System Reliability Calculator (RBD)

Identical components, independent failures and the same mission time are assumed.

This selection changes review context only. Formulas and example inputs stay unchanged. Check the model assumptions and applicability for the actual process.

Identify the actual asset, process, work boundary, source documents, units and assumptions. Confirm that the selected model or template applies before using its results.

1 Inputs

Minimum: 0 · Maximum: 100

Minimum: 1 · Maximum: 30

Minimum: 1 · Maximum: 30

2 Results

System reliability
99.9875%
Single component
95%
Change vs single
+4.988 pp
System unreliability
0.0125%
Configuration
Active parallel (3 redundant)
Rₛ = Rⁿ; Rₚ = 1 − (1−R)ⁿ; Rₖ = Σᵢ₌ₖⁿ C(n,i)Rⁱ(1−R)ⁿ⁻ⁱ
Identical components, independent failures and the same mission time are assumed. Active redundancy is not standby redundancy. Check shared power, common environment and switching dependencies before relying on the predicted improvement.

Worked example

Example values are illustrative. Replace them with your measured data.

InputValue
Component reliability (each)95 %
Number of components3 count
ConfigurationParallel — any one works (redundant)
k (for k-out-of-n)2 count

System reliability: 99.9875%

References

Related tools

About this calculator

How it works

For n identical components each with reliability R, the tool applies Reliability Block Diagram rules. Series: R_sys = Rⁿ. Active parallel: R_sys = 1 − (1 − R)ⁿ. k-out-of-n: the sum of C(n,i) × Rⁱ × (1 − R)ⁿ⁻ⁱ for i from k to n. It reports system reliability, the change versus one component, and system unreliability (1 − R_sys).

Worked example (illustrative inputs)

Three components at 95% each. In parallel, R_sys = 1 − 0.05³ = 99.9875%. In series, R_sys = 0.95³ = 85.74%. As 2-out-of-3, R_sys = 3 × 0.95² × 0.05 + 0.95³ = 99.275%.

How to read the result

Series reliability drops with every component added, so shorten the chain or improve the weakest link. Redundancy raises reliability, but each extra unit adds less than the one before. The model assumes failures are independent. Common causes such as a shared power supply, environment or maintenance error can defeat redundancy in practice.

When to use it

Use it to compare architectures, for example duty/standby or voting arrangements, before deciding how much redundancy a function needs.

À propos de ce calculateur

Traduction (brouillon) — à relire.

Fonctionnement

Pour n composants identiques de fiabilité R, l'outil applique les règles du diagramme de fiabilité. Série : R_sys = Rⁿ. Parallèle actif : R_sys = 1 − (1 − R)ⁿ. k parmi n : somme de C(n,i) × Rⁱ × (1 − R)ⁿ⁻ⁱ pour i de k à n. Il affiche la fiabilité du système, l'écart par rapport à un composant et l'infiabilité (1 − R_sys).

Exemple chiffré (valeurs d'illustration)

Trois composants à 95 % chacun. En parallèle, R_sys = 1 − 0,05³ = 99,9875 %. En série, R_sys = 0,95³ = 85,74 %. En 2 parmi 3, R_sys = 3 × 0,95² × 0,05 + 0,95³ = 99,275 %.

Lire le résultat

En série, la fiabilité baisse à chaque composant ajouté : raccourcissez la chaîne ou améliorez le maillon faible. La redondance augmente la fiabilité, mais chaque unité supplémentaire apporte moins que la précédente. Le modèle suppose des défaillances indépendantes. Les causes communes, comme une alimentation, un environnement ou une erreur de maintenance partagés, peuvent annuler la redondance en pratique.

Quand l'utiliser

À utiliser pour comparer des architectures, par exemple service/secours ou votes, avant de décider du niveau de redondance d'une fonction.

حول هذه الحاسبة

ترجمة (مسودة) — للمراجعة.

طريقة الحساب

لعدد n من المكونات المتماثلة بموثوقية R لكل منها، تطبق الأداة قواعد مخطط كتل الموثوقية. التوالي: R_sys = Rⁿ. التوازي النشط: R_sys = 1 − (1 − R)ⁿ. k من n: مجموع C(n,i) × Rⁱ × (1 − R)ⁿ⁻ⁱ لقيم i من k إلى n. وتعرض موثوقية النظام والفرق مقارنة بمكون واحد وعدم الموثوقية (1 − R_sys).

مثال محسوب (قيم توضيحية)

ثلاثة مكونات بموثوقية 95% لكل منها. على التوازي: R_sys = 1 − 0.05³ = 99.9875%. على التوالي: R_sys = 0.95³ = 85.74%. بنظام 2 من 3: R_sys = 3 × 0.95² × 0.05 + 0.95³ = 99.275%.

قراءة النتيجة

على التوالي تنخفض الموثوقية مع كل مكون يضاف، فقصّر السلسلة أو حسّن الحلقة الأضعف. التكرار يرفع الموثوقية، لكن كل وحدة إضافية تضيف أقل من سابقتها. يفترض النموذج أن الأعطال مستقلة، والأسباب المشتركة مثل مصدر تغذية أو بيئة أو خطأ صيانة مشترك قد تُبطل التكرار عملياً.

متى تستخدمه

استخدمها لمقارنة البنى، مثل التشغيل والاحتياط أو أنظمة التصويت، قبل تحديد مستوى التكرار الذي تحتاجه وظيفة ما.

In one line

Identical components, independent failures and the same mission time are assumed. Active redundancy is not standby redundancy. Check shared power, common environment and switching dependencies before relying on the predicted improvement.

Worked example

EXAMPLE

Illustrative values (the calculator defaults), not data from a real site.

Inputs
Component reliability (each)95 %
Number of components3 count
ConfigurationParallel — any one works (redundant)
k (for k-out-of-n)2 count
Results
System reliability99.9875%
Single component95%
Change vs single+4.988 pp
System unreliability0.0125%
ConfigurationActive parallel (3 redundant)

Frequently asked questions

What's the difference between series and parallel reliability?

In series, every component must work, so reliabilities multiply (Rⁿ) and system reliability drops fast as you add components. In active parallel redundancy, the system only fails if all components fail, so reliability improves toward 1 − (1−R)ⁿ as you add redundant units.

What is k-out-of-n reliability?

It models a redundant system that only needs at least k of its n components to be working, such as 2-out-of-3 voting logic. It's calculated with a binomial sum and sits between pure series, needing all n, and pure parallel, needing just 1.

Does this assume all components are identical?

Yes — this tool uses a single reliability value applied to all n components. Real systems with components of differing reliability require a more detailed block-by-block RBD calculation rather than this simplified identical-component model.

Why might redundancy not deliver the reliability gain this calculator predicts?

The model assumes independent failures. If redundant components share a common cause of failure — the same power feed, the same environment, or a shared maintenance error — that common-cause risk can defeat redundancy in the real world even though the math shows a big improvement.

How does this relate to MTBF?

Component reliability R here is a probability of surviving a given mission time or duty cycle, whereas MTBF describes average time between failures. You can convert an MTBF and a mission time into a component reliability value before using it in this system-level model.

Donate · Faire un don · تبرّع