Testability and Prognostics



With a view to maintenance, the concept of system testability is understood as the ‘intrinsic characteristic of a system or apparatus to permit means of internal self-diagnosis, or appropriate external instrumentation, to verify the functional efficiency and diagnose breakdowns'. This logistical parameter has been a matter of concern for some time now, and many figures of merit (FOM) have been defined for it in order to evaluate the quality of a system of self-diagnosis or to estimate how testable an apparatus is from outside.


False Alarm Expert System Preventive Maintenance Primary System Logistical Parameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ben-Daya M, Duffuaa SO, Raouf A, Knezevic J, Ait-Kadi D (2009) Handbook of Maintenance Management and Engineering. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Bensoussan A (1993) La maintenance des sistèmes informatiques et le droit. Paris, HermesGoogle Scholar
  3. Cigolini R, Deshmukh A, Fedele L, McComb S (2009) Recent advances in maintenance and infrastructure management. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Guided Missile Frigate USS Oliver Hazard Perry (FFG–7) Class (1985) Ship Systems Definition and Index (SWBS Staging Diagrams). T9FFG–AG–IDX–010/FFG-CLGoogle Scholar
  5. Davies A (1998) Handbook of Condition Monitoring. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Department of the Navy-Naval Sea Systems Command (1985) Users guide for Expanded Ship Work Breakdown Structure (ESWBS) for all ships and ship/combat systems. S9040-AA-IDX-020/SWBS 5DGoogle Scholar
  7. Direction of Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command (1981) Reliability-Centered Maintenance Handbook. S9081–AB–GIB–010/MAINTGoogle Scholar
  8. Fedele L, Furlanetto L, Saccardi D (2004) Maintenance design and management. Mc Graw Hill Italy, Milano (in Italian)Google Scholar
  9. Fitch EC (1992) Proactive Maintenance for Mechanical Systems. FES Inc, Stillwater, Oklahoma (USA)Google Scholar
  10. Gabriel M, Rault CJ (1987) Systèmes Experts en Maintenance. Masson; Informatique e Gestion de l’Enterprise, ParigiGoogle Scholar
  11. Hiles A (2003) Service level agreement framework for business service. Rothstein Associates Incorporated, ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
  12. Kelly A, Harris MJ (1978) Management of Industrial Maintenance. Butterworths Management Library, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Lewis RT (1989) Role of wear particle analysis in condition monitoring. Proceedings of the 1st Military–Handbook (1981) Application of Reliability-Centered Maintenance to Naval Aircraft, Weapon Systems and Support Equipment. MIL–HDBK–266 (AS)Google Scholar
  14. Military Standard (1986) Reliability-Centered Maintenance for Aircraft, Engines and Equipment. MIL–STD–1943 (USAF).Google Scholar
  15. Pliska TF, Jew FL, Angus JE (1979) BIT/external test figures of merit and demonstration techniques—Report RADC–TR–79–309. National Technical Information Service (NTIS), USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Ploe RJ, Skewis WH (1990) Handbook of Reliability Prediction Procedures for Mechanical Equipment. DTRC–90/010.Google Scholar
  17. Talbott C (1997) State of the Art in Prognosis of Residual Machine Life. Proceedings Maintenance and Reliability Conference (MARCON 97), 20–22 may 1997, pp. 38.01–38.11.Google Scholar
  18. Talbott C (1998) Prognosis of remaining machine life based on condition. Proceedings of the Society for Machinery Failure Prevention Technology Meeting, Virginia Beach, VA, 31 March–2 April 1998.Google Scholar
  19. Tranter J (1990) The fundamentals of, and the application of computers to, condition monitoring and predictive maintenance. Proceedings of the 1st International Machinery Monitoring and Diagnostics Conference (IMMDC), Las Vegas (Nevada), pp. 394–401.Google Scholar

Copyright information

©  Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipto. Ingegneria Meccanica e AerospazialeUniversità di Roma SapienzaRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations