Event model
Define stop, micro-stop, degradation, intervention, repair, safe restart and restored production with consistent clocks.
Deployment evaluation · 15
Availability and recovery
Measure intervention frequency, failure categories, detection, diagnosis, safe restart and return to quality production.
Evidence statusEngineering decision framework · cell-specific validation requiredLast reviewed: 11 August 2026
15
FUURAA thesis
Availability is shaped as much by diagnosability and recovery design as by component reliability.
Engineering map
Turn the title into engineering objects that can be observed, measured and reviewed.
Each layer states the boundary to establish and the evidence needed for the next decision.
Diagnosis
Preserve state, alarm, command, observation, configuration and causal context before reset removes evidence.
Recovery
Design bounded local actions, authorised escalation, spare access, rollback and quality verification after restart.
Verification questions
Write the questions first, then decide whether a demo, test, pilot or operating record can answer them.
Each question needs an object, conditions, denominator, threshold and accountable decision owner.
- 01
What is the mean operating time between human interventions?
- 02
Which few causes dominate lost time?
- 03
Can operators diagnose without trial-and-error bypass?
- 04
When does restart require recalibration or product quarantine?
Evidence to preserve
Enable the next reader to reconstruct conditions, results, failures and the decision.
A conclusion alone loses reviewability; raw records, configuration and exclusions matter too.
- 01
Evidence package 1
Event log with detection, response, repair and recovery timestamps
- 02
Evidence package 2
Failure Pareto linked to corrective and preventive action
- 03
Evidence package 3
Safe-restart and post-restart quality verification
Scope boundary
State what this evidence still cannot be generalised to.
- 01
Component MTBF, a short pilot or uptime without intervention definitions cannot establish production availability.
- 02
This is an engineering reading and decision framework; it does not replace application-specific risk assessment, conformity work, procurement acceptance or professional advice.
Sources and evidence status
Read standards scope, measurement evidence and application conclusions separately.
Source dates and review status remain visible; external sources open in a new tab.
01
NIST · 2018-06-01
↗02Quick health assessment for industrial robot degradation
Demonstrates measurement of tool-centre position and orientation degradation to support condition assessment.
OSHA · Reviewed 2026-08-11
↗Robotics safety overview and hazard recognition
Highlights robot hazards and the importance of non-routine states such as setup, programming, testing and maintenance.