IR Category: Serviceability and Support

Foreword. IR Category Standard for serviceability and support (category weights live in the VRS-GEN-005 master and its data twin, never here). This edition scores the category as a sum of integer points across eight serviceability criteria (SV-1…SV-8, 55 points; Clause 6), each earned against a plain-language ladder and bounded by an evidence tier — Unverified, Verified or Certified (Clause 7). It supersedes the rate-based model of the 0.x drafts: no restoration-time or parts-lead formula, no statistical blend toward a class median, no qualitative bands. Requirements use “shall”.

Introduction

Serviceability is the loss driver an insurer reads as claim severity — how long a failure keeps a robot out of service, and therefore how large the business-interruption exposure grows — and a lender reads as recoverability and obsolescence: can the asset be restored to earning condition, and for how long will the manufacturer keep it supportable. A robot that fails is a frequency event; a robot that cannot be repaired quickly, or at all, is a severity and residual-value event. This Standard turns “how serviceable is this model?” into a repeatable number by asking eight questions — is its service documentation complete, is it designed to be field-repaired, can its faults be seen, how fast is it restored, are its parts available, is its support commitment and network real, does it meet that commitment in practice, and how long will it stay supportable — and awarding integer points for each. The points sum to a category total of 0–55. What a robot can earn is bounded by how well its evidence is substantiated: public documents alone reach the Unverified ceiling, a manufacturer evidence pack reaches the Verified ceiling, and a witnessed demonstration reaches the Certified ceiling. The category rewards serviceability that is designed in and shown, not merely asserted, and it reuses the records operators already keep (ISO 14224:2016 maintenance events, IEC 62402:2019 obsolescence declarations) so that adoption is a mapping, not new testing.

1 Scope

1.1 This Standard defines, for the serviceability-and-support intrinsic category: what the category measures (Clause 4); the scoring basis (Clause 5); the eight criteria SV-1…SV-8 with their point ladders and tier ceilings (Clause 6); the evidence admissible at each tier (Clause 7); the determination procedure (Clause 8); a worked example (Clause 9); and the assessor checklist (Clause 10).

1.2 The category shall be assessed at one of three tiers — Unverified, Verified, Certified — and each criterion states the maximum points reachable at each tier. The category tier is the tier whose evidence bar the assessed evidence meets (Clause 8). An Application Rating tier shall not exceed the Intrinsic Rating tier.

1.3 This Standard excludes category weighting and aggregation into the Intrinsic Rating (VRS-GEN-005 §6), sector re-weighting (the sector -201 protocols), and the evidence-grade definitions (VRS-GEN-012). It measures how quickly and dependably the model returns to service when it fails and how long it remains supportable; the frequency of failure and the resulting availability are measured by reliability (VRS-GEN-102). Restoration time is defined here and consumed by VRS-GEN-102 as an availability input only; it is not re-scored there. This Standard does not itself assign the Intrinsic Rating.

2 Normative references

• VRS-GEN-001, Vocabulary and Terminology — robot and dependability terms.
• VRS-GEN-005, Intrinsic Rating — Methodology — point aggregation, tiers, cold-start parity and the company-wide fallback rule (§6).
• VRS-GEN-009, Robot Risk Passport and Registry Schema — the record that carries the category result (Clause 8).
• VRS-GEN-012, Evidence Grades and Data Requirements — evidence kinds and the tier evidence bars.
• IEC 60050-192:2015, International Electrotechnical Vocabulary — Part 192: Dependability (maintainability, MTTR, mean down time, maintenance-support-performance definitions).
• IEC 61703:2016, Mathematical expressions for reliability, availability, maintainability and maintenance support terms — mean repair time, mean down time, logistic delay.
• IEC 60706-2:2006, Maintainability of equipment — Part 2: Maintainability requirements and studies during the design and development phase — active corrective maintenance time basis.
• IEC 60300-3-14:2024, Dependability management — Supportability and support — supportability attribute and maintenance-support framework.
• ISO 14224:2016 (corrected 2016-10-01), Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment — repair-event taxonomy and the reused maintenance-record evidence lane.
• IEC 62402:2019, Obsolescence management — end-of-support / support-horizon declaration lane.

3 Terms and definitions

Terms per VRS-GEN-001, IEC 60050-192:2015 and IEC 60300-3-14:2024 (maintainability, supportability, maintenance support). Locally:

• repair event — a completed corrective maintenance action restoring a failed unit to its function (ISO 14224:2016), the counting unit for the restoration-time criterion (SV-4).
• restoration time MTTR — the mean restoration time per critical repair event, from failure detection to return-to-service, in hours, comprising active repair time (IEC 60706-2:2006) and logistic delay (IEC 61703:2016 mean down time).
• parts lead time — the logistic delay from a confirmed parts requirement to parts on-site, in days (IEC 61703:2016 logistic delay).
• field-replaceable module — a module a manufacturer declares replaceable in the field by an operator or technician with common tools (the FRU list of SV-2).
• support horizon — the time from the assessment date to the manufacturer’s declared end-of-support date for the model (IEC 62402:2019 declaration; SV-8).
• tier — the evidence stringency at which the category is assessed: Unverified (public evidence only), Verified (manufacturer evidence pack examined), Certified (behaviour witnessed).
• ceiling — the maximum points a criterion can award at a given tier; points earned are capped at the ceiling of the assessed tier.
• evidence bar — the minimum evidence a criterion requires before any points are awarded; below it the criterion scores 0.
• company-wide fallback — where model-specific evidence is unavailable, the substitute points a criterion allows from manufacturer-wide evidence (VRS-GEN-005 §6); marked in the criterion row.
• certificate rung — a ladder step earned by a publicly verifiable third-party certificate or mark in lieu of a witnessed demonstration.

4 What this category measures

4.1 The category measures the model’s restoration behaviour and supportability under real duty — service documentation, field-repairability, fault visibility, restoration speed, parts logistics, support commitment and coverage, support responsiveness achieved, and support horizon — bounded by the evidence that substantiates each claim.

4.2 It measures both design and evidence and record: whether the model is documented and built to be serviced and diagnosed (SV-1, SV-2, SV-3), what restoration time and parts availability actually are (SV-4, SV-5), what support is committed and delivered (SV-6, SV-7), and how long the model will remain supportable (SV-8). A declared serviceable design that is only asserted is measured at the Unverified ceiling; the observed repair record and the binding support declaration are measured at higher tiers. A criterion is scored only to the tier its evidence supports.

4.3 The category shall be assessed at model granularity (manufacturer + model + declared major variant). Repair events and support arrangements shall not be pooled across models that differ in serviceability-relevant hardware or support arrangements unless the manufacturer declares them one model for serviceability purposes and evidence supports that declaration.

5 Scoring basis

5.1 The category score shall be the sum of integer points awarded across the eight criteria SV-1…SV-8 (Clause 6). The maximum is 55 points. There is no restoration-time or parts-lead formula and no statistical blend; the point range of each criterion sizes its importance. Aggregation of this total into the Intrinsic Rating, tier rules and the cold-start parity and company-wide fallback rules are defined once in VRS-GEN-005 §6 and are not restated here.

5.2 Each criterion awards points against a ladder of rungs, highest first, decidable by inspection, measurement, test or documented evidence (VRS-GEN-002 §7.1). The assessor shall award the highest rung the evidence supports.

5.3 Each criterion states three ceilings — Unverified, Verified, Certified. Points earned shall be capped at the ceiling of the tier at which the criterion’s evidence is assessed. A criterion may reach a higher tier than another; the category tier is recorded per Clause 8.

5.4 Each criterion states an evidence bar. Where the bar is not met the criterion scores 0; no evidence is 0 points, never a null or a discard.

5.5 A criterion marked not applicable by class for the model’s form (Clause 6 Applicability row) is excluded from the score and from the totals; the reachable maximum is reduced accordingly and recorded (Clause 8). For the serviceability category all eight criteria apply to all classes.

5.6 Where a criterion offers a company-wide fallback, manufacturer-wide evidence may earn the stated fallback points when model-specific evidence is unavailable (VRS-GEN-005 §6); the substitution shall be recorded. Numeric thresholds inside a rung that carry (prior) are launch-edition values that change only through the calibration data twin, never in this document.

6 Criteria

6.0 Summary. Points and tier ceilings per criterion; totals reproduce by addition.

6.1 SV-1 Service documentation quality (0–6)

6.2 SV-2 Field-replaceable design (0–10)

6.3 SV-3 Diagnostics and fault visibility (0–6)

6.4 SV-4 Restoration time (MTTR, critical repairs) (0–8)

6.5 SV-5 Parts availability and lead time (0–8)

6.6 SV-6 Support SLA and service-network coverage (0–6)

6.7 SV-7 Support responsiveness achieved (0–6)

6.8 SV-8 Support horizon and end-of-life policy (0–5)

7 Evidence by tier

7.1 Unverified. The assessor works only from evidence anyone can obtain without the manufacturer’s cooperation: the public service manual, preventive-maintenance schedule and diagnostics guide (SV-1, SV-3), the published field-replaceable-unit list (SV-2), operator reports of restoration times (SV-4), a public parts catalogue or parts store (SV-5), published support terms and service plans (SV-6), and the public end-of-support or obsolescence declaration (SV-8). Each criterion’s Unverified ceiling is the most an honest reading of such evidence can earn; the category tier is Unverified. SV-7 has no public path and its ceiling rests on the Verified service-log figure.

7.2 Verified. The assessor additionally examines a manufacturer evidence pack: the full service documentation set (SV-1), the module list with its swap procedures and declared times (SV-2), the diagnostics documentation (SV-3), the repair record with restoration times (SV-4), the parts catalogue with a lead-time record (SV-5), the service-level agreement with a coverage map (SV-6), the service-log adherence figure (SV-7), and the support/obsolescence declaration (SV-8). Verified ceilings apply only to criteria whose pack items are present and examined; the category tier is Verified.

7.3 Certified. The assessor witnesses the declared behaviour: a battery and one further module swap performed and timed against the declared times (SV-2), and diagnostics shown live on the robot’s own console (SV-3). The documentary and record criteria (SV-1, SV-4, SV-5, SV-6, SV-7, SV-8) carry their Certified points from the Verified evidence. The category tier is Certified.

7.4 Certificate rung. Where a criterion allows a publicly verifiable third-party certificate or mark in lieu of a witnessed demonstration, an artefact identified by registrar entry or certificate number earns the stated rung; an unverifiable mark shall not.

7.5 Company-wide fallback. Where a criterion offers a company-wide fallback (SV-4 → 6, SV-5 → 6, SV-7 → 4) and model-specific evidence is unavailable, manufacturer-wide records — a company repair record, a company achieved-lead-time record, or a company-wide service-log adherence figure — earn the stated fallback points (VRS-GEN-005 §6); the substitution shall be recorded per Clause 8. Parent-company evidence is admissible on the same basis where the manufacturer is a declared subsidiary.

7.6 Support-horizon watch. A support horizon (SV-8) that will lapse within the assessment edition’s validity shall be flagged as an obsolescence watch item (VRS-GEN-004 review); the flag records a finance recoverability and residual-value signal and does not itself change the awarded points.

8 Determination procedure

Step 1 — Fix the tier and applicability. Record the tier at which each criterion is assessed (Clause 7) and, per 5.5, the set of any not-applicable criteria; for the serviceability category all eight apply.

Step 2 — Award points. For each criterion, the assessor shall award the highest ladder rung the evidence supports (Clause 6) and shall cap the award at the ceiling of that criterion’s assessed tier (5.3). Where the evidence bar is not met, the award shall be 0 (5.4). Numeric rung thresholds marked (prior) are read as written; they are not recomputed here.

Step 3 — Record substitutions. Where a company-wide fallback is used (SV-4, SV-5, SV-7), record the substitution and the fallback points (7.5).

Step 4 — Sum. The category score shall be the sum of the capped per-criterion points. With no not-applicable criteria the reachable maximum is 55; otherwise it is 55 minus the ranges of the excluded criteria, and this reachable maximum shall be recorded alongside the score.

Step 5 — Record the tier reached. The category tier is the lowest tier among the criteria that determined the score (a score resting on any Unverified criterion is an Unverified-tier result).

Step 6 — Output and passport binding. Record, for the model’s Robot Risk Passport serviceability-category record (VRS-GEN-009): the category score, the per-criterion points, the ceiling reached and tier for each criterion, the not-applicable set and reachable maximum, the company-wide substitutions, and the support-horizon watch flag, so that an underwriter or lender can reproduce and audit the score from the passport alone. The per-criterion points carry the business-interruption severity, recoverability, residual-value and obsolescence loss drivers: restoration time and parts availability (SV-4, SV-5) size the outage-duration severity an insurer prices as a business-interruption sub-limit or waiting-period deductible and a lender reads into a debt-service-coverage covenant; support commitment and responsiveness (SV-6, SV-7) size recoverability; and the support horizon (SV-8) is an obsolescence and residual-value signal a lender reads into the residual-value curve, LTV and end-of-term covenant. Failure frequency and availability are the drivers of reliability (VRS-GEN-102) and shall not be inferred from this score.

9 Worked example (fictional model)

“Northline AMR-7”, a warehouse AMR, assessed at the Verified tier: a manufacturer evidence pack is examined but no behaviour is witnessed. All eight criteria apply (reachable maximum at Verified = 49). The pack shows full service documentation, a field-replaceable-module list with swap procedures and times, diagnostics documentation, a repair record with a mean restoration time near 15 h, a parts catalogue with a committed lead time under 10 days, a service-level agreement with a ≤ 24 h numeric response commitment but service presence in only some of the regions where the model is sold, a service-log adherence figure of 0.92, and an end-of-support declaration roughly 33 months out.

The serviceability-category total is 36 of a reachable 49 at the Verified tier. Arithmetic: 6 + 6 + 4 + 4 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 1 = 36. Three effects are worth reading. Documentation, field-repairability and parts (SV-1, SV-2, SV-5) are strong, but two of the top rungs are unreachable at this tier by construction: SV-2 rung 10 needs a witnessed, timed module swap and SV-3 rung 6 needs diagnostics shown live on the console — both are Certified-tier steps, so the model would have to be assessed at the Certified tier to earn them. The binding weakness is SV-8: an end-of-support date only ~33 months out sits below the 5-year rung and earns 1 point, and it is flagged as an obsolescence watch item (7.6) — the finance recoverability and residual-value signal that the strong repair and parts picture alone would understate. No company-wide fallback was used (model-specific repair, parts and service-log evidence were present), and the not-applicable set is empty. The score, per-criterion points, and tier and ceiling reached for each criterion are recorded to the passport (Step 6).

10 Assessor checklist

• [ ] Model granularity confirmed and repair events / support arrangements not improperly pooled (4.3).
• [ ] Assessment tier fixed per criterion; not-applicable set recorded (Step 1); reachable maximum recorded.
• [ ] SV-1 service documentation scored against the ladder.
• [ ] SV-2 field-replaceable design scored; FRU list declared (evidence bar); witnessed swap only at Certified.
• [ ] SV-3 diagnostics and fault visibility scored; live-console rung only at Certified.
• [ ] SV-4 restoration time scored; repair record present (evidence bar); (prior) thresholds read as written.
• [ ] SV-5 parts availability and lead time scored; catalogue or support-plan coverage exists (evidence bar).
• [ ] SV-6 support SLA and coverage scored as one ladder from the two facts (commitment, coverage).
• [ ] SV-7 support responsiveness scored; SLA exists (evidence bar); no public path (Unverified ceiling 4).
• [ ] SV-8 support horizon and EOL policy scored; horizon-lapse flagged as an obsolescence watch item (7.6).
• [ ] Company-wide substitutions recorded (Step 3; 7.5).
• [ ] Each award capped at the assessed-tier ceiling (5.3); no-evidence criteria scored 0, never null (5.4).
• [ ] Score, per-criterion points, tier and ceiling reached, and horizon watch flag recorded to the passport (Step 6).

Bibliography

• IEC 60050-192:2015, International Electrotechnical Vocabulary — Part 192: Dependability (maintainability, MTTR, mean down time, maintenance-support-performance terms).
• IEC 61703:2016, Mathematical expressions for reliability, availability, maintainability and maintenance support terms (mean repair time, mean down time, logistic delay).
• IEC 60706-2:2006, Maintainability of equipment — Part 2: Maintainability requirements and studies during the design and development phase (active corrective maintenance time).
• IEC 60300-3-14:2024, Dependability management — Supportability and support (supportability attribute and maintenance-support framework).
• ISO 14224:2016 (corrected 2016-10-01), Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries — Collection and exchange of reliability and maintenance data for equipment (repair-event taxonomy).
• IEC 62402:2019, Obsolescence management (end-of-support / support-horizon declaration).

Change history