Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Fred Schenkelberg 2 Comments

The Derating & Safety Margin Manual

The Derating & Safety Margin Manual

Do you have one in your organization? Is it used regularly?

If not, your organization’s products are likely not as reliable as they should be. You are shipping products that are not as robust nor reliable as your customers deserve.

Derating and Safety Factors, defined earlier, provide a means to select components or create design features that have sufficient margin to accommodate variation in use and strength over time.

So why are these tools routinely ignored or given only fleeting attention?

Well, they are boring, they tend to add cost and weight to a product, and the calculations take data and time to accomplish.

Reliability is just one of many objectives for a development team and often is not the single most important objective. Thus the constraints of cost, time to market, or functional capability tend to consume the resources available.

Create System of Use for the Manual

One way to incorporate the use of design guidelines is to create reinforcing processes around the use and benefits of using the manual’s guidelines.

Initially, the process requires a few cases studies to show following the guidelines saves

  • total costs despite increased cost of components,
  • time to market by avoiding last minute redesign work,
  • and, product functionality by creating robust capability of each unit.

The idea is to celebrate those teams correctly deploying and using the manual. And building a set of ‘see it works here’ stories to share within the organization.

This build incentivizes to invest in meeting the design guidelines as the benefits become clearer.

A second system to reinforce the first is reviews and questions. We as design teams do what is measured. If we are only measured on time to market, despite understanding cost and reliability are important, we focus on time to market.

As with KPIs what we measure collectively and which measures dominant the focus matter.

Ensure the system of reviews, the questions asked and the measures tracked include the longer term results that include reliability performance.

Short term, too. At a design review simply do not focus only on the cost of the assembled components, include questions about reliability, durability, and lifecycle costs.

Derating and safety design guidelines are specific topics for review and discussion.

Did we, as a design team, meet every element of the guidelines?

Which elements of the design do not meet the guidelines and what is the impact? In short, is this the right decision?

Support with Appropriate Infrastructure

Regularly telling the story that using the guidelines is good for the customers and for the business is one step. Another is the tactical reinforcement of the expectation and review of the actual calculations and decision-making process.

Another element is the support of the ease of use of the guidelines.

Provide training and education support for anyone involved with the implementation of the guidelines.

Provide tools to determine tradeoffs between cost, time to market, customer satisfaction, etc. when meeting or not meeting the guidelines.

Provide visibility for the teams that achieve reliability objectives without heroic last minute or reactive measures.

Creating a set of guidelines for derating and safety margins is the easy part. Getting the manual off the shelf and into the design is not.

Senior management support certainly helps, yet alone is not sufficient. You need to create the reinforcing processes that encourage, check and reward implementation of the guidelines.


 

Further reading

Derating Value

Product Reliability Design Guidelines: The Design for Reliability Manual

 

Filed Under: Articles, Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics, on Product Reliability Tagged With: derating, safety

« Why Parametric Variation Can Lead to Failures and HALT Can Help
Deciding What Should Have Fault Tolerance »

Comments

  1. Hilaire Perera says

    February 11, 2016 at 3:39 PM

    Uprating is often possible because of the way electronic parts are designed and manufactured. The methods of uprating take into consideration the issues related to part testing and specification margins to assess the ability of the parts to operate over their target temperature range.

    The uprating assessment of a part determines the electrical functional capability of parts in their target application conditions. This determines whether a part “can work” in a given environment.
    However, to determine if a part “won’t fail” in the application environment, the reliability of the part needs to be determined for the application. The methods of determination of reliability can
    vary and may include assessment of manufacturers’ qualification test results, additional tests performed by the equipment manufacturers and virtual qualification. (Ref: CALCE Rating and Uprating of Electronic Parts, Chapter 3)

    Reply
  2. Fred Schenkelberg says

    February 12, 2016 at 9:53 AM

    Hi Hilaire, sure parts can be uprated, yet it generally comes at the expense of shorter lifetimes for the components. Just because it can work doesn’t mean it will work over the duration of interest. I do agree that understanding the tradeoff is key and means understsnding how the stresses applied impact the durability of a part.

    Cheers,

    Fred

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Article by Fred Schenkelberg
in the Musings series

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Articles

  • Risk Prioritization in FMEA – a Summary
  • What Are Best Practices for Facilitating Qualitative Assessments?
  • So, What’s Still Wrong with Maintenance
  • Foundation of Great Project Outcomes – Structures
  • What is the Difference Between Quality Assurance and Quality Control?

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.