J
OK, so I read the article and learned some stuff. ;^)
If I am reading this correctly MTBF only describes the failure rate during the normal life period of the life cycle, and does not account for infant mortality or wear out failure modes. Therefore, it is possible to have a
device that will fail due to "wear out" in 10 years, still have a MTBF of 400 years. MTBF seems to better describe failure rate than it does any life expectancy then, correct? MTTF, as defined in the article appears that it would take wear out failures into account, and would therefore be somewhat closer to reality.
Am I interpreting correctly? Doesn't this also mean that the MTBF numbers are somewhat indirectly dependant on the number of units in the field?
--Joe Jansen
If I am reading this correctly MTBF only describes the failure rate during the normal life period of the life cycle, and does not account for infant mortality or wear out failure modes. Therefore, it is possible to have a
device that will fail due to "wear out" in 10 years, still have a MTBF of 400 years. MTBF seems to better describe failure rate than it does any life expectancy then, correct? MTTF, as defined in the article appears that it would take wear out failures into account, and would therefore be somewhat closer to reality.
Am I interpreting correctly? Doesn't this also mean that the MTBF numbers are somewhat indirectly dependant on the number of units in the field?
--Joe Jansen