1、 Standard ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 Performance-Based Failure Review Board (FRB) Requirements AIAA standards are copyrighted by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191-4344 USA. All rights reserved. AIAA grants you a license as follow
2、s: The right to download an electronic file of this AIAA standard for storage on one computer for purposes of viewing, and/or printing one copy of the AIAA standard for individual use. Neither the electronic file nor the hard copy print may be reproduced in any way. In addition, the electronic file
3、may not be distributed elsewhere over computer networks or otherwise. The hard copy print may only be distributed to other employees for their internal use within your organization. ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 American National Standard Performance-Based Failure Review Board (FRB) Requirements Sponsore
4、d by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Approved 17 November 2008 American National Standards Institute Abstract This Standard provides the basis for developing the performance-based Failure Review Board (FRB), which is a group consisting of representatives from appropriate project o
5、rganizations with the level of responsibility and authority to assure that root causes are identified and corrective actions are effected in a timely manner for all significant failures. Although good engineering practice suggests that most product development projects should include a formal FRB, t
6、he basic FRB functions may devolve to a single individual on small projects. Planning and reporting requirements and analytic tools are provided for contractors. The linkage of this Standard to the other standards in the new family of performance-based reliability and maintainability (R the names of
7、 all voting FRB members that participated, and those of other attendees acting in an advisory capacity; the objectives of the FRB meeting; status of prior FRB action items, with special attention to the status of action items relating to the FRACAS reports currently under consideration; for each ano
8、maly report under consideration, identification of the affected item including part number, nomenclature, and serial number; description of the test conditions at the time of anomaly, including identification of the test procedure and revision, test paragraph, environmental conditions, and previous
9、environments the item was subjected to, if pertinent; symptoms of the item under test at the time of the anomaly; results of attempts to reproduce the anomaly, where applicable; name of the person initiating the anomaly report; name of the person verifying the anomaly; steps taken to determine the c
10、ause of the anomaly and their results; a statement regarding the effects of the anomaly and anomaly analysis on the affected item under test; action items from the FRB meeting and the names of assignees; if a redundant item, an assessment of the impact of the anomaly on the operation of the system u
11、sing the redundant path; identification and location of other items with the same configuration as the affected item under test (These items are considered suspect); a description of corrective actions taken with the affected item under test and other suspect items, scheduled accomplishment and appr
12、opriate concurrences; a description of corrective actions taken to eliminate the root cause and prevent its recurrence, scheduled accomplishment, and appropriate concurrences; and actions taken to verify corrective actions, including the extent of retest, the results, and the names of the individual
13、 verifying the corrective action. ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 7 5 Detailed Requirements The following detailed requirements pertain to the performance-based FRB process defined in Annex B. 5.1 Operating Procedures Prior to implementing the FRB process, the contractor shall document and approve FRB oper
14、ating procedures that include the following activities. a) establishing minimum qualifications for FRB members and defining the scope or extent of their authority; b) allowing the acquisition activity to appoint a representative to the FRB as an observer; c) reviewing each verified failure report fr
15、om appropriate developmental activities such as inspections and tests, including the subcontractors verified failures, each anomaly analysis option, and each corrective action option; d) authorizing appropriate anomaly investigations and analyses, as needed, to assure root causes are identified; e)
16、authorizing appropriate corrective actions; f) documenting the results of each FRB meeting, including minutes and action items, as a controlled record; and g) summarizing the status of the FRACAS (e.g., significant failures, impact of anomaly management on project budget, status of delinquent correc
17、tive actions, and number of open/closed anomalies) in a report to project management at significant milestones or as directed. 5.2 Anomaly Investigations and Analyses Anomaly investigations and analyses shall be approved and initiated, as needed, to ensure that the root cause and appropriate correct
18、ive actions are identified. The output of an anomaly investigation or analysis shall include the following information. configuration controlled documentation of the anomaly; verification of the anomaly; identification of candidate anomaly root-cause sites using an appropriate tool, such as fishbone
19、 analysis; identification of candidate singular and multiple anomaly mechanisms that can result in the observed anomaly, using an appropriate tool such as fault tree analysis; mapping of candidate anomaly mechanisms with possible root-causes, using an appropriate tool such as fault tree analysis; an
20、d identification of the sequence of events that occurred prior to the observed anomaly using an appropriate tool such as event tree analysis. NOTE This is done to identify confirmed or candidate root cause(s). The severity classification for verified failures shall be defined and qualified or rated
21、based on the down stream effect(s) on the system/mission. Table 1 provides the baseline failure severity classification criteria. ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 8 Table 1 AIAA S-102 Failure Severity Classification Failure Severity Classification Failure Effect Description CATASTROPHIC failure would cause
22、loss of life or total disability to personnel, or failure would cause identifiably catastrophic damage to system and repairs that are beyond the capability of the user or contractor to resolve the effects. CRITICAL failure would cause severe disabling injury or severe occupational illness to personn
23、el, or failure would cause identifiably critical damage to the system and extensive repairs to resolve the effects. MARGINAL failure would cause minor injury or minor occupational illness to personnel, and those injuries or illness may require hospitalization but they are not disabling, or failure w
24、ould cause identifiably marginal damage to the system and acceptable level of repairs and downtime to resolve effects. MINOR failure would cause minor injury or minor occupational illness to personnel, but those injuries or illness would not require hospitalization, or failure would cause identifiab
25、ly minor damage to the system and minor repairs and short downtime to resolve effects. NEGLIGIBLE failure would cause less than minor injury and no occupational illness, or failure would cause negligible damage to the system and insignificant or no downtime to resolve effects, or failure is not cred
26、ible. 5.3 Corrective Actions The FRB shall ensure that appropriate corrective actions are approved, and approved corrective actions are implemented, in a timely manner. The FRB shall a) provide a detailed description of each approved corrective action, b) document the personnel responsible for imple
27、menting each corrective action, c) document the schedule for starting and completing each corrective action, d) monitor and report the status of each in-progress corrective action, e) review the results of each completed corrective action to verify its adequacy, and f) document the closure of the an
28、omaly report when all approved corrective actions have been successfully completed and verified. 5.4 Anomaly Trend-Correlation Analysis If a Capability Level of 3 or higher FRB process is required, the FRB shall ensure that project FRACAS data and relevant lessons learned data are reviewed to identi
29、fy possible anomaly trends and anomaly reports that represent viable lessons learned candidates. Also, the FRB shall summarize (1) the results ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 9 of anomaly trend-correlation analysis and (2) project compliance with lessons learned recommendations to program management at sig
30、nificant milestones (e.g., PDR, CDR, and pre-launch reviews). 5.5 FRB Database If a Capability Level 3 FRB is required, the contractor shall establish an FRB database that has capabilities and procedures for data change control and tracking4. If a Capability Level 4 FRB is required, all data that ar
31、e entered in or extracted from the FRB database shall be prefaced with one or more keyword data element descriptions (DED) listed in Annex C. Each keyword DED belongs to one of the following data types. Physical or Functional Characteristic Physical or Functional Dependency Application Failure Mode
32、and Effects Analysis (FMEA) Criticality Analysis Maintainability Analysis Anomaly Detection and Response (ADR) Reliability, System Safety, and Maintainability Critical Item Failure Compensation Identification Unit Reference Value Comment Attachment Database Administration The FRB database shall be s
33、tructured to allow: (1) independent verification of the system level effects for all verified failures that are Severity Classification 3, 4, or 5, and (2) online review of the most current and all prior anomaly reports. If a Capability Level 4 FRB is required, the contractor shall establish and mai
34、ntain a seamless interface between the FRB database, product FMECA database, and the project R B.1.3 Timely documentation of FRB activities, including meeting agenda, minutes, and action items, and the records retention policy; B.1.4 Timely reporting of FRACAS status, including failures that are ide
35、ntified by the project as mission-critical or requiring special processing (sometimes referred to as “red flag” failures) to project management; B.1.5 Approve each failure analysis prior to its performance; B.1.6 Assure that all failure analyses are performed in timely manner and to the level necess
36、ary to identify the proximate cause(s); B.1.7 Validate each identified proximate cause; B.1.8 Approve each corrective action prior to its performance; B.1.9 Maintain all FRB documentation as controlled records throughout the acquisition life cycle in accordance with the contract and an established r
37、ecords control and retention policy. B.2 The Capability Level 2 FRB shall include all the tasks in Capability Level 1 plus the following: B.2.1 Ensure that the FRACAS database and FRB records are accessible by all major stakeholders and meet the requirements of the FRACAS standard that is on contrac
38、t; B.2.2 Review all test and verification information related to each anomaly to ensure accurate information is used to decide the appropriate anomaly analysis method and corrective action option(s); NOTE: This may meaning checking to ensure test setup is correct, test measurements are accurately re
39、corded, test equipment is not defective, and anomaly effects on system requirements are known. B.2.3 Augment Task B.1.5 with, assure that failure analyses are performed in a timely manner and to the level necessary to identify the contributing/intermediate cause(s); B.2.4 Validated each identified c
40、ontributing/intermediate cause. ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 16 B.3 The Capability Level 3 FRB shall include all the tasks in Capability Level 2 plus the following: B.3.1 Prior to implementing the FRB process, document and approve an FRB charter, plan, or procedure that is an integral part of the FRACAS
41、 plan and define the following: minimum qualifications, acquisition activity FRB representative/observer authority, verified failure6report review responsibility, anomaly investigation and analysis implementation authority, corrective action approval authority, FRB meeting minutes recording responsi
42、bility, and FRACAS summary/assessment responsibility. B.3.2 Establish structured root-cause analysis (RCA) practices, e.g., require fault tree diagrams or fishbone diagrams to be used; B.3.3 Review anomaly reports to assure that the driving event is described in sufficient detail to support RCA; B.3
43、.4 Augment Task B.2.3 with, assure that failure analyses are performed in a timely manner and to the level necessary to identify the root cause(s); B.3.5 Validated each identified root cause; B.3.6 Establish a structured corrective action practice that addresses the basic events from the project per
44、spective; B.3.7 Assure that root cause data are analyzed for trends and significant findings are reported to project management in a timely manner; B.3.8 Timely development and maintenance of an FRB database that meets the following requirements: (1) controlled modification of FRB records; (2) selec
45、tive retrieval, sorting, and querying of FRB data; and (3) an on-line help function that explains each data entry field; B.3.9 Timely transmittal of FRB reports to all interested project functions, such as, Design, FRACAS, R B.3.10 Timely evaluation of all aspects of the FRB process, including its i
46、mplementation and data products, to identify candidate product-based and process-based lessons learned candidates. Evaluate for quality and prioritize these candidate lessons learned, and forward them to the Lessons Learned Approval Authority for appropriate action. B.4 The Capability Level 4 FRB sh
47、all all the tasks in Capability Level 3 plus the following: B.4.1 Review the risk assessment for each anomaly analysis method and corrective action option (including use-as-is) prior to its approval; 6A verified failure is the case where sufficient evidence is provided to prove that a failure actual
48、ly occurred. ANSI/AIAA S-102.1.5-2009 17 B.4.2 Augment Task B.1.4 and Task B.1.7 with, approve the appropriate anomaly analysis and corrective action option(s) based on the risk assessment results and in accordance with the project risk management plan; B.4.3 Coordinate FRB decision making with proj
49、ect managements ongoing assessment of the project risk profile; B.4.4 Augment Task B.3.6 with, establish a structured corrective action practice that addresses the basic events from the enterprise-wide perspective; B.4.5 Timely development and maintenance of an FRB database that is a part of, is integrated with, or interfaces with the FRACAS database and the project R B.4.6 Timely evaluation and documentation of the value of the completed FRB report to internal organizations o
