|
Message
Why did I have a sneaky suspicion that there would not be
any quick and easy solution to this challenge {:>). Makes sense -
without a statistical base of sufficient size of failures and their causes,
numbers don't mean much. It appears the next best approach is to make
available the practices and approaches that appear to work with a high degree of
success. But, again, experimenters want to experiment, so I don't have
high hope that the situation is going to change much.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 6:01
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Safety margin
assessment
I agree
that other than a seat-of-the-pants feel that my subsystem's are robust (in
the sense of avoiding failure), I have no quantitative measure of my system's
"safety Margin".
Would
certainly be interesting for everyone to take the 0-10 exam on their system
and report the results of the assessment. Perhaps we might find those
above a 5 and give them some careful study.
The problem, of
course, is that with a one-of-a-kind system ‘guessing’ at a number from 1 – 10
is not much different than ‘guessing’ that your system is OK in regard
to a given condition. The only way to get a numerical rating is to have
a large number of systems tested to failure for a number of different
variables.
Al
G
|