2001
DOI: 10.1016/s0920-3796(00)00554-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparisons of facility-specific and generic component failure rates for tritium-bearing components used in fusion research

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, it may be deemed as a reasonable accuracy in the realm of probabilistic reliability assessments. As an example, a failure rate data bank, set up by the International Energy Agency [26], compares equipment and instrumentation failure rates between different fusion test reactors. It classifies values that agree within a factor of 3 as "good", within a factor of 10 as "fair" and values that differ by more than an a factor of 10 as "poor" comparison.…”
Section: Mean Failure Rate Variationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it may be deemed as a reasonable accuracy in the realm of probabilistic reliability assessments. As an example, a failure rate data bank, set up by the International Energy Agency [26], compares equipment and instrumentation failure rates between different fusion test reactors. It classifies values that agree within a factor of 3 as "good", within a factor of 10 as "fair" and values that differ by more than an a factor of 10 as "poor" comparison.…”
Section: Mean Failure Rate Variationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is an extension of previous work that compared only US and Japanese data. 9 The comparison process helps to validate the data and make selections of best estimate values. The data values presented here compared reasonably well.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%