ValueSure · The Unified RAMST Platform

Certainty, engineered.

A full reliability analysis of a medium-to-large system — with your engineers in control and your data under your control.

Reliability, safety, maintainability & supportability analysis — powered by local AI and a built-in knowledge base. AI does the lookups; deterministic math produces every number.

From weeks to 24–48 hours.*

Planned growthMIL-HDBK-189C
PDR CDR TRR 10× 1×
Demonstrated MTBF 90% confidence bound
  • 100%
    Offline — no cloud calls
  • On-prem
    Installs on your server
  • EN + HE
    Reports in both languages
  • 1–2 days
    Onboarding — training per module

* ValueTech expert estimate for a medium-to-large system, including engineer review.

The challenge

Your customers buy uptime, not hardware

Scattered tools, spreadsheets and guesses.

Found too late

Issues surface at customer sites — where every fix costs the most.

Uptime in the contract

Customers expect committed MTBF, MTTR and availability numbers.

Scarce expertise

Reliability know-how sits with one or two people — or outside.

Siloed tools & teams

Mechanics, electronics and software each keep their own tools and data.

Before With ValueSure
Guessing how long to testExact test-time calculation
Manual Excel calculationsAutomated model fitting
No confidence bounds80 / 90 / 95% confidence bounds
Separate tools for planning vs. analysisPlanning + analysis in one platform
Lambda lookups by hand, part by partEvery part matched automatically — source and confidence per line
How it works

Your data in — decisions out

Runs on your server or ours.

You bring

  • BOM as an Excel/CSV export from any PLM or ERP
  • Design descriptions, drawings and block diagrams
  • Test results and failure reports
  • Field and service data, if you have it
  • Customer uptime requirements

ValueSure does

  • Matches every part to proven failure data
  • Applies the right standard automatically
  • Calculates risk, reliability and test needs
  • Ranks what drives risk — and explains why
  • Writes the report your customer expects

You get

  • Reliability — MTBF per system
  • Top risks — ranked shortlist
  • Test effort — hours or units
  • Safety — hazards & controls
  • Reports — DOCX / PDF, EN & HE

1 platform instead of scattered tools and spreadsheets

RAMST in plain words

Five questions every product must answer

ValueSure answers them with data, not opinions — one dataset shared by all disciplines.

  1. Will it fail?

    How often — measured as MTBF, the mean time between failures.

    217F NPRD-16 RBD FMECA
  2. Will it be available?

    The share of time the system is up and doing its job.

    Ao · Ai · Aa Simulation
  3. How fast can we fix it?

    Repair time, spare parts and maintenance effort.

    HDBK-472 MTTR ILS
  4. Is it safe?

    Which hazards exist, how severe — and are they controlled?

    882E FTA SHA · SAR
  5. Can we prove it by test?

    Test hours or units needed to show the requirement is met.

    189C Success-Run 1916
Core capabilities

One AI-powered workspace for the entire RAMST process

Six domains, 26+ tools — one dataset, one knowledge base, one report engine.

MIL-STD-882E

Safety & hazard analysis

From hazard identification to system-level safety reports.

  • PHL + PHA generator
  • FTA builder · IEC 61025
  • SHA / SAR / SSPP
  • Software safety · D-080
  • 882E risk matrix
  • MCS · importance · CCF
  • Monte-Carlo
  • FTA from image (OCR)
  • SWCI + LOR
217F · NPRD-16

Reliability prediction & allocation

From component lambda to full system MTBF — and targets per block.

  • Unified prediction
  • Auto-prediction from BOM
  • Component assessment
  • Weibull · IEC 61649
  • Allocation · Equal / ARINC / AGREE
  • Environment & temperature factors
  • Confidence per source
  • RBD
Core · 189C / 61164

Reliability growth & demonstration

Plan, track & prove reliability growth across the lifecycle.

  • Growth planner
  • Demonstrated reliability
  • Nonparametric · Success-Run
  • Duane · AMSAA/Crow · PM2
  • Chi-square CI 80/90/95%
  • Sensitivity analysis
  • Zero-failure (c=0)
1629A · Closed-loop

FMECA & FRACAS

Failure analysis and closed-loop corrective action.

  • FMECA report generator
  • FRACAS
  • RCA · 5-Why / Ishikawa
  • CAPA tracking
  • Automatic RPN
  • AI failure-mode suggestions
  • Pareto + trends
  • Excel / XML, bilingual
HDBK-472 · Simulation

Maintainability, ILS & simulation

From repair-level analysis to failure-rate simulation over time.

  • MTTR · Mct · Mpt
  • Availability Ao · Ai · Aa
  • ILS — spares & fleet
  • Reliability simulation
  • Repair-level analysis
  • PM scheduling
  • Wear-out (Weibull)
  • Monte Carlo · what-if
Beyond hardware

Human, software & mechanical reliability

Quantify the risk contributors that a parts count misses.

  • Human reliability · THERP / HEART / SPAR-H
  • SW reliability analyzer
  • Stress-strength analysis
  • Halstead · complexity · defect density
  • Safety margin → P(failure)
  • Impact simulation
Intelligence layer

Local AI + knowledge base

How every lambda is sourced — in this order, with its confidence on the line.

  1. Knowledge base

    exact + semantic match

    proven · high
  2. NPRD-16 / 217F

    standard tables

    standard · rated
  3. AI-assisted classification

    λ from the standard table

    low-confidence · flagged
  • AI interprets — it never invents numbers.
  • Standard formulas, unit-tested code.
  • Data source and confidence score shown for every value.
  • Reports carry a SHA-256 integrity chain.
Component identification Failure-mode suggestions Severity assessment Table & image extraction Reports EN + HE Fully offline
Worked examples

Five situations every program hits — and what you get back

Five analyses with the numbers as the tools produced them — and how each was sourced.

217F · BOM → MTBF Reference case · synthetic / anonymized data

One BOM in — a clear list of where to invest

Large-format industrial printer · 473 parts · 9-level BOM · no reliability data prepared · one automated run.

  • 715 hSystem MTBF — known on day one
  • 473parts, all matched: knowledge base → NPRD-16 / 217F
  • 80 / 20matched to proven data / concrete data-gap list (95 parts)

Mechanical guides, brackets and connectors — not electronics — dominate this design.

What you get

  • Focus the design reviews: three part families carry most of the failure rate — review them first, not everything.
  • Budget with real numbers: system MTBF known before prototypes and test rigs.
  • Know how solid the answer is: 80% matched to proven data; the other 20% is a clear data-gap list.

How it works

  1. Read the BOM — normalise every P/N and description
  2. Match to the knowledge base (exact + semantic); NPRD-16 / 217F where no match
  3. Apply π factors — environment and temperature
  4. Roll leaf λ up the tree → subsystem → system MTBF
  5. Next: close the data gap, review the top 3 families, seed the 189C growth plan
ARINC · Allocation Reference case · synthetic / anonymized data

Top-down targets every team owns

Prediction says what the design will achieve — allocation says what each block must achieve. System goal: MTBF 1,000 h; predicted today 500 h.

  • 2×failure-rate cut each team now owns — split fairly by ARINC weight
  • 3 methodsEqual · ARINC · AGREE
  • 4 blocksPower supply 5,000 h · Motion control 2,500 h · Controller board 4,000 h · Sensors 6,667 h

What you get

  • A system goal cascaded down to assemblies and parts
  • Fair, defensible targets for every subsystem team
  • Life-profile exposure: operating time per subsystem
  • One-click DOCX report, ready to deliver

How it works

  1. Set the system goal: MTBF or R(t) for the mission
  2. Define the tree: subsystems, assemblies, parts
  3. Add inputs: predicted λ, complexity, importance, duty cycle
  4. Choose a method: Equal / ARINC / AGREE
  5. Allocated λ and MTBF per block → DOCX report
MIL-HDBK-189C · Growth planner Reference case · synthetic / anonymized data

How much testing do we really need?

Turn the program's most expensive guess into a calculation. A system starts at 150 h MTBF; the goal is 500 h.

  • ~8,000test hours required
  • 5phases with milestones
  • 150 → 500 hstarting MTBF → goal

What you get

  • Test hours needed — up front
  • Phases and milestones you can put in the schedule
  • Effect of faster or slower fixes
  • Units needed for a reliability demonstration test
  • A plan that survives budget review

How it works

  1. Enter starting MTBF, target & growth rate
  2. Tool computes required test time automatically
  3. Plan phases — test hours per round
  4. Track expected failures per phase
  5. Compare models: Duane / AMSAA / PM2 · sensitivity on the growth rate
MIL-HDBK-189C · Demonstrated reliability Reference case · synthetic / anonymized data

Proving reliability — with statistical confidence

An electro-optical system tested in three phases. Real failure events in; MTBF per phase with confidence bounds out.

  • 3.9 → 8.4 → 40 hMTBF at PDR (23 failures) → CDR (11) → TRR (7)
  • 10×MTBF improvement, confirmed with confidence bounds
  • 80 / 90 / 95%confidence levels

What you get

  • Proof, not hope — defensible evidence for customers and review boards
  • Growth trend visible across phases — fewer surprises at qualification
  • Charts and a ready report from the same data

How it works

  1. Enter failure events: day, count, test phase
  2. MTBF computed with Chi-square confidence bounds
  3. Growth models fitted to detect improvement (AMSAA / Crow, Duane)
  4. Reliability compared across test phases; proven R(t)
  5. Charts & a ready report
Success-Run · Zero-failure test Reference case · synthetic / anonymized data

Prove reliability from a small test — no distribution assumptions

Zero-failure (c=0) test at 90% confidence. Solve for n, R or confidence from the other two.

  • 45 unitszero failures → R ≥ 0.95 proven at 90% confidence
  • 22 / 45 / 230units for R ≥ 0.90 / 0.95 / 0.99
  • Binomialno life distribution needed

What you get

  • How many units to build for the acceptance test — before building them
  • The real cost of a tighter requirement: 0.95 → 0.99 is 45 → 230 units
  • Acceptance criteria & ready tables for the test plan

How it works

  1. Choose what to solve: n, R or confidence
  2. Enter the two known values
  3. Binomial math — no life distribution needed
  4. Acceptance criteria & recommendations; export tables for the test plan
Use cases by industry

Same platform, different pressure points

Semiconductor & equipment OEMs

Committing to uptime on a tool you have not built yet: customers write MTBF, MTTR and uptime into the contract — and audit them.

217F HDBK-472 ILS Simulation

Defense & aerospace

Qualifying a mission system against MIL standards: demonstrated MTBF, a system safety case and a growth plan the review board accepts.

882E 217F 189C 1629A

Industrial machinery & printing

One BOM in — a clear list of where to invest: 473 parts, no reliability data prepared, one automated run.

217F FMECA

Medical devices

A safety case and lot acceptance the auditor can follow: hazards identified and controlled, lots accepted on a statistical basis, tolerances held before volume.

882E IEC 61508 1916

Deployment & data

Secure, transparent — and yours

Built for security-sensitive engineering organizations.

  • Installs on your enterprise server

    Licence: on your own server. Local AI engine, no cloud calls — suited to sensitive IP and classified programs. Pilot: on our systems, under NDA.

  • BOM in, from any PLM or ERP

    BOM as an Excel/CSV export from any PLM or ERP system; design descriptions, test results and field data alongside.

  • Onboarding in 1–2 days

    Training 1–2 days per module.

  • Support on all channels

    Support on all channels, by package. Software and standards updates are included in the licence.

  • Your data, your reports

    The customer owns all data. Open formats: Word, Excel, PDF.

Two ways to work with us

With or without a reliability team

Run the platform yourselves — or let our RAMS engineers deliver with it.

In-house team

You have a reliability team

  • Multiply the team's output
  • One platform, all analyses · engineers stay in control
  • ValueTech backup at peaks
  • Licence: annual or per project
No team

No team — or it's overloaded

  • Our RAMS engineers run it · deliverables per contract
  • Results in days, not weeks
  • Knowledge stays with you · design-review support
  • On our systems, under NDA
Next step · Free pilot

Start with a free pilot on your BOM

  1. 01

    Send one BOM

    One module or small subsystem — Excel, CSV or PLM export.

  2. 02

    We run ValueSure

    Our engineers run it offline, on our secured systems, under NDA.

  3. 03

    Joint review meeting

    We present the full reliability report to your team.

  4. 04

    Decide with evidence

    Your product, your numbers — before any commitment.

Next step

Start a free pilot

See ValueSure on your own data — one BOM, one report, one meeting.