mirror of
https://app-learninglab.inria.fr/moocrr/gitlab/da84ababf0696af51bddad556af86353/mooc-rr.git
synced 2026-06-17 09:35:24 +02:00
119 lines
4.5 KiB
Text
119 lines
4.5 KiB
Text
---
|
|
title: "Analysis of the risk of failure of the O-rings on the Challenger shuttle"
|
|
author: "Arnaud Legrand"
|
|
date: "28 juin 2018"
|
|
output: html_document
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
On January 27, 1986, the day before the takeoff of the shuttle _Challenger_, had
|
|
a three-hour teleconference was held between
|
|
Morton Thiokol (the manufacturer of one of the engines) and NASA. The
|
|
discussion focused on the consequences of the
|
|
temperature at take-off of 31°F (just below
|
|
0°C) for the success of the flight and in particular on the performance of the
|
|
O-rings used in the engines. Indeed, no test
|
|
had been performed at this temperature.
|
|
|
|
The following study takes up some of the analyses carried out that
|
|
night with the objective of assessing the potential influence of
|
|
the temperature and pressure to which the O-rings are subjected
|
|
on their probability of malfunction. Our starting point is
|
|
the results of the experiments carried out by NASA engineers
|
|
during the six years preceding the launch of the shuttle
|
|
Challenger.
|
|
|
|
# Loading the data
|
|
We start by loading this data:
|
|
|
|
```{r}
|
|
data = read.csv("shuttle.csv",header=T)
|
|
data
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The data set shows us the date of each test, the number of O-rings
|
|
(there are 6 on the main launcher), the
|
|
temperature (in Fahrenheit) and pressure (in psi), and finally the
|
|
number of identified malfunctions.
|
|
|
|
# Graphical inspection
|
|
Flights without incidents do not provide any information
|
|
on the influence of temperature or pressure on malfunction.
|
|
We thus focus on the experiments in which at least one O-ring was defective.
|
|
|
|
```{r}
|
|
data = data[data$Malfunction>0,]
|
|
data
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
We have a high temperature variability but
|
|
the pressure is almost always 200, which should
|
|
simplify the analysis.
|
|
|
|
How does the frequency of failure vary with temperature?
|
|
```{r}
|
|
plot(data=data, Malfunction/Count ~ Temperature, ylim=c(0,1))
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
At first glance, the dependence does not look very important, but let's try to
|
|
estimate the impact of temperature $t$ on the probability of O-ring malfunction.
|
|
|
|
# Estimation of the temperature influence
|
|
|
|
Suppose that each of the six O-rings is damaged with the same
|
|
probability and independently of the others and that this probability
|
|
depends only on the temperature. If $p(t)$ is this probability, the
|
|
number $D$ of malfunctioning O-rings during a flight at
|
|
temperature $t$ follows a binomial law with parameters $n=6$ and
|
|
$p=p(t)$. To link $p(t)$ to $t$, we will therefore perform a
|
|
logistic regression.
|
|
|
|
```{r}
|
|
logistic_reg = glm(data=data, Malfunction/Count ~ Temperature, weights=Count,
|
|
family=binomial(link='logit'))
|
|
summary(logistic_reg)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The most likely estimator of the temperature parameter is 0.001416
|
|
and the standard error of this estimator is 0.049, in other words we
|
|
cannot distinguish any particular impact and we must take our
|
|
estimates with caution.
|
|
|
|
# Estimation of the probability of O-ring malfunction
|
|
The expected temperature on the take-off day is 31°F. Let's try to
|
|
estimate the probability of O-ring malfunction at
|
|
this temperature from the model we just built:
|
|
|
|
```{r}
|
|
# shuttle=shuttle[shuttle$r!=0,]
|
|
tempv = seq(from=30, to=90, by = .5)
|
|
rmv <- predict(logistic_reg,list(Temperature=tempv),type="response")
|
|
plot(tempv,rmv,type="l",ylim=c(0,1))
|
|
points(data=data, Malfunction/Count ~ Temperature)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
As expected from the initial data, the
|
|
temperature has no significant impact on the probability of failure of the
|
|
O-rings. It will be about 0.2, as in the tests
|
|
where we had a failure of at least one joint. Let's get back to the initial dataset to estimate the probability of failure:
|
|
|
|
```{r}
|
|
data_full = read.csv("shuttle.csv",header=T)
|
|
sum(data_full$Malfunction)/sum(data_full$Count)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This probability is thus about $p=0.065$. Knowing that there is
|
|
a primary and a secondary O-ring on each of the three parts of the
|
|
launcher, the probability of failure of both joints of a launcher
|
|
is $p^2 \approx 0.00425$. The probability of failure of any one of the
|
|
launchers is $1-(1-p^2)^3 \approx 1.2%$. That would really be
|
|
bad luck.... Everything is under control, so the takeoff can happen
|
|
tomorrow as planned.
|
|
|
|
But the next day, the Challenger shuttle exploded and took away
|
|
with her the seven crew members. The public was shocked and in
|
|
the subsequent investigation, the reliability of the
|
|
O-rings was questioned. Beyond the internal communication problems
|
|
of NASA, which have a lot to do with this fiasco, the previous analysis
|
|
includes (at least) a small problem.... Can you find it?
|
|
You are free to modify this analysis and to look at this dataset
|
|
from all angles in order to to explain what's wrong.
|