High Reliability Screening vs Component Availability
Calibrate screening intensity to component criticality and supplement with architectural redundancy to maintain reliability without exhausting supply chains.
CyberTRIZ analysis · Space contradiction RMA026 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Extensive component screening can reduce the probability that manufacturing defects or weak components enter flight hardware. However, strict screening criteria can reject significant portions of available inventory, increase procurement time, raise cost, and create shortages of specialized components.
Space TRIZ Resolution
Screening should focus on failure mechanisms relevant to the mission environment and component function rather than applying maximum screening uniformly. Supplier process information, lot characterization, targeted testing, system-level protection, and architectural redundancy can complement component screening and reduce dependence on exceptionally limited inventories.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 3 – Local Quality varies screening according to component criticality and exposure.
Principle 10 – Prior Action identifies supplier and manufacturing risks before procurement becomes critical.
Principle 11 – Beforehand Cushioning uses architectural protection where component uncertainty cannot be eliminated economically.
Expected Outcome
Maintained component reliability
Greater component availability
Reduced procurement delays
Better assurance-resource allocation
Decision Indicators
Early indicators include:
Screening rejects large portions of otherwise suitable component lots.
Procurement delays are driven primarily by assurance requirements.
Identical screening is applied regardless of component function.
Specialized components become unavailable because acceptable sources are too limited.
System-level protection is ignored when screening requirements are established.