=(720 hours - 20 hours) / 2 failures = 350 hours.If the companys MTBF goal is 300 hours, the goal would be met.The probability that the boiler does not fail before the MTBF goal would be calculated this way:e-(300/350) = 42.5 percent.Thus, analyzing numbers may only give peace of mind to some people since there are other reasons an asset may fail, such as:Non-compliance of cleaning standards;Inoperative protections;Harmful situations for security and the environment;Greater fuel consumption, which is a greater cost.If the asset does not perform all required functions as desired, it is also considered a failure.Therefore, if the real failure concept is applied, calculations would be different:MTBF = 720 hours - 20 hours / 10 failures = 70 hours.Since the companys MTBF is 300 hours, the purpose would not be met.With the current failure concept, the probability that the boiler does not fail before the MTBF goalwould be calculated this way: Probability = e-(70/350) = 1.37 percent.Very few companies havedata on MTBF; what they really have is datum on mean time between shutdowns.Very few companies record failure occurrence using the failure mode scope and those that do,their information systems make the MTBF calculation difficult.So, whats the solution? The time being used for mathematical calculation of MTBF or failure probability would be better spent defining failure consequences and devising an action plan to mitigate those consequences.How to Improve ReliabilityCurrently, the issue facing maintenance staff is not only learning what the new techniques are, but also being able to decide which ones are useful for their companies.If properly chosen and used in an integrated manner, maintenance practices and outputs will likely improve. Likewise, costs will be optimized. If improperly chosen, more problems will be created which, in turn, will worsen existing ones.Some companies have gone beyond statistics and have reviewed their internal practices, carrying out benchmarking with those that are outstanding. These organizations came to the conclusion that it is impossible to talk about reliability as a unique cipher. Therefore, it is necessary to use several measurements as fundamental indicators of inputs/outputs of the processes.The need for reliability in installations is as old as humanity, but undeniably, the growing relevance of environmental issues and their security have led to the need of changing orientation of some markets and niches due to:More complex products.Greater pressure to reduce costs to be more competitive.A greater number of operational functions carried out by equipment and machines.Requirements to reduce products weight and volume, and maintaining and improving performance and security standards.Requirements to increase or reduce operation duration of products to increase or reduce demand.Greater difficulties to carry out maintenance interventions due to asset utilization increases.Trends to use software, electronic, pneumatic, or hydraulic components having different wearing behavior in response to components failing in function of age.Current legislation that is increasingly more demanding and less tolerant.Greater impact of shutdowns and operational losses on sales and products.Growing demands for quality in services and products.New perceptions of a companys image or commitment.Commitments to reduce the human life loss risk.Requests to reduce the spilling risk or affectations of the equipment on the