Page 1 of 18 Fusion RAMI Evolution, part 1 of 2: A Low TRL RAMI Process for Fusion Energy Research and Development ARIES 2011 Quarter #2 Review July, 2011; Gaithersburg, Maryland Tom Weaver Counter CBRNE DEW Platform Systems Technology Boeing Research and Technology I-Li Lu, Ph.D. Applied Statistics Platform Performance Technology Boeing Research and Technology

Page 2 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Fusion RAMI Strategy Tailor aerospace/nuclear industrial RM&SH process to fusion I-Li Lu: Applied Mathematics and Statistics Knowledge Capture Boeing Research and Technology James Robinson: Reliability, Maintainability, and Testability Boeing Commercial Aircraft Enlisted aid of relevant support groups

Page 3 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Presentation Agenda Two parts –1) Administration, Background, and Theory –2) Fusion application of the process Key Concepts –RAMI model→test→model cycle shown effective in aerospace –Develop a fusion plant RAMI estimating tool including available data and physics models for missing data –Use tool results to advise experiment plans to increase benefits and reduce risks –Repeat cycle with more detailed tool and more informative tests

Page 4 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Part 1 Administration and Process Background and Theory

Page 5 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 June – Sept 2011 Activity RAMI Process Define RAMI Program Collect & Provide Experience Data Provide RAMI in the Product Assess RAMI In Design And Production Responsible Entity Customer and Regulator Program Manager Prime Contractor Standards RAMI Engineering Logistics Design Engineering Systems and Safety Engineering Suppliers Output Requirements and Data RAMI “Design” Incorporation of RAMI in Design Candidate Logistics Support Analyses Input Provided RAMI Data Requirements Design Data HW & SW Rqmts CAE/CAD/CAM Systems Data, Methods, Tools, Expertise, Processes “Command Media” SoW and Spec Rqmts Requirements SoW and Spec Rqmts

Page 6 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Oct – Dec 2011 Activity RAMI Process Define RAMI Program Collect & Provide Experience Data Provide RAMI in the Product Assess RAMI In Design And Production Responsible Entity Customer and Regulator Program Manager Prime Contractor Standards RAMI Engineering Logistics Design Engineering Systems and Safety Engineering Suppliers Output Requirements and Data RAMI “Design” Incorporation of RAMI in Design Candidate Logistics Support Analyses Input Provided RAMI Data Requirements Design Data HW & SW Rqmts CAE/CAD/CAM Systems Data, Methods, Tools, Expertise, Processes “Command Media” SoW and Spec Rqmts Requirements SoW and Spec Rqmts

Page 7 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Critical Fusion R&D Issue Chicken-and-Egg Problem –Need more data –Need facilities to get data –Need to know what to build with scarce funds –Need more data ICF found a defense escape route Industrial RAMI may show way out for MCF –Data Mining –Engineering-guided Experiment Planning with RAMI as prototype

Page 8 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Critical Fusion RAMI Issue Not unique in attempting RAMI estimation and enhancement across a major technological leap; however, The gap the technological leap fusion is to cross is unusually large. Aerospace and military engineering addressing the issue

Page 9 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Introduction to RCM Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) Goal of RCM Avoid or reduce failure CONSEQUENCES Not necessarily avoid failures (failure prevention remains an important part of the process, it is just recognized as never 100% possible) Failure Consequences are the effects of failure on: Personal and Equipment Safety Environmental Health/Compliance Operations Economics An analytical process used to determine appropriate failure management strategies to ensure safe and cost-effective operations of a physical asset in a specific operating environment.

Page 10 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 RCM Definition SAE JA1011 “Evaluation Criteria for RCM Processes” defines seven questions for RCM: What are the functions…of the asset…(functions)? In what ways can it fail…(functional failures)? What causes each functional failure (failure modes)? What happens when each failure occurs (failure effects)? In what way does each failure matter (failure consequences)? What should be done…(proactive tasks and intervals)? What should be done if a suitable proactive task cannot be found?

Page 11 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 RCM History Early PM Programs based on concept that periodic overhauls ensured reliability and, therefore, safety Overhaul: Tearing down and rebuilding components By the 1960s: Introduction of 747, DC-10, L-1011 led airlines to conclusion that current preventive maintenance philosophies were unsustainable FAA and Commercial Aviation Industry formed a group to study preventive maintenance FAA/Airline Group conclusion: overhauls had little or no effect on overall reliability or safety in many cases Why?

Page 12 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Assumptions Needed Challenging What the airlines and manufacturers discovered.  Statistical analysis showed, in most cases, no change in safety or reliability when overhaul limits changed.  Initial overhaul limits were not analytically based.  High repair costs for little or no benefits. Conditional Probability of Failure Time Overhaul interval Facts about overhauls  Many failure modes do not support overhaul philosophy- have no ‘right’ overhaul time.  Lose considerable component life.  Overhauls re-introduce infant mortality failures. Led to the creation of the “Maintenance Steering Group”

Page 13 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Found 6 Patterns of Failure Modes of part failures must be characterized “Bathtub” curve Infant Mortality Wear out zone Continuous degradation, but no defined wear out zone or age Continuous degradation Low chance of early failure to a constant probability of failure Constant probability of failure (random failure) High Infant Mortality dropping to constant or slowly increasing probability of failure Fraction of parts in Civil Aircraft 4% 2% 5% 7% 14% 68% Clearly defined wear out zone Opportunity for Condition Based Maintenance Condition monitoring is only effective on a small fraction of parts Condition-Based Maintenance becomes an element of the new approach

Page 14 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Maintenance Generations  1960s maintenance mostly still used a first generation “fix it when it breaks” philosophy  Philosophy needed changing in order to achieve greater expectations –Improved availability, reliability, safety, cost effectiveness, etc. This is an excerpt of the first chapter of the book "Reliability-centered Maintenance" by John Moubray.John Moubray

Page 15 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 New Techniques Example ICBM maintenance was improved by a relook at equipment monitoring, analysis and design

Page 16 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 The Solution Boeing engineers and statisticians have developed a Decision Support System that is Data-Driven, Knowledge-Guided, and Statistical-Based, with analysis that will provide Cost and Risk Optimized solutions. Key Factors: –The need surfaced in Maintenance Steering Group (MSG) international oversight body. –All major regulatory agencies and OEMs participate. –Boeing guided the development of the Issue Paper for Scheduled Maintenance –FAA has approved the Issue Paper and tool –Centralized Task Force with multi-disciplinary approach : Subject Matter Experts from Engineering, Information Technology, Statistics, Operations Research, Data/Text Mining, and Economics. Remark: what distinguishes Boeing approach Novel measures for degradation using Latent and Evident Lifetimes Bottom-Up approach for task and system reliability Advanced statistical reliability methods developed by thinking outside the box Centralized software development and technology integration

Page 17 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011 Next Step Part 2, Fusion Application of the Process will be after a break

Page 18 of 18 ARIES Quarterly Review Gaithersburg, MD – 27, 28 July 2011