This one made me scratch my head and wonder. Did I read this right?

A reader sent me an excerpt of a document found on Vicor’s site.

“Reliability is quantified as MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) for repairable product and MTTF (Mean Time To Failure) for non-repairable product. A correct understanding of MTBF is important. A power supply with an MTBF of 40,000 hours does not mean that the power supply should last for an average of 40,000 hours. According to the theory behind the statistics of confidence intervals, the statistical average becomes the true average as the number of samples increase. An MTBF of 40,000 hours, or 1 year for 1 module, becomes 40,000/2 for two modules and 40,000/4 for four modules…”

[Read more…]

Extend Your FMEA Process with Mechanisms

One of the issues I’ve had with failure modes and effects analysis is the focus on failure modes.

The symptoms that the customer or end user will experience are important. If a customer detects that the product has failed, that is a failure. The FMEA process does help us to identify and focus on the important elements of a design that improve the product reliability. That is all good.

The issue is that the FMEA process doesn’t go far enough to really aid the team in focusing on what action to take when addressing a failure mode. The process does include the discussion of the causes of the failure mode. The causes are often the team members’ educated opinions on what is likely to cause the failure mode. Often the description of a cause is a failed part, faulty code, or faulty assembly.

Generally, the discussion of causes is vague.

[Read more…]

To make informed decisions, you need information.

To form conclusions, you need evidence and a touch of logic.

To discover patterns, you need data.

In each of these cases, and others, we often start with data. The data we have on hand, or can quickly gather.

We organize data into tables, summarize data into reports, display them in dashboards, and analyze the results to inform decisions. [Read more…]

Having the technical and business skills is not sufficient to be a good reliability engineer.

You must also work with other people. With your peers, across the management team, with suppliers, contractors, and customers.

The ability to work well with others is often complex and situational. Being aware of a few basic skills will allow you to learn and improve. Prette and Prette define social competence as the social skills:

that meet the different inter-personal demands in the workplace in order to achieve the goals, preserve the well-being of the staff and respect the rights of each other.

A. Del Prette e Z. A. P. Del Prette, Psicologia das relações interpessoais: vivências para o trabalho em grupo, Vozes, Petrópolis, 2001.

[Read more…]

Knowing how to estimate sample size or create a Weibull plot is not enough today.

Just having technical skills, while essential, is not sufficient.

Having a master of business administration (MBA) may be helpful, and it is not required; knowing the warranty and brand cost per failure is essential.

You also need to know which analysis to conduct and how it fits into the larger program and organization, plus how it impacts your customers. You also need to understand the business side of your work. [Read more…]

The fundamental technical skills, as I see it, have to include statistics and root cause analysis skills. This skill set is one of three broad areas introduced in the article, What Makes the Best Reliability Engineer?

I would say these are the minimum technical skills for a good reliability engineer. Able to calculate sample size requirements, understand a dataset, and correctly determine the root causes of a failure. [Read more…]

Recently heard from a reader of NoMTBF. She wondered about a supplier’s argument that they meet the reliability or MTBF requirements. She was right to wonder.

Estimating reliability performance a new design is difficult.

There are good and better practice to justify claims about future reliability performance. Likewise, there are just plain poor approaches, too. Plus there are approaches that should never be used.

[Read more…]

Why Do Reliability Testing

Reliability testing is expensive. The results are often not conclusive.

Yet we spend billions on environmental, accelerated, growth, step stress and other types of reliability tests. We bake, shake, rattle and roll prototypes and production units alike. We examine the collected data in hopes of glimpsing the future. [Read more…]

Formal education (master’s or Ph.D) or design/manufacturing engineering experience?

Where do you look when hiring a new reliability engineer? Do you head to U of Maryland or other university reliability program to recruit the top talent? Or, do you promote/assign from within? Where do yo find the best reliability people? [Read more…]

Here’s a simple illustration of how MTBF oversimplifies data, concealing essential information.

By convention, we tend to use MTBF for repairable data. That is fine.

You may also be aware of my dislike for the use of MTBF, for many different reasons. If you find yourself suggesting your organization, customer, industry or whomever to stop using MTBF, you may want to use this simple example to illustrate the ‘value’ of MTBF. [Read more…]

I was preparing to write this article and wondered how many search hits would appear for MTBF? So, opened Google and did an MTBF search. It is a common if misunderstood, acronym.

Beyond the 5,200,000 Google search results, it was the first page results that got me thinking. Keep in mind that Google often serves up a combination of what it thinks you are seeking and which sites have been useful for others.

Let’s break down what you find when you do an MTBF search. [Read more…]

MTBF comes up a bit too often. When it does I have found rolling my eyes and arguing against using MTBF is not very effective.

So, what should a knowing reliability professional do instead?

Let’s explore four questions that you can ask that may help others find the value in no longer talking about MTBF. [Read more…]

Received a short question last week. The person writing seems to already know the answer, yet asked:

If we replace an item after a duration equal to the MTTF value, we would avoid failures, right?

Well, no, most likely not, was my response. What is your response? How would you answer this question? [Read more…]

We establish reliability goals and measure reliability performance.

They are not the same thing. Goals and measures, while related, are not the same nor serve the same purpose. [Read more…]