It has long been well known that actual system reliability typically falls well short of early estimates. Failure rates are often ten or more times higher than anticipated. Many reasons have been given for this, but over-optimism is the fundamental cause of too-favorable reliability predictions. Most forecasts of reliability are essentially best-case scenarios, as are predictions of budget and schedule. Confident engineers assemble estimates bottom-up, including the known factors and ignoring problems that they hope won’t happen. Traditional reliability estimation is based on simply summing up the component failure rates. This ignores most actual failure causes. The way to reduce over-optimism is to use the historical system level failure rate from similar projects. Adjustments should not be made based purely on engineering judgment, but only if there is so logical quantitative justification. The traditional component-based reliability estimate is useful as a lower bound on the system failure rate. The difference between this lower bound component-based reliability and the historical system level reliability indicates how much of the total failure rate is due to system level problems rather than component failures.
展开▼
