Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site
A listing in reverse chronological order of articles by:
This is the second session from the Annual Apex Ridge Reliability Seminar held in Boston.
The session focus was how to best use specialized testing technique outputs as effective program inputs. There are simple steps for hooking the information from the test data into the correct program management decision points.
Very often opportunities are missed in programs by aligning testing outputs with incorrect program phases. [Read more…]
How well can you describe the use conditions your product will experience?
How well do you need to know the use conditions?
For some situations, the environment for your product is assessable, others are not. For some situations, we guess the range of expected stresses, others we measure.
The design process and the myriad decisions that impact product reliability rely on characterized environmental stresses.
A great place to consolidate how and where customers will use your product (including the relevant stress factors) is in an environmental manual. [Read more…]
We just held the Annual Apex Ridge/NEHALT seminar, sponsored by Qualmark. We had a full house again which was great. This year’s seminar was in three sections.
The first section discussed the methodology for balancing reliability with other product goals during a development program.
The second session was on Reliability testing tools and how to use their outputs to steer program decisions and design improvement. The third session was on specialized HALT testing techniques. [Read more…]
A Crisis in the Home IT departmentIf you are the head of your home IT department, you may relate to this tale
Last night my wonderful wife Stacy was riddled with angst over the disruption of her binge watching a spy series, a mild crisis with our own IT hardware.
The cause of her disappointment was the failure of our new large screen Ultra High Definition (UHD) Smart TV to deliver a drama series with a reasonable picture and sound quality. [Read more…]
Finding solutions is reliability engineering too.
Have you noticed that finding solutions often requires just the right question, the proper framing of the issue, the query that reveals the problem and solution?
One of the best ways to lead a team and provide a focus on reliability performance is to ask the right questions.
Understanding objectives, risks, and failures is what we primarily do as reliability professionals. We work with teams to achieve or improve reliability performance.
We ask questions. [Read more…]
We all probably know Fred’s fight against the use of “MTBF” as a default measure of reliability.
And I concur. “MTBF” offers the least insight to product reliability. It offers little to the user in terms of realizing the benefits of reliability.
However, we all would like to see products that deliver more appealing benefits; and reliability is a key factor. But reliability is only part of the equation.
Technical performance is important.
So is price. So is appearance. So is delivery. So is the customer: different customers may see the world differently. And so may your competitors.
So, we can’t all adopt the same measurement for reliability. [Read more…]
Reliability goals or objectives are just a starting point.
You goals represent your target at one point in time.
At best they represent what your customers expect for reliability performance at one point in time.
When goals are set well, they anticipate what your customer expects when they receive your product. In a perfect world, you customer will find the reliability performance just a bit better than expected.
It’s not a perfect world. [Read more…]
This type of reliability may have different names. A quick search of a few references in my library and I didn’t find ongoing reliability testing, ORT, in any of them.
It does exist and you may have heard of it before or even use some form of ORT. Or not.
Ongoing reliability testing or ORT is the continued evaluation of your product typically using samples drawn from production. The testing evaluates the reliability performance of recent production units.
The focus is on finding anomalies or changes that may occur in the design, supply chain, or production process that significantly changes field reliability performance. [Read more…]
DFMEA’s definitely have a bad reputation as exercises that consume an enormous amount of time and unfortunately yield little value to the program.
And can be miserable to experience.
A quote from a customer “We aren’t going to do any more DFMEA’s because we feel a bit traumatized by the last round.”
I have also seen DFMEA’s be a cornerstone to a design program using its resources with surgical precision to improve the product.
I started to think about the differences between the ineffective and effective DFMEA’s. Here are some of the steps that I believe make the “good ones” GOOD. [Read more…]
A Bloomberg articles details the Takata airbag recall series of events. The line that caught my attention is:
…company documents suggesting that Takata executives discounted concerns from their own employees and hid the potential danger…
“Sixty Million Car Bombs: Inside Takata’s Airbag Crisis”, Susan Berfield, et.al. Bloomberg Business Week, posted June 2nd, 2016, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-06-02/sixty-million-car-bombs-inside-takata-s-air-bag-crisis
There are other examples where management doesn’t seem to listen when engineers raise concerns. Have we cried wolf too often? Has management gotten used to taken risks as a good business practice?
At times reliability risks are real and need to be clearly communicated. Let’s talk about how you can effectively get the message across. [Read more…]
This is the wheel of the Curiosity Rover after millions of rotations on Mars.
This is how I feel after I ask customers about legacy product performance. [Read more…]
If you look around you day to day you can see a lot of examples of reliability testing.
When you are at the hardware store and looking at new power tools, notice which have broken switches, triggers, handles. Many of us often just think it’s a defective one. But it’s not. It’s the weakest model of the bunch.
If all the models were put on display at similar times they have all been going through life cycle testing. Every person that walks by picks it up and pulls the trigger, flips the switches bangs it around a bit.
It’s getting its life cycle testing done right in front of you. The one with the broken features is the model with the shortest life. [Read more…]
Sigma, σ, is the Greek character we use to represent standard deviation. 6 σ represents the spread of data about the mean. For data with a normal distribution, 6 σ includes 99.7% of the data.
The 6 σ design approach incorporates knowledge of the variation that will occur within the design such that the design has is unlikely to fail.
According to Mikel J. Harry, the foundation of excellence in product quality rests on achieving six sigma product quality. [1] [Read more…]
In a single meeting, you may need to structure a reliability model, create estimates, outline test plans, and discuss a field failure. The breadth of tools and knowledge to be effective is staggering.
No two problems, questions, situations, or industries are the same. Thus, the solutions you provide must differ as well. If you enjoy a complete set of reliability engineering tools at your disposal, you are well situated to address any question.
The concept of derating is similar to the mechanical engineering concept of a stress–strength analysis.
The intent is to ensure that the selected component or the mechanical design has sufficient strength to withstand the expected applied stresses.
Components operating at or near their rated values have short lives. Consequently, the general practice is to use components for materials well below their rated values to extend the operating life of the items.
This is where derating comes into play. [Read more…]
