| Related Topics: | ||
Operational Mission Profile Testing |
||
Consider the test-fix-find-test data of Crow Extended Example 2 in Failure Mode Management Strategy, which is shown again in Table 12.1. The total test time for this test is 400 hours. Note that for this example we assume one stopping point at the end of the test for the incorporation of the delayed fixes. Suppose that the data set represents a military system with Task 1 firing a gun, Task 2 moving under environment E1 and Task 3 moving under environment E2. For every hour of operation the operational profile states that the system operates in environment E1 70% of the time and in environment E2 30% of the time. In addition, for each hour of operation the gun must be fired 10 times.
In general, it is difficult to manage an operational test so that these operational profiles are continuously met throughout the test. However, the operational mission profile methodology requires that these conditions be met on average at the convergence points. In practice, this almost always can be done with proper program and test management. The convergence points are set for the testing, often at interim assessment points. The process for controlling the convergence at these points involves monitoring a graph for each of the tasks.
Table 12.2 shows the expected and actual results for each of the operational mission profiles.
Table 12.1 - Test-fix-find-test data |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table 12.2 - Expected and actual results for profiles 1, 2, 3 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Figure 12.1 shows a portion of the expected and actual results for mission profile 1, as entered in RGA 7.

Figure 12.1: Entering expected and actual results for profile 1 in RGA 7 |
A graph exists for each of the three tasks in this example. Each graph has a line with the expected average as a function of hours, and the corresponding actual value. When the actual value for a task meets the expected value then is a convergence for that task. A convergence point occurs when all of the tasks converge at the same time. At least three convergence points are required, one of which is the stopping point T. In our example, the total test time is 400 hours. The convergence points were chosen to be at 100, 250, 320 and 400 hours. Figure 12.2 shows the data sheet that contains the convergence points in RGA 7.

Figure 12.2: Specifying convergence points in RGA 7 |
The testing profiles are managed so that at these times the actual operational test profile equals the expected values for the three tasks or falls within an acceptable range. Figure 12.3 shows the expected and actual gun firings. Figure 12.4 shows the expected and actual time in environment E1 and Figure 12.5 shows the expected and actual time in environment E2.

Figure 12.3: Operational mission profile for gun firings |

Figure 12.4: Operational mission profile for time in environment E1 |

Figure 12.5: Operational mission profile for time in environment E2 |
The objective of having the convergence points is to be able to apply the Crow Extended model directly in such a way that the projection and other key reliability growth parameters can be estimated in a valid fashion. To do this, grouped data is applied using the Crow Extended model. For reliability growth assessments using grouped data, only information between time points in the testing is used. In our application, these time points are the convergence points: 100, 250, 320, and 400. Figure 12.6 shows all three mission profiles plotted in the same graph, together with the convergence points.

Figure 12.6: Combined mission profile graph with convergence points |
Table 12.3 gives the grouped data input corresponding to the data in Table 12.1.
Table 12.3 - Grouped data at convergence points 100, 250, 320 and 400 hours |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The parameters of the Crow Extended model for grouped data are then estimated, as explained in Grouped Data for the Crow Extended Model. Table 12.4 shows the effectiveness factors (EFs) for each of the BD modes.
Table 12.4 - Effectiveness Factors for delayed fixes |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Using the Crow Extended failure times Data Sheet shown in Figure 12.7, we can analyze this data set based on a mission profile by clicking the mission profile icon:
![]()

Figure 12.7: Failure times data |
A specific mission profile can then be associated with the Data Sheet, as shown in Figure 12.8. This will group the failure times data into groups based on the convergence points that have already been specified when constructing the mission profile.

Figure 12.8: Selecting a mission profile |
A new data sheet with the grouped data is created, as shown in Figure 12.9.

Figure 12.9: Grouped data set prepared based on the mission profile convergence points |
The calculated results based on the grouped data are as follows:

Figure 12.10 shows the instantaneous, demonstrated, projected and growth potential MTBF for the grouped data, based the mission profile grouping with intervals at the specified convergence points of the mission profile.

Figure 12.10: Instantaneous, demonstrated, projected and growth potential MTBF for grouped data |