24 operating hr/day)(365days/yr)
= 8,760 hours. The fraction failed, F(t) = 1 - R(t)
=1-R(8,760)=1 - 0.971 = 0.0290 (to 3 significant
figures)
- 1 - R(17,520) = 1 - 0.94234 = 0.0577 This is the fraction
failed after 2 years. If 1/3 of the failures result in
patient death, the probability of death due to Chip X failure
is: P = (1/3)(0.0577) = 0.0192. The failure-rate is
Chi-square distributed. The upper and lower
bounds of failure rate are given by:

In the above, T is the accumulated unit-hours of test;
and x2 indicates the Chi-square statistic at a
given (two-sided) Confidence Level (1 - α / 2) or
Significance (α / 2); with v degrees of freedom. For
a failure truncated test, take v = 2f, where f is the
number of failures. If the test is time-truncated, use v =
2( f + 1) for computing the upper bound,
λu, and v = 2f for computing the lower
bound, λL. The Chi-square statistic is
tabulated in many statistics books and handbooks. For the
problem at hand, T = 1.77E6 hours, f = 6. Lacking further
information, assume that the test was time-terminated. This
is typical of field data, where failures are noted but the
equipment is repaired and continues to operate.
- The solution is tabulated below.
- The solution is tabulated below.

- See plot below.
- For one-sided confidence C:

This result may be interpreted thus: "If we ran an
infinite number of tests, 90% of the tests would yield a
failure rate < 5.96E-6 per hour."
- The intended ad is misleading. At 34 years, using the
point estimate (50% confidence) for the MTBF (34 years), 63%
of the chips will have failed!
A more truthful statement is: "At 90% statistical
confidence, no more than 5.1% of the chips used in our
device will fail after one year of operation." However,
such statements are not well understood by physicians
unless they have a background in epidemiology or laboratory
research. Further, it is "scary" and likely would not be
accepted by the Marketing Department of AHI, Inc.
- Chip X, based on data analyzed here, is not suitable for
this application without additional safeguards. The loss of
5% of the chips after one year's operation is not acceptable,
based on common hazards encountered daily such as driving an
automobile, etc.

Back to Top
These problems were originally developed as part of an
NSF-funded project to create numerical problems that raise
ethical issues for use in engineering and other course
assignments. The problems presented here have been edited
slightly for clarity.
Cite this page:
Dr. Joseph H. Wujek, P.E.
"Product Reliability, Hazard, and Risk"
Online Ethics Center for Engineering
2/16/2006 8:43:35 AM
National Academy of Engineering
Accessed: Thursday, November 20, 2008
<www.onlineethics.org/CMS/profpractice/ppcases/numericalprob/EE21.aspx>