The Bathtub Curve, Nuclear Safety, and Run-to-Failure (xpost)

[bananas]

I posted this in Good Reads last month,
Throckmorton added some important information.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016138136

Fri Nov 27, 2015, 12:28 AM
bananas (26,477 posts)

The Bathtub Curve, Nuclear Safety, and Run-to-Failure

The NRC’s Operating Experience Branch issued a report on component failures from 2007 to 2011. More than 75% of the failures examined in this study involved components used longer than their recommended service lifetimes. The NRC’s report referred to it as being “run-to-failure.”

<snip>

Deliberately running safety components beyond service lifetimes until they fail is not only irresponsible, it is illegal. The NRC must not run away from its charter and obligation to protect public health and safety by failing to stop this lawbreaking nonsense.


Read the rest: http://allthingsnuclear.org/dlochbaum/the-bathtub-curve-nuclear-safety-and-run-to-failure

Star Member Throckmorton (2,822 posts)

1. The maintenance rule 10-CFR-50.56 has changed the designation

It is now run to maintenance. What a farce.

After 28 years as a system engineer at a nuclear plant, I quit 2 years ago. Accident day is coming to US plant and I no longer wanted deal with it.

[Scuba]

1. But, but, but ... Profits!

[whitefordmd]

2. Good article, let me add a few comments

Not all parts have a failure rate following the bathtub curve, and using something past its "recommended service lifetime" is not the same thing as a "run to failure policy"

Some information about failure probability is found here

http://www.livingreliability.com/en/posts/real-meaning-of-the-six-rcm-curves/