Two independent pump trains feed a common water-delivery header. Fail either train, compare N+1 capacity against demand, and expose the common-header failure that duplicate pumps cannot overcome.
• 3D scene parts: Pump train A; pump train b; common discharge header; delivery reservoir / demand; branch isolation / check valves. • Controls: Required delivery flow (20–100 L/s); Capacity per available pump (30–80 L/s); Fail pump train A; Fail pump train B; Fail common header. • Live readouts: Total available capacity (L/s); Delivered flow (L/s); Unserved demand (L/s); Single-train capacity meets demand (0/1). • Guided experiments: Single pump failure; Common header failure. • Four tabs (visual laboratory, curves and measurements, experiments, learn and assess), a model-verification run, a timestamped event log and a trial report.
Available = capacity × surviving pump count Delivered = common failure ? 0 : min(demand, available) N+1 capacity criterion: one pump capacity ≥ demand
Representative systems-engineering teaching example. Equipment geometry and animation time are illustrative; this is not an equipment qualification, safety assessment or certification tool. No pump curve, power, transient, automatic transfer delay or stochastic availability is solved. N+1 here is a capacity criterion only, not a complete reliability claim. Try the preset experiments, then compare the live readouts with the equations.
No. The stated model omits real qualification evidence and system-specific assumptions.
Common components can defeat duplicate paths.
Representative systems-engineering teaching example. Equipment geometry and animation time are illustrative; this is not an equipment qualification, safety assessment or certification tool. No pump curve, power, transient, automatic transfer delay or stochastic availability is solved. N+1 here is a capacity criterion only, not a complete reliability claim.