Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

APICS CPIM-8.0 Exam - Topic 1 Question 9 Discussion

If the total part failure rate of a machine is 0.00055 failures per hour, what would be the mean time between failures (MTBF) in hours?
A) 1,818.2
B) 59.99945
C) 1.98
D) 0.99945

APICS CPIM-8.0 Exam - Topic 1 Question 9 Discussion

Actual exam question for APICS's CPIM-8.0 exam
Question #: 9
Topic #: 1
[All CPIM-8.0 Questions]

If the total part failure rate of a machine is 0.00055 failures per hour, what would be the mean time between failures (MTBF) in hours?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

The mean time between failures (MTBF) is the inverse of the failure rate. The failure rate is given as 0.00055 failures per hour, so the MTBF is 1/0.00055 = 1,818.2 hours. This means that the average time the machine operates without failing is 1,818.2 hours. Reference: MTBF Formula | How to Calculate Mean Time Between Failure? - EDUCBA, Mean time between failures - Wikipedia


by Evangelina at May 04, 2025, 04:53 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CPIM-8.0 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Dulce
8 months ago
Totally agree with A, solid math there!
upvoted 0 times
...
Yvette
8 months ago
Definitely A, that makes sense!
upvoted 0 times
...
Josefa
8 months ago
MTBF is calculated as 1 divided by the failure rate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Troy
9 months ago
Are we sure about that? Feels off to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rueben
9 months ago
Wait, 1,818.2 hours? That seems way too high.
upvoted 0 times
...
Bernardine
9 months ago
I think the correct answer is A, but I’m not completely confident. I need to double-check my math!
upvoted 0 times
...
Lilli
9 months ago
I feel like the answer should be a larger number since it's MTBF, but I’m second-guessing my calculations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Emogene
10 months ago
I think I practiced a similar question where we had to find MTBF from a failure rate. I’ll try to remember the formula!
upvoted 0 times
...
Art
10 months ago
I remember MTBF is the inverse of the failure rate, but I’m not sure how to calculate it exactly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimberely
10 months ago
I think I've got it - the MTBF is just the reciprocal of the failure rate, so the answer should be 1/0.00055.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alyssa
10 months ago
Wait, is the failure rate given per hour or per some other time period? I need to make sure I'm using the right units.
upvoted 0 times
...
Raymon
10 months ago
Okay, I know the MTBF is the inverse of the failure rate, so this should be a simple division problem.
upvoted 0 times
...
Quentin
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about the formula to use here. Let me think this through step-by-step.
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
11 months ago
This looks like a straightforward calculation, I should be able to handle this.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonio
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2 hours? Wow, that machine must be built like a tank! I wonder if they use it to power a small country or something. Either way, it's got to be the answer.
upvoted 0 times
Ernest
1 year ago
D) 0.99945
upvoted 0 times
...
Patti
1 year ago
C) 1.98
upvoted 0 times
...
Lottie
1 year ago
B) 59.99945
upvoted 0 times
...
Pok
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2 hours? Wow, that machine must be built like a tank! I wonder if they use it to power a small country or something. Either way, it's got to be the answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Leandro
1 year ago
I agree with Terry, A) 1,818.2 makes sense based on the formula
upvoted 0 times
...
Goldie
1 year ago
C) 1.98 hours? Really? That can't be right. I'd be surprised if the machine lasted that long without having a meltdown. Time to go back to the drawing board on this one.
upvoted 0 times
Theola
1 year ago
B) 59.99945 could also be a possible MTBF value for the machine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Zana
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2 seems more reasonable for the MTBF of the machine.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shanda
1 year ago
C) I agree, 1.98 hours seems too short for the mean time between failures.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leatha
1 year ago
D) 0.99945
upvoted 0 times
...
Roosevelt
1 year ago
C) 1.98
upvoted 0 times
...
Quentin
1 year ago
B) 59.99945
upvoted 0 times
...
Raina
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Terry
1 year ago
But the MTBF is calculated as 1 divided by the failure rate, so it should be A)
upvoted 0 times
...
Blythe
1 year ago
Hmm, D) 0.99945 is a bit too low, don't you think? I bet the machines would be breaking down every hour if that were the case. Better go with something more reasonable.
upvoted 0 times
Farrah
1 year ago
C) 1.98
upvoted 0 times
...
Vinnie
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Corinne
1 year ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is B) 59.99945
upvoted 0 times
...
Terry
1 year ago
I think the answer is A) 1,818.2
upvoted 0 times
...
Aliza
1 year ago
I'm going with B) 59.99945. It just has a nice, precise feel to it. This exam is all about the details, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Shannan
1 year ago
I agree with you, B) 59.99945 seems like the most precise option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lynelle
1 year ago
I'm not sure, but I'm leaning towards C) 1.98.
upvoted 0 times
...
Catarina
1 year ago
I think A) 1,818.2 is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Karl
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2 seems like the right answer. I mean, if the failure rate is super low, the mean time between failures has to be pretty high, right?
upvoted 0 times
Donte
1 year ago
C) Yeah, it makes sense that the mean time between failures would be high with a low failure rate like that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Grover
1 year ago
B) I think you're right. A high mean time between failures would make sense with such a low failure rate.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jerlene
1 year ago
A) 1,818.2 seems like the right answer. I mean, if the failure rate is super low, the mean time between failures has to be pretty high, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel