MIL-HDBK-2155 Fracas

Downloaded from http://www.everyspec.com m NOTE: Mil-SId-2 155(AS) bm been redesignated m n Handbook, nnd is to be used for guidance purposes only. For administrative expediency, the only physicnl change from Mil-Std-2 155(AS) is this cover page. However, this document IS no longer to be cited m n requirement. [1 cited us n requirement, Contractors Interpret mny disregnrd its contents tbe requirement of this document tmd only M guidance. MIL-HDBK-2 155 11 December 1995 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE HANDBOOK FAILURE REPORTING, ANALYSIS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN AMSC NIA FSC RELI DISTRIBUTION unlimited. STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is and IS aval I able ments and Agencies of the Department of Defense. pertinent data which may be of use addressed to: Gmnanding Officer. il .Downloaded from http://www. Th{s Mf 1 f tary Standard is approved for use by the (lxmnand. Naval 08733. Benef Iclal comments (recomnendatlons. Analysis. and Corrective Action System MI L-STD-2155(AS) 1. by using the self-addressed Proposal (OD Form 1426) appearing Naval Al r Systems for use by aI 1 Depart- 2. NJ Standardization Document Improvement at the end of this document or by letter.com +41L-STD~2155(’AS) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 14ashlngton. D. Department of the Navy.everyspec. Lakehurst. addi t!ons. 20301 Failure Reporting. C. deletlons) and any in tmproving this document should be Engineering Speciflcatlons and StanAlr Engineering Center. dards Department (Code 93). program urgency. The acquiring activity has the responsibj lity of determining these limits in Iight of accepted norms established in successful programs or even h! gher standards of performance as warranted by a particular program. and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) is considered an essential element in the early and sustained achievement of the reliability and maintainability equipment. and associated software. and engineering Ingenuity. It IS recognized that there are pragmatic 1 Imits to the resources In time. and verlf!ed to prevent further recurrence of the failure. These options and f)extbility become more 1 imi ted and expensive to Implement as a design becomes firm. These 1 Imits Wi 11 vary from program to program. and detai led attention to each failure or fault as it occurs should limit the s{tuation in which prioritization of open investigations causes a backlog which results in a number of correctable deficiencies being left to field service to resolve over the years. The earlier a failure cause IS Identified and posltlve corrective action implemented. The essence of a closed loop FRACAS is that failures and faults of both hardware and software are formal Iy reported. and positive corrective actions are identified. Early implementation of corrective action also has the advantage of provldlng visibility of the Early adequacy of the corrective action in the event more effort is required. potential Inherent in ml lltary systems. actions. implemented. money. Analysis. analysls IS performed to the extent that the fal lure cause is understood. and engineering manpower to expend on an anal Ysis Of a Particularly complex fal lure occurrence or the implementation of preferred corrective These 1Iml ts are determined by item priority. Corrective action options and flexlbi 1lty are greatest during design evolution when even major design changes can be considered to el Imlnate or significantly reduce susceptibi lity to known fal lure causes. available technology.Downloaded from http://www.everyspec.com MiL-STO-2 155(AS) FOREHORD I A disciplined and aggressive closed loop Failure Rep&t!ng. the scarer both the producer and user real ize the benef Its of reduced fai lure occurrences in the factory and in the field. iil . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . Corrective action effectivity Failure. system .3 4. . . . 3. . Fa{lure symptom. . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 .12 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 SCOPE. . . . . . .3 3. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 1 . . . . . . . . . . . Fault . .2 3. . . . . . . . . . . . Closed IWP faflure reporting Contractor . .. 1. . . . .6 3. . . . . . . .11 3. . . . .com MI L-STD-2155(AS) CONTENTS @ Paragraph 1. . requirements . . . . . . . .. . . . GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Contractor responsibility FRAC. Fallu~eanalysis . Purpose. . .1 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Ill :::::. . . Failure Review Board. .1 3. . . . .10 3. . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . .2 2. . . . .2. . . . . . . . . : DEFINITIONS Terms. .1 4. . . .7 3. . . . . . . . . .. Failure Review 60ard Failure documentation . . . Laboratory analysis . . . . . . . . .everyspec. . .. .5 3. other other . .2. . . . . . . .1 3. . . . . . . . Application. . . . . . .9 3. . .8 3. . . . . . . .2 4. . . . . . . . . . .1 1. . . . . . . Relationship to Integration with . . . . activities . . . . . . . . .. . 1 I 1 1 1 REFERENCED EKKWENTS Issues ofdocuments~ . . . . 4 iv . . . . . Acquiringactlvity . .4 3. . . . . . .Downloaded from http://www. Failure cause. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4S planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 10 OATA ITEM DESCRIPTIONS (DID) . . . .. . . .4 50. .everyspec. .. . . . . . . . . . . Duplication of effort . . . . . . .-. . . . . .. . . . 50. .Downloaded from http://www. .. . . . .8 GENERAL RETIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . Failure analysis .. . . . . . Failures . . .3 5. . . . .1 5. . .1. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oata items . . . . Failure re~rting . . . 40. . .1. . . . . .4 ::: OETAILEO RETIREMENTS .8 . . .2 50. . .. .. .. .. . . .3 50.. .. Paragraph 5. . . .3 50. . . . . . Request of FRKASplan . . . . . . . .8 Importance of FRACAS . . . . . . 7 . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . ..com 141L-}TD-2155(AS) CONTENTS (CS3NTINUED). . . . . .. . . . . Failure analyses . . .. . 4 4 5 5 APPENDIX APPLICATION Paragraph 10. . . . . . . . . . . .”l . . . 8 8 8 9 9 lJII1ll. . . . . . . . . . FMEW . . . OETAILREOUIREMENTS .2.2 [0.1 A GUIOE . . . . . . . . . . . .. .1 50. . of failed Items . .2. . . .3 10. .9 .9 .1 50. . . .. .. . . FRACAS planning and documentation Primary Object ice . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. .. . . .2. . .1. . . . . . . .2.. . . . .4 60. . . . . . . . . . 40. . Failure verif!catlon Correctiveaction. . 10. . .:::lj FRACAS data collection . . . v . .4 20.. . .2 50. . . Tailoring requirements . . . .10 . . . . . . . 60. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .lllll: Failure report close-out Identification and control . ..1 50. . . . . Effect iveness of FFbWW . . . . . . . . 30. .2 50. Results of failure analysis . . . .4 11111JJ115 . .. . ‘. Requirement addition Failuredata. . . . . . . . .~ ..-8 . Oat . . . .1 40. . . . .. . . . .. ... . ANO TAILORING GENERAL .2 50. . . . .8 . . . . . ..4 . .. . . .. . . .1. . . .2 5. .1 10. . Relationship of FRACAS to REFERENCEO DOCUMENTS DEFINITIONS ..-9 .. . . . com MI L-ST@2155(AS) .Downloaded from http://www. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK v{ .everyspec. . Models and Related Terms Maintai nabi 1 i ty Program for Item Exchangeabi I i ty. qual tty assurance. system safety. materials. in addition to 1 .1 Purpose. docurents of for proposal.1 Relationship to other requirements.com MI L-STD-2155(AS) 1. and MI L-STD-2068. software by timely and disciplined data to generate and implement effeclure recurrence and to simplify or This standard establ 1. maintainabi 1 ity. REFERENCED ODUJMENTS The fol lowing 2. and operation of military systems. 2.2 Integration with other activities. on the date of invitation for bid or request standard to the extent specified herein. and implement the FRACAS requl rement of MI vide management visibll!ty and control improvement of hardware and associated uti I ization of fai lure and maintenance tive corrective actions to prevent fai reduce the maintenance tasks. This standard. human engineering. SCOPE lshes untform requirements and criteria Corrective ActIon System (FRACAS) to L-STD-785. . configuration integrated logi sties support to preclude duplication of effort and to produce integrated cost effective results. 1. for a Fai lure Reporting.2 Application. MI L-STD-1 679. and processes control . equipment. program phases of demonstration and validation and full scale development. Analysis.. development. STANOARDS MILITARY MI L-STD-280 Definitions of Item Levels. is intended to complement the requirements of MIL-STO-47D. implementing the FFWAS requirement of MI L-STD-785. test. MI L-STO-781. The FRACAS effort shall be coordinated and integrated with other program efforts such as reliabi Iity. 1 . f abdication.1 Issue of documents. the issue in effect form a part of this MI L-STO-470 ODD-STO-480 Systems and Equipment Configuration Deviations Definitions ability Control and Haivers of Terms .Downloaded from http://www. test. This standard primarily applies to the and associated canputer programs.everyspec.2. MI L+TD-721 for Reliability and Maintain- 1 . management. and parts.2.Engineering Changes. FRACAS is Intended to profor reliability and maintainability .. This standard applies to acquisitions for the design. analyzed (engineering or laboratory anaiysis). to prevent recurrence.5 requirements document of agreement. 2 .everyspec.6 Failure requi-&ions An event i n which an i tern does within the specified limits not perform one or more of under specified conditions. a 3. The circumstance that induces soldering. and laboratory analysis resul ts. comPanY. or activity through sub. The term “contractor” 1s defined as any corporation. defective software error. herein are in accordance with 3. or activates a fai lure assembly techniques. A controlled system assuring that al 1 failures and faults are reported. project orders. and that the adequacy of implemented corrective actions is verified by test. when its 3. positive corrective actions are. associ ati On. 3.~gn”Qual if~catlon and Production Exponential Di strlbution for Systems . required by contractors should be obtained from tracting officer. mechanism.com i.8 Fai lure cause. DEFINITIONS 3.1 ~. etc. on another contractor. . of failure syasptoms.iIL-STD=215ki( A5) MI L-STD-781 Reliabii:lty tance Tests: L&. and publications Wlthf speclf{c acquisition functions activity or as directed by the con- the Mean!ng of terms not defined in MI L-STO-280 and MI L-STD-721 activity. That activity levies FAA~. drawings. in connection the contracting Development ha~dbcmks.Downloaded from http://www. uil 1 be or has been The date Incorporated or item serial number Into the ttem.7 logical evidence. or ~ndi vi dual Uhi ch undertakes performance under the terms of a contract. identified. letter of intent or purchase orders.. reasoning from examination of data. ) 3. and Equipment Accep- HIL-STD-785 Rel iabi 1 ity Program ment and Product Ion Meapon System Software Develop- #iIL-STD-1679 MI L-STD-2068 (Copies of speclflcations.2 Acquiring contractor) which contract or other (government. the term “contractor” also includes Government operated activi ties undertaking performance of a task.3 Ciosed loop fai lure reportinq system.5 corrective Corrective action action effectivity. 3. A determination Failure analysis. Purpose of th~s standard. cause made by use of available physical 3.g.4 Contractor. design weakness. and For the al lotment. in which this document may be incorporated by reference. 3. definitions Oeve lopment Tests Relatability standards. e. A Fai lure Review Board (FRB) shal 1 be estab1 i shed to review fai lure trends. requirements specified by the acquiring activity.com . or condltlon or occurrence.1 Contractor responsibi Iity. FRACAS planning t nvolves the preparation of written 4. 3.respcwrstbi 1 i ty and authority to assure that fal lure causes are identified and corrective act~ons are effected. of associated 3. reserves the right to appoint a representative to the FRB as an observer. analysts. 4. and corrective action system (FRACAS) stsal 1 be implemented by the conThe system shal 1 be maintained for reporting. A degradation misalignment.3 Failure Review Board. analy4. appropriate contractor 0r9anf Zatt0nS With the level of . 3. analysis. J . be provided for acquiring activity review. The FRtS shal I have authority to require Fai lure investigations and analyses by other contractor organizations The acquiring activity and to assure implementation of corrective actions. Failures occurring in specified levels of assemblies in tests at subcontractors’ facilities shall be integrated into the contractor’s data CO1 lection system for tracking and incorporation in the fai lure summary and status reports.10 the Failure faf lure Any circumstances. Irrctlcates its ex~stence event. sis. . in performance due to failure maladjustmmt. and so forth. analysis Of fa~lure$. Flow diagrams that depict fai led hardware and failure data flow also shall be documented in the plan. and corrective action system shall be used with modification only as necessary to meet. analysis. The determination of laboratory. parts. The contractor’s procedures for implement i ng FRACAS and for tracking and nmitoring fat lure analysis and corrective action status shal 1 be described in the FRACAS plan. tractor and his subcontractors. tractor to act on the FR6 sha 11 be identified i n the FRACAS procedures and the scope or extent of their authority shall be identified.everyspec.Downloaded from http://www.9 wfth wtrlch 3.$fIL-. spectrographic analysts. techniques or microphotography. the. then a description of how the existing function wi II be employed to meet acquiring activity requirements shall. and the feedback of corrective actions into design.sT~2l55(As) A group consisting of representatives from Fai lure Review Board.12 Laboratory destruct I ve and nondestructive tion. SYIIP tom. corrective act ton status. If the contractor can identify and use an already exi$ting function to perform the FRB functions. di ssec- GENERAL REi)UIREt4ENTS A ciosed loop fat lure reporting.2 FRACAS planning. The contractor’s existing data collection. 4. and test process. manufacturing. The FRB shall meet on a regular basis to review fai lure data from a~propriate inspections and tests including subcontractor test failures. procedures for the initiation of fai lure reports. and to assure The personnel appointed by the conadequate corrective actions are taken. ~. a failure mechan}sm us!ng such as x-ray.11 detuning. and correction of hardware fai lures and software errors that occur in contractually specified levels of assembly during in-plant tests and that occur at installation or reroute test sites. 2 Failure analysis. 811 software problems ldenti f 1 ed durt ng the i nspectlons and tests shal 1 be reported in accordance with the requirements of MI L-STD-1679. The verification of the GFM fai lure shal 1 be documented for notification to the acquiring activity. Fai lures and faults that occur during appropriate inspections and tests shall be reported. DETAILED RETIREMENTS 5.fatlure investigations and analySes. symptoms of failure. The fai lure report shall include information that permits identification of the failed Item. etc. or procedures.. Analysis of government furnished material (GFM) failures shall be limited to verifying that the GFM fa!lure was not the result of the contractor’s hardware. . Reported fal 1ures ‘shal 1 ‘be evaluated or analyzed as appropriate to determine the cause of fai lure. The format of the form(s) used to record fai lure and associated data is important only to the extent that i t simpllf ies the task of the data recorder. test cond{tlons. mtcroscoptc analysis. .everyspec. when appl i cable. FRACAS procedures shal 1 include requirements for documenting the results and conclusions of fai lure invest \ gatlons and analyses. softw$re. damaged hardware.g. test. BIT indication. and corrective action monitoring. ‘ corrective actions taken. 5. Failure verification is determined either by repeating ‘the fai lure mode on the reported Item or by evidence of fai lure (leakage residue. Failure documentation shall include a uniform reference ident!f Icatlon to provide ccsnplete traceabl llty of al I records and actions taken for each reported fai lure. and effectiveness of corrective actions. Procedures for initiating fai’iure reports shal 1 include requirements for verifyfng fal lures using BIT. that may be necessary to determine fai lure cause.4 Fatlure documentation. The fai lure analysis of other than GFM fai lures shal 1 be conducted at the lowest level of hardware or software necessary to identtfy the causes. The investigations and analyses of faflures shall consist of any applicable method (e. and for Coi Iecting and recording corrective maintenance information and times. . Al 1 fat 1ure reports and software problem reports shal 1 be verif 1ed for accuracy and correctness and subm{ tted on standard forms. All reported fai lures shall be verified as actual or an explanation provided for lack of verification. These records shal 1 be organl zed to perm!t effi c$ent retrl eval for fat lure trendl ng. knowledge of previous fai lures and fai lure analyses. failures. Records shal 1 be maintained for al 1 rgported 4. mechani sins.. assignable fat lure causes. and item operating time at time of failure. x-ray analyses. > application study. . dissection.1 Failure reporting. 5. fal lure susmrary and status reports. provides for item and data traceabi 1 i ty.Downloaded from http://www. etc). built-in-test (BJT) Indications.3 Fa!lure ver!flcat!on. and provides the information required by the acquiring activity as lt becomes available 5. and potential effects of the fai lure and to serve as a basis for decisions on the corrective action to be implemented.com MI L-STD-:2155(AS) . 5 . The rationale to support no corrective action shal 1 be documented and approved by responsible authority.Downloaded from http://www. Unless otherwise specified. a corrective action shal 1 be developed.5 Fai lure report close-out. 5. change control procedures shal 1 be i n accordance with OCIO-STO-480. Fai led items shal 1 not be opened. Corrective action implementation shall be approved by responsible contractor personnel (and acquiring activity as required).4 Corrective actibn. All open reports.com MI L-STW2155(AS) Hhen th”e” cause of a fal lure has been determined. distributed. Fai led items shal I be control led pending authorized disposition after completion of fai lure analyses. and implemented to el lml nate or reduce the recurrence of the fat lure.everyspec. or mishandled to the extent of obliterating facts which might be pertinent to an analysis. 5. A fai lure report shal 1 be considered closed-out upon completion of corrective action implementation and verification or rationale In those instances where corrective action was not implemented.6 Identification and control of failed items. Each reported fai lure shall be analyzed and corrective action taken in accordance with the requirements of this standard in a timely manner so as to obtain lnxnediate benefits of the corrective action and to minimize an unmanageable backlog of open failures from occuraction suspense dates shal 1 ring. anal YseS. 5. and corrective be reviewed to assure timely failure report close-outs. All failed items shall be conspicuously marked or tagged and control led to assure disposition per contract requirements. documented. everyspec.com THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BL4NK .Downloaded from http://www. An FMECA is an analytical ly derived identif i cation of the conceivable hardware fai lure modes of an i tern and the potential adverse effects of those modes on the system and misston. . The depth “and detai 1 of” the FRACAS effort WI 11 be defined in appropriate contractual and other program documentation. maintainabi 1 i ty. there 1s a synergistic effect when the two efforts are coupled. 7 . The FMECA’s primary purpose is to inf Iuence the system and i tern design to either eliminate or minimize the occurrences of a hardware failure The f~ms represents the “real UOrl d“ or the consequences of the fai lure.1 acquiring reporting. contract data requ{ rements 1 Ist (CORL). An FMECA benefits the experience of actual failures and the!r consequences.. Each provi slon of this standard should be reviewed to determine the extent of appl tcabi i ity. and other contractual means. provides a means of verifying the completeness and accuracy of the FMECA. GENERAL t41~-STO-2155(AS) APPENDIX APPLICATION A GUIDE AND TAILORIMG 10. and corrective action syst~ (F~~S). worid” experience as reported and There should be agreement between the “real assessed in the FRACAS and the “analytical world” as documented in an FMECA. and 5 to adapt the requirements to specific i tern characterssties.com I I . 10. fal lure . or alteration to the statements In Sections 3.. FRACAS by providing a source of comprehensive fai lure effect and fai lure severity information for the assessment of actual hardware fai lure Actual failure experience reported and analyzed in FRACAS occurrences. ‘“” 10. contractual structure. Al th&gh the respective FRACAS and Fai lure Mode Effects and Critical ity Anaiysts (FMECA) effort are designed and capable of being performed Independent 1y of each other. Tailoring of requirements may take the form of deletion. *. 4. or acquisition phase. 10. A review of the contractual requirements Is necessary to avoid duplication of effort between the reliability program and other program efforts such as qual ity. and integrated logi sties support. test. Significant differences between the two worlds are cause for a reassessment of the item design and the differing fai iure criteria that separates the FFWXS and FUECA.2 Tailoring re@rements. Identification of the coincident generation of FRACAS tasks or use of such tasks by the reliability program and other disciplinary areas is required in the rel iabi 1i ty program plan or other appropriate program documentation to avoid dupl icatlon of effort by the acquiring activity and the contractor. safety. acquiring activity options. The tailored FIWAS requirements are specified in the contractual provisions to include Input to the statement of work.everyspec. Thls appendix provl des notes for the guidance of the activl ty in generating the contractual requirements for.4 Relationship of FRACAS to FMECA. . -‘: ~‘.Downloaded from http://www. addition. 10. analysfs.3 Dupl lcatton of effort. 2.jA9~~1 A~~l !.i zat Ion.RACAS requirements Wi 11 involve If any of these some “form ‘of.ilETAIL ”iEoiJIRE14ENTS >. . contractor prepared plan. FRACAS ~lanning - ‘The primary objective of a closed-loop FRACAS 5. Each separate data item -!dentified’for del f very uust be included on a 00 Form 1423 yhich must be. ject . 50..ful 1 scale development (FSD) .1. for a F~CAS norcna 11 y WI 11 eq. directives for spec. “and “documentation. ~0.everyspec. The plan submitted . . wi 11 be control led.t 11 can be identified.The .50. form.“ This early implementation . REFER$~E~:~E~~$~ DEF~NITIONS..uest for proposal (RFP) and contract. f ai \ ure analyses. and ‘associated software subapply’ to#Ie deyelop~nt et. the easier it 1s to.20. I “.ific information on how to ccatplete the 00 Form 1423.Fi@CAS i. . ” they are del tverable 1 terns. There efforts that are similar to that duplication of effort activity. RFP. . analysis..duricsg des{gn evolution.ctt Ye action “option: and flexibtl ity are ~ qreatest . “The eatl ter fat lure’ causes are tdenttf ied.authorf zed Oata Item Description (OID) and must incftide a Spec’ffiic ‘contract reference that specifies Refer to governing and author! zes. Each 00 ‘FOTrn.of a“ FRACA5 1s i~rtant because corre.40 .2 Request of FRACAS plan. the contractor to act on the FRB and to .Downloaded from http://www. . and the feedback of corrective actions into the design. . . “’. the ‘reg. but the opticms become limited and implementation is rore difficult. If a FRACAS plan is requested In the. manufacturing. @~~: ~ENERAL-’REQUIRENENT5 . $~o~.Oata i tens. and test process. document.~tr%s’t.to valida~lon-or.implement ‘corrective actions.1 423 entry aui&t refer to an . indicate the scope or extent 8 a requirement for a Failure the reporting. As the design matures. included as a“’part of the req.fmportarici .ii.: . 30: 40. however. ..ui@ent. corrective actions st... the .com . @# %f%w’ .foc review should de<crlbe the flow of fai led hardware and failure data thro:~g~~t}the contractor ~s organ. other closely related functions or the FRB that should be closely coordinated to assure is avoided.implementatiop of F. or data.of .. The timely di ssemlnatlon of accurate fat lure information is necessary so remedial actions nay be taken promptly to prevent the recurrence of the fal lure or fault. ‘ 50. are to be rgcetved by the acquiring acttv~ty. bihen an FRB is required by the acquiring should be asked to identify the personnel appointed of their authori ty..0.contractor should be asl(ed to describe how he plans to ispiement ‘the FRAC4S. He should be asked ‘to identify and discuss the procedures that wil 1 be : used to control f ai lure report WI! tlation. systems.1:3 “Requirement addition. The addition of Revieu Board (FRB) wi 11 provide added assurance that and corrective actions taken ‘on jdentif ied fai lures may be. 1 Pri&ry objective. is to document fal 1ures and faults and to disseminate the data. the work to be done for each data 1 tern. ‘ 50~1 .c~b I’e)” . the fai led item should be identified and al 1 activity.? failure data A useful output management and engineering personnel. what fai led.2. . 9 . Failure analysis is”the determination”of tk c“ause of a fai lure.~n as mb ed in 50.2.tion should identify and describe the data that should be recorded for both hardware fai lures and software errors to assure that fai lures are adequately described and that the proper harduare or software has been reported.Downloaded from http://www. and how future faflures wi 50. One of the first steps tn any fai lure analysis is the review of the fat lure information by cognizant personnel. The’ fa) 1ure analysts can range from a simple Investigation of the” circumstances surrounding the failure to a sophisticated laboratory analysis of the failed parts... ” Essential surrounding a failufe” or fault to fai lure documentation must proylde lure.u! 1 ~. store. During development.1 Effectiveness of FRAC4S. here It “fa! led. system or equipment fat lures typically occur during tests or operation by the contractor or the acquiring #(hen a fai lure occurs. The outputs of a f ai lure data system should be tailored to prov!de sumnarles and spectal’”reports ”for “Iioth of. l%d’ contractor.“coir ~he “ w kc or-and ‘< The fal lure data system . ““” 50.ti. A failure analysis plan then should be developed to describe the steps the analysis wil 1 take and to preclude pre.is ‘accurate.4 Fatlure data.2. .be designed t~.2 Failures. to provide Indications of failure treftds:and “to evaluate’ the tiiid for and the extent of contemplated corrective actions.everyspec.1. acqu{ring actfvlty.ls. system ts the fal l’ure sunsnary and status report.: and to” lndi cate how it will be maintained. The level of analysis always should be sufficient to provide an understanding of the cause of fat lure so that logically derived . .com MIL+TD>2155(AS) (IRPENL)IX’”A 1 I Failure data.2 FRACAS data collection.. should be asked to define the scope and content of hls fai 1ure data system. Thi s:report . functi@:. The contractor’s procedure for failure report i ni tia. input data in reports documenting fai inputs should document all conditions faci I itate cause determination. pertinent i nformat ion about the fai lure should be docussanted on a f al 1ure report form. when 11 be prevented.3 “Failure analysis. 50. and retrieve faflure Information and to p?ovide” the’ rsean’s-for “’ “”” displaying the data tn a meaningful form.provtde info~tion about the fai lure of Ilke Items or slmflar.uislch can be used.mature disposal of f ai led i terns prior to being subjected to required analyses. corrective acrlons can be aevelopea. manageable aggregates for purposeful ~~aludtio ‘1”’ %y b6 !“h“ ti(e .co~~~ct. the contractor should have a method for accounting for fat 1ure reports and should audit the completed forms periodical ly to verify that failure reports are being submitted prcmptl y. ~. A FRACAS will be effecttve only if the lures and faults . The information on who discovered the fai it failed.:h~l~ . us Fpl on y. In addi t ion. Each failure should be verified q nd then ana!wed to the extent necessary to identify the cause of fai lure and any contributing factors. 50. Corrective Action ReDOrt. DD Form 1664.2.4 Results of failure analysis. the contractor shal 1 deliver the data specified below in accordance with the Del iverable data sourced to this order requirements. Hhen the provisions of DAR 7-104.com -i41kSTD~2 155(AS) APPENDIX A The results of fal lure analysts 50. and System Plan and Production Fai lure Reporting. AMDSL. 11. COriectlve action to alleviate a problem may range f rcm new controls implemented ! o manufacturing or test to a change in design or changing a part to one better sui ted to operational The generated corrq$i ve +c:t!on should be documented i n detai I requ~rements. 4. Copies of EsIDs required by the contractors in connection with specific acquisition. Hhen thfs standard is uqed in an acquisition that incorporates CDRL. {t shoulId lke a’onjtored to assure that the corrective action has removed the fai lure causes and has not introduced new problems. RELI-N035 10 . should be fed-back to cognizant petsoiinel so they can decide on an appropriate course of action to al leviate the problem.Downloaded from http://www. DD Form 1423.9 (n) (2) are invoked and DD Form 1423 is not used.AS Project No. functions should be obtained from the by the Contracting Officer. 60. Naval Pub] ications and Forms Center. Paragraph 4.everyspec.2 Applicable 01-R-21597 DID Data Reciul rement Analysis. Vol . After a corrective action is implemented. so that i t can be impi emented and verif6ed~”Z~ the ProPer level. I Q@. contract or purchase standard are ci ted in the fol lowing paragraphs.1 DI-R-21598 DI-R-2 178 Development Susmsary Fai lure Report Computer Software Trouble Report DIDs reiated to this standard wil 1 be apprcwed and i isted as such in EK)O 5000. DATA ITEM DESCRIPTIONS (DIO) 60. 19L. the data requirements identified below shal I be develooed as sDecified bv an aooroved DID. or as directed Preparing activity: Navy . and delivered in accordance with the approve~ CORL” ~ncorporat~d into “the contract.4 DI-R-21599 Fail ure 5. OATE O* SU8U1SS1ON [YYMMDD1 I DD &“::..ETE.NG ADD.ATION & Tv- u u Of OmOANIZAT#ON (U -.Downloaded from http://www. d WO. -m. City. Sti.1- 1.S1-.iond b.” f-J qROWLEM .. - 00. . WORK TELEPHONE NWSER (1-=IM* Arm CA) . . NAME OF SUOMITTE R (La. VzImO” f--J ADORE= (s-t. .. R--L..-dh#: .81w Ormn mmdfr. . IxY. 1 NAME OF SUSUllTINO 0ROAN17. Mm. Ml..— MA. ESS ..: nEblARcS .- .com .everyspec. Stiw.i .cru”.0u9 EOITIOId IS OCSOI. a? C-J Wsn MA”w. L. ZIP Cdl Oullonti t. . 1426 PR~v.— AmEAS N“nml.: & — W.. .Downloaded from http://www. 12s03 WASMING1ON 0.com (Fold daaJ *b Mu) 1( 0EPARThlEN7 OF lHE NAVY . C. DC 20361 (AIR 51122) .TV U61NES Porn PRIVATE USE UOO I BUSINESS REPLY MAIL t 1 1 WmAGE WILL m w F.everyspec. PAID THE OEMRTMENTOF THE NAVY Commander Naval Air Systems ~nd Washington.”ST CL- P6RM. . 111111 w-m” No POSTME w mAILED Tm an uN#TeO STATES OFFICIAL *EWAI.T “o.. . Documents Similar To MIL-HDBK-2155 FracasSkip carouselcarousel previouscarousel next4_300656429503611354IACS International Association of Class Societies - Maintenance Strategi Guideline - Rec74 - 20118D (1)Problem Solving ReportContentBrilliant at Basics Version 2 02000 - Guidance on the Concept and Use of the Process Approach for Management SystemsWFT244690NABL 160 -Guide Preparing A Quality Manual.pdfOverview of QRA SoftwareAction Planning ChecklistZenith Incident Investigations.n. 24 Checklist- Ems f6.4-22 (Ems)American Society for Quality Meeting the Compliance Challenge8DProblemSolvingCourse_1107Equipment CriticalityHomework 4Lesson 24 - 3M and Navy SupplyManaging Efficient ShutdownQuality Assurance Manual-Praga Marine Pvt LtdISO 16949 ChecklistSQM-Exhibit-1-rev-Aug-28-12-2012-09-05day1session2maxbenefits-130916174459-phpapp02Revised Proact RCI EnglishValue Engineerin Management TechHistory03 Quality Addendum Qfd ChecksEdif ERA Datasheet Mechanical Plant Consultancyedg16Tpm Presentation 12 Steps 1 121[1]More From Andreas MeyerSkip carouselcarousel previouscarousel nextKa Ese Her StellungGerinnung Der Milch (1)Produ 2Cheese processing ResearchJames Watson’s Most Inconvenient Truth Race Realism and the moralistic fallacyProducts English Rennet and WheyMusterbusinessplan Doenertempel DataKäseherstellung mit PRO DIPDiesel Deathhoolasi_2005Quark (1)Kaeseherstellung (2)Human Skin Lampshade and Nazi Shrunken HeadsInternship 2013Parasites SMMilk Production Characteristics and Productivity of N'Dama Cattle Kept Under Village Management In The Gambia Pi is 0022030291783227Factors Affecting Labor Productivity and Cost per Gallon in Fluid Milk Plants Pi is 0022030296764858Intro Haccp in food industrySpectator - Page 8 - Tree Lucern.pdfDevelopment of a Spiral Mesh Bloreactor with Immobilized Lactococcl for Continuous Inoculation and Acidification of Mllk1 Pi is 0022030293776249Lambing Kidding Supplies 2Goat Producers 2006Assure quality in dairy farmingSparks Goat Facility Floor Plan 01 10 14NR Rangelands 2012-01prMarx Slavery The evolution of productivity performance on China’s dairy farms in the new millennium Pi is 0022030212006923Past, Present, and Future Perspectives of Small Ruminant Dairy Research1 Pi is 0022030201746553Grass Series OrchardgrassGC9601 Forage PalatabilityFooter MenuBack To TopAboutAbout ScribdPressOur blogJoin our team!Contact UsJoin todayInvite FriendsGiftsLegalTermsPrivacyCopyrightSupportHelp / FAQAccessibilityPurchase helpAdChoicesPublishersSocial MediaCopyright © 2018 Scribd Inc. .Browse Books.Site Directory.Site Language: English中文EspañolالعربيةPortuguês日本語DeutschFrançaisTurkceРусский языкTiếng việtJęzyk polskiBahasa indonesiaYou're Reading a Free PreviewDownloadClose DialogAre you sure?This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?CANCELOK