Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T17:33:53.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Random wear models in reliability theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2016

David S. Reynolds  and
I. Richard Savage
David S. Reynolds
Affiliation:
The Procter and Gamble Company, Cincinnati, Ohio
I. Richard Savage
Affiliation:
The Florida State University, Tallahassee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Gaver (1963) and Antelman and Savage (1965) have proposed models for the distribution of the time to failure of a simple device exposed to a randomly varying environment. Each model represents cumulative wear as a specified function of a non-negative stochastic process with independent increments, and assumes that the reliability of the device is conditioned upon realizations of this process. From these models are derived the corresponding unconditional joint distributions for the random failure time vector of n independent, identical devices exposed to the same realization of the wear process. It is shown that the identical failure time distribution for one component can arise from each model. In the Gaver model simultaneous failure times occur with positive probability. The probabilities of specific tie configurations are developed.

For an interesting class of Gaver models involving a time scale parameter, the maximum likelihood estimates from several devices in one environment are examined. In that case the tie configuration probability does not depend on the parameter. For the corresponding Antelman-Savage models a consistent sequence of estimators is obtained; the maximum likelihood theory did not appear tractable.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in Applied Probability , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1971 , pp. 229 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 1971 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Antelman, G. and Savage, I. R. (1965) Characteristic functions of stochastic integrals and reliability theory. Naval Res. Logist. Quart. 12, 199–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlow, R. E. and Proschan, F. (1965) Mathematical Theory of Reliability. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Bergström, H. (1966) Some Remarks on One-Sided Infinitely Divisible Distribution Functions. Statistics Report No. M116, Florida State University.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, Z. W., Lentz, B. P. and Murthy, V. K. (1970) A New Mathematical Model for Fatigue. ARL 70–0013, Aerospace Research Laboratories, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, Z. W. and Saunders, S. C. (1958) A statistical model for life lentgh of materials. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 53, 151–160.Google Scholar
Boehme, T. K. (1968) The convolution integral. SIAM Rev. 10, 407–416.Google Scholar
Doob, J. L. (1953) Stochastic Processes. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York.Google Scholar
Epstein, B. and Sobel, M. (1953) Life testing. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 48, 486–502.Google Scholar
Gaver, D. P. (1963) Random hazard in reliability problems. Technometrics, 5, 211–226.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. W. and Olktn, I. (1967) A multivatiate exponential distribution. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 62, 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNolty, F. (1964) Reliability density functions when the failure rate is randomly distributed. Sankhyā. A 26, 287–292.Google Scholar
Morey, R. C. (1966) Some stochastic properties of a compound renewal damage model. Operat. Res. 14, 902–908.Google Scholar