Bad History Challenge
Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss the situation where a we are trying to introduce a new methodology for reliability and a key player on the team that we have to win over says they tried it and it didn’t work.
- Almost any critical reliability development process, whether DFMEA, HALT, or modeling, can be poorly planned or executed, resulting in a bad outcome and leading to the dismissal of the new strategy before someone can try it at a new company.
- Companies with good field failure data and root cause analysis should be able to identify many of the causes of failure, such as loose screws or connectors causing failure, and how stress testing can stimulate detection in a HALT evaluation.
- HASS is an expensive process to use for the long term. HASS should be only initially during the early production stage for some products if they are made as robust as standard technology allows and the manufacturing processes are stable.
- Semantics can matter, and it could be a good idea to call a new method or process by a different name, even though it is fundamentally the same process, to overcome the resistance to change.
Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can join friends as they discuss reliability topics. Join us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches.
You can now purchase the most recent recording of Kirk Gray’s Hobbs Engineering 8 (two 4 hour sessions) hour Webinar “Rapid and Robust Reliability Development – 2022 HALT & HASS Methodologies Online Seminar” from this link.
Please click on this link to access a relatively new analysis of traditional reliability prediction methods article from the US ARMY and CALCE titled “Reliability Prediction – Continued Reliance on a Misleading Approach”
For more information on the newest discovery testing methodology here is a link to the book “Next Generation HALT and HASS: Robust design of Electronics and Systems” written by Kirk Gray and John Paschkewitz.