Reliability Assessment Sample Clauses

Reliability Assessment. The WECC will ensure that interconnected bulk electric system reliability assessments are conducted as needed. The WECC will do this work in conjunction with the Regional Entities to the greatest extent possible. The WECC will also facilitate coordinated reliability assessments among Regional Entities.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Reliability Assessment. TCS will assess key components of the current radio system not being addressed in the rebanding process. A complete assessment will be completed in the areas of concern and the risks associated with each component that should be replaced or updated to provide a continual high reliable system. A typical assessment could encompass the following technical elements: • Description of existing system configuration; • Description of key components not addressed in rebanding and no longer supported; • Description of required infrastructure hardware/performance reliability factors; This assessment will be documented with a detailed report noting key components and the risks associated with reliability and the costs to upgrade.
Sample 1
Reliability Assessment. Beginning three (3) months after commencement of delivery of production units of the specific METROLOGIC Purchasable Product and thereafter throughout the warranty period, the following threshold parameters will be utilized to compare the actual MFR with (i) a target MFR; (ii) a threshold MFR level which will trigger liquidated damages; for failure to achieve the stated reliability goals: Target Reliability Percentage ( % per month): 2% Liquidated Damages Reliability Percentage ( % per month): 6.5% (hereinafter "LDRP") Account credit per unit failure in excess of the LDRP (assessed monthly): $3 The liquidated damages computed by determining the number of Failed Units in excess of the LDRP units, times $3.00 shall be limited to a maximum of 1% of the aggregate value of METROLOGIC Purchasable Product under warranty. Such damages shall be applied as account credits towards SYMBOL's next purchases of METROLOGIC Purchasable Product. In the event that SYMBOL does not utilize the account credit, or portion thereof, within a one (1) year period of issuance, METROLOGIC shall pay SYMBOL a cash amount equal to the unused credit whereupon the balance of the unused credit shall be set to zero.
Sample 1
Reliability Assessment. The process of ship structural design goes from the primary structure (midship section) to the detail design of substructures and components such as plates and welded joints. Design of primary load- carrying structures is mainly governed by fatigue and ultimate strength. Fatigue analysis is based on different principles than ultimate collapse. Both the environmental loads and the corresponding stress in a structural component vary with time and can be modelled as stochastic processes. Theory and methods of reliability assessment have been developed significantly in the last two decades and now there are two main types of reliability methods. Time-invariant methods consider that both the strength of the components and the loads do not change with time, i.e. they are random variables. Time-dependent formulations are able to model the case when a component is subjected to a random fluctuating loads and its capacity deteriorates with time. The developments of structural reliability theory, which occurred in the late 60's, started being applied to ship structures in the 70's. Since then several improvements have occurred in the theoretical formulations and in the computational methods of structural reliability, some of which have been applied to the analysis of ship structures. Presently the first and second order reliability methods provide a way of evaluating the reliability efficiently with a reasonably good accuracy, which is adequate for practical applications as provided by [95] and [25]. These approaches take into account the information about the type of distribution of the basic variables, and these analytically based methods have been extended to combine their capabilities with Xxxxx-Xxxxx [68] simulation methods which in turn have been made efficient through different strategies. Non-linear limit state functions are adequately dealt with and the analysis of systems, either in parallel or in series, can be performed with current methods. Furthermore, various interesting formulations for time-varying reliability have been proposed [99],[20]. One problem to study is the behaviour of the whole hull girder of a ship and in particular, the way in which the structural design process is addressed from the point of view of the Regulatory Agencies. Classification Societies have been interested in the subject since the early days, as can be seen in the studies of [2],[5],[90],[108],[82],[29],[36]. The interest of Classification Societies is very important since...
Sample 1
Reliability Assessment. The Contractor confirms and continuously ensures that its personnel is fully reliable and sufficiently qualified to perform the Contractual Services. Upon the Customer’ request, the Contractor shall describe its verification process, provide any supporting documentation as well as a written confirmation of reliability and qualification to the Customer without undue delay. The Contractor is obliged upon request of the Customer or a competent supervisory authority to evidence reliability and qualification of the personnel who has been assigned overall responsibility for the performance of the Contractual Services.
Sample 1
Reliability Assessment. 2.5.1 General Reliability numerical evaluation will be performed for components, equipment, subsystems and for the spacecraft to demonstrate compliance with the contractual numerical reliability requirements. The reliability assessments will be updated during the program to include the impact of design changes and more detailed design information as the spacecraft hardware design matures. The results of quantitative reliability assessments will be reported and provided as part of design reviews. Reliability trades will also be used during all phases of the program to identify the relative merits of alternative designs and to assist in problem resolution (i.e., to determine the possible numerical reliability impact resulting from a potential design change). Reliability functional block diagrams will be developed and used to represent the system and subsystem design configurations as they operate over the specified mission phases. These functional block diagrams will in turn be the basis for the reliability block diagrams that indicate the redundancy, cross-strapping, and single thread items of the designs. The reliability block diagrams then become the basis for defining the quantitative reliability of hardware from the unit to the end item spacecraft level. Mathematical models (either discrete or dynamic) will then be used, along with the failure rates calculated for the hardware items, to determine numerical reliability. Quantitative reliability requirements will be specified in the applicable equipment, subsystem, and system performance specifications. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF THE DATA CONTAINED ON THIS SHEET IS SUBJECT TO THE RESTRICTION ON THE TITLE PAGE.
Sample 1

Related to Reliability Assessment

  • Joint Assessment If the Premises are not separately assessed, Lessee's liability shall be an equitable proportion of the Real Property Taxes for all of the land and improvements included within the tax parcel assessed, such proportion to be conclusively determined by Lessor from the respective valuations assigned in the assessor's work sheets or such other information as may be reasonably available.

  • Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.

  • Security Assessment If Accenture reasonably determines, or in good faith believes, that Supplier’s security practices or procedures do not meet Supplier’s obligations under the Agreement, then Accenture will notify Supplier of the deficiencies. Supplier will without unreasonable delay: (i) correct such deficiencies at its own expense; (ii) permit Accenture, or its duly authorized representatives, to assess Supplier’s security-related activities that are relevant to the Agreement; and (iii) timely complete a security questionnaire from Accenture on a periodic basis upon Accenture’s request. Security issues identified by Accenture will be assigned risk ratings and an agreed-to timeframe to remediate. Supplier will remediate all the security issues identified within the agreed to timeframes. Upon Supplier’s failure to remediate any high or medium rated security issues within the stated timeframes, Accenture may terminate the Agreement in accordance with Section 8 above.

  • Conformity Assessment Procedures 1. The Parties recognise that a broad range of mechanisms exist to facilitate the acceptance of conformity assessment results, including:

  • Performance Assessment 6.1 The Performance Plan (Annexure A) to this Agreement sets out key performance indicators and competencies that needs to be evaluated in terms of –

  • Diagnostic Assessment 6.3.1 Boards shall provide a list of pre-approved assessment tools consistent with their Board improvement plan for student achievement and which is compliant with Ministry of Education PPM (PPM 155: Diagnostic Assessment in Support of Student Learning, date of issue January 7, 2013).

  • No Joint Assessment Borrower shall not suffer, permit or initiate the joint assessment of any Individual Property with (a) any other real property constituting a tax lot separate from such Individual Property, or (b) any portion of such Individual Property which may be deemed to constitute personal property, or any other procedure whereby the Lien of any taxes which may be levied against such personal property shall be assessed or levied or charged to such Individual Property.

  • Needs Assessment The determination of whether the Annual Income of a family or individual occupying or seeking to occupy a Qualifying Unit complies with the requirements for Extremely Low-Income Households or Low- to Moderate-Income Households shall be made by the applicable housing authority in the CDBG-DR Program area prior to admission of such family or individual to occupancy of a Qualifying Unit.

  • Evaluation Cycle: Formative Assessment A) A specific purpose for evaluation is to promote student learning, growth and achievement by providing Educators with feedback for improvement. Evaluators are expected to make frequent unannounced visits to classrooms. Evaluators are expected to give targeted constructive feedback to Educators based on their observations of practice, examination of artifacts, and analysis of multiple measures of student learning, growth and achievement in relation to the Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice.

  • Report on Assessment of Compliance and Attestation (a) On or before March 1 of each calendar year, commencing in 2007, the Servicer shall:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.