making it clearer

This commit is contained in:
Robin 2010-06-05 07:41:07 +01:00
parent 2a5ba2d3d5
commit bb22f00c7b

View File

@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ from the cardinality constrain powerset number.
\subsubsection{Example: Two Component functional group \\ cardinality Constraint of 2}
Thus were we to have a simple functional group with two components R and T, of which
For example: were we to have a simple functional group with two components R and T, of which
$$FM(R) = \{R_o, R_s\}$$ and $$FM(T) = \{T_o, T_s, T_h\}$$.
This means that a functional~group $FG=\{R,T\}$ will have a component failure modes set % $FM_{cfg} $
@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ We must then subtract the number of `internal' component fault combinations for
For component R there is only one internal component fault that cannot exist
$R_o \wedge R_s$. As a combination ${2 \choose 2} = 1$ . For $T$ the component with
three fault modes ${2 \choose 3} = 3$.
Thus for $cc == 2$ we must subtract $(3+1)$.
Thus for $cc == 2$, under the conditions of unitary state failure modes in the components $R$ and $T$, we must subtract $(3+1)$.
The number of combinations to check is thus 11 for this example and this can be verified
by listing all the required combinations:
%