RECOVERY

К оглавлению
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 
119 120 121 122 123 

The first step in this process is to create an RTM. If you do not have an

RTM, use Table 5-3 as a start. Modify the RTM for your own needs. Just be

sure not to change the concepts of content and flow.

T a b l e 5 - 3 — R e q u i r e m e n t s T r a c e a b i l i t y M a t r i x ( R T M )

Unit System

SOW/ WBS S/C SOW/ Test Test

Spec Para Requirement Number Spec Para Number Para Monitor

SOW

4.3.1 Security 06-03-02 N/A T-0304 4.4.1 Smith

Spec

3.2.1 System weight 02-04-03 3.4.6 T-0045 3.4.1 Jones

shall be less

than 10,000

pounds

Once you have concluded that the design is incorrect, you must determine

why it is incorrect. There are four possibilities:

1. The requirement was misinterpreted, resulting in an incorrect design. In

this case, you need to go back to Cause Factor 2a/2a (NO) and find out

why the requirement was misinterpreted and reconcile the requirement.

2. There are customer requirements or expectations (implicit requirements)

that were not previously revealed.

3. The designer was (is) incompetent. In this case, you need to go to Cause

Factor 7a/7a (NO) and work the problem from there.

4. The Design Review processes were not followed. In this case, you need to

go to Cause Factor 52a/52a (NO) and work the problem from there.

Finally, you need to ensure that the necessary design tasks are included in

the project schedule and are properly monitored and performed.

52c (NO) The design is not efficient.

The design is not efficient when it does not perform as the requirements

document (contract) demands, or does not have the inherent reliability, maintainability,

or availability demanded by the requirements document (contract),

or does not meet at least the same qualifications for these factors for competing

products and is not economical in its design, production, or throughout its life

cycle.

Notice the use of the conjunction or. If your product does not meet all the

requirements and conditions, it is not efficient. This does not mean that tradeoffs

cannot be performed. But, if a trade is made, it must be agreed to by the

customer and documented in the requirements. If the product is a competitive

product being designed to the assumed requirements of the marketplace, management,

as well as the departments of marketing, sales, production, customer

relations, maintenance, and quality must be involved and must accept the trade.

Usually the trade involves cost at the expense of some other factor set such as

reduced maintainability to gain faster production (e.g., using rivets instead of

screws) resulting in lower cost.

RECOVERY

The first step in this process is to create an RTM. If you do not have an

RTM, use Table 5-4 as a start. Modify the RTM for your own needs. Just be

sure not to change the concepts of content and flow.

T a b l e 5 - 4 — R e q u i r e m e n t s T r a c e a b i l i t y M a t r i x ( R T M )

Unit System

SOW/ WBS S/C SOW/ Test Test

Spec Para Requirement Number Spec Para Number Para Monitor

SOW

4.3.1 Security 06-03-02 N/A T-0304 4.4.1 Smith

Spec

3.2.1 System weight 02-04-03 3.4.6 T-0045 3.4.1 Jones

shall be less

than 10,000

pounds

Ensure that the RTM contains those factors associated with efficiency. Or, if

this is a subjective evaluation, list those factors that are in question along with

their counterparts. Increasing or decreasing one factor will have a direct impact

on at least one other factor.

Immediately after you have created the matrix, assess the actions and resources

necessary to accomplish the requirements in the matrix. It is one thing

to list the requirements and quite another to find the resources to get them

done.

It must be understood that efficiency requirements in one regime or discipline

or product will not be the same as the efficiency requirements in another.

For example, the reliability required for a component of a lawn tractor may not

necessarily be the same as the reliability required for a component of the space

shuttle.

It is a good idea to conduct a Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA also

referred to as FMECA-Failure Mode and Criticality Analysis—see paragraph

8.2.3 in Chapter 8) for components that are expected or required to have a high

reliability, availability, or similar stringent requirement.

Additional Resources:

MIL-STD-1629; automotive standards such the SAE, AIAG or Ford Motor

Company.

Relex V x.x; from Relex Software

540 Pellis Road, Greensburg, PA 15601

Phone: 724-836-8800

info@relexsoftware.com

52d (NO) The design does not adequately address issues that were

identified and deferred to design at the architectural level.

The design does not adequately address issues that were identified and deferred

to design at the architectural level when those architectural elements have

not been defined or are not traceable to the design. Further, they are not addressed

in the appropriate Design Review or clearly identified in the design.