Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance

Cycles or Time Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss whether we should use time or number of cycles or total time a product has been available for use. Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss a question from a listener on whether it’s better to use time or cycles as a reliability metric. Topics include: As with most of our discussions, the decision to use cycles or total time depends on the type of system you are measuring. In pumps, valves, and other mechanical systems, the time between use can significantly affect wear and fatigue damage as seals and bearings lubrication may evaporate or its viscosity changes with temperature. Using an electro-mechanical system continuously and not having many on-off cycles results in different mechanical wear effects versus using the system once daily.  Starting a warm car engine is much less stressful and damaging than starting an engine after it has cooled down. The same is valid with electronics assemblies, especially in power electronics. Many products can log the cycles and total power on time, which differentiates between cycling and frequency of processes or on-off cycles. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes 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. The post SOR 916 Cycles or Time appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Creating Reliability Awareness Abstract Chris and Fred discuss how to help me, you and the people around us more aware of reliability (and reliability engineering)? Good question! Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss how we go about creating reliability awareness in an organization. The answer isn’t always a webinar. And the answer has to include management and decision-makers and make it stick! Topics include: The issue is motivation (not awareness). Should you need to be aware of what the issues are, what options are available to address them, and so on? None of this works if people aren’t motivated. So you need to start by explaining how reliability engineering solves problems (not just product failures). Which has the cool benefit of reducing time to market, money spent on crises during production, and so on. It starts with leaders. They need to be the people who are the most motivated (and aware) of what reliability engineering can do. If they aren’t interested in turning up … you are wasting your time. Don’t blame suppliers. Everything starts with you. If all you want to talk about to your suppliers is budget, schedules, milestones, payment deadlines, qualification tests, and the rest, then you are practically forcing them to only be aware of these things. If you show that you aren’t aware of reliability as a customer, it will invariably be because you focused on everything else that is in the contract that you prefer to talk about. And on it goes. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 915 Creating Reliability Awareness appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Required to Use MIL-HDBK 217? Abstract Chris and Fred discuss Military Handbook 217 Version F for the ‘Reliability Prediction of Electronic Equipment’ or MIL-HDBK 217F … and why being forced to use it is borderline evil. Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss MIL-HDBK 217F contains lots of estimates of failure rates of different types of electronic components (tantalum capacitors, surface-mounted resistors and so on). Which was released in 1991 (i.e. … a long time ago) and is nothing but best guesses by faceless people. So what happens when customers demand you use it? Bad stuff. Topics include: It makes your system less reliable. True story. If a customer demands you use MIL-HDBK 217F, then you are essentially forced to use the types of components in those handbooks that have the best failure rate. But the pecking order for today’s electronic components has changed remarkably (remember that MIL-HDBK 217F came out in 1991). So there are lots of manufacturers who knowingly take out more reliable components and replace them with components that have a better failure rate in MIL-HDBK 217F. Madness. It makes you stop thinking about reliability. Looking at you defense and governmental customers. Instead of you actually learning about what you need to look for in the products your suppliers give you, you just want a number that you can put in a report. So you essentially tell your suppliers that no matter how hard you work on the quality and reliability of your components, they will always be assigned the same arbitrary, outdated number. Lots of madness. Where did the numbers found in MIL-HDBK 217F come from? There is no formal answer to this question. But industry insiders know that it is based on the precious few companies (perhaps as low as five) who were willing to share their reliability data (without knowing how robust these numbers were). All the gaps were filled in by historical military data dating back decades (to the 1960s). So do you want to use MIL-HDBK 217F to estimate smartphone or desktop computer reliability based on an ad hoc smattering of data that was put together before anyone knew these products were even feasible? Incredible amount of madness. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 914 Required to Use MIL-HDBK 217? appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Using DFR Tools Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss using Design for Reliability (DFR) for reliability development of a new product. Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss the use of DFx, being design for tests, design for manufacturing and design for reliability and the basics of good designs. Topics include: There are many CAD tools that have existed, such as SPICE for circuit analysis, that have been improved significantly over the decades. There are also powerful multi-physics software packages that can simulate environmental stresses on designs that can be applied before actual hardware is built. “All models are wrong, some are useful” a quote from George Box is true about the CAD models in that the values used are averages of well manufactured components and do not account for the manufacturing variations or variations of the same component from different vendors. It is important to document the weaknesses found in development of a new product to prevent future design weaknesses in the next iteration of the product or a new product to become more efficient in reliability development. Companies that do frequent reo0rganizations can make this very difficult to transfer the lessons learned to a new reliability team. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes 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. The post SOR 913 Using DFR Tools appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Using Outside Labs Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss the use and tradeoffs of using external environmental testing and failure analysis labs versus having in-house equipment Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss the advantages and drawbacks of a independent test and or failure analysis lab, versus stetting up an internal lab. Topics include: Companies that are going to be using environmental stress for reliability development for current and future products have an exponential value of having and internal test lab over trying to use a remote or external test lab. External test labs for failure analysis may have more advantages in that the lab can do SEM imaging and component cross-sectioning with experienced FA engineers familiar  with component failure physics. Being able to have access to the multiple design engineers when you have an internal lab and are able to show engineers and reproduce product weaknesses under stress makes it much easier to improve the weak links in the product. Standard long duration tests, such as a week long test at 85C and 85% RH are the  pass-fail tests that are there are more good reasons to send to external labs. HALT testing to limits requires continuous monitoring and observation during the testing, and that it is critical to have engineers, and maybe several depending on the complexity of the device, to be able to isolate a weakness when found. Some products in HALT  that are robust and are as strong as the fundamental limit of technology can show and sometimes surprise engineers how much actual margin is possible, setting a new safe stress benchmark for accelerated stress testing. Some specialized testing, such as dust or salt spray, would most likely be best done at an external lab. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes 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. The post SOR 912 Using Outside Labs appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Dealing with Data Abstract Philip and Fred discuss the first basic steps when confronted with a pile of data. What do you do with a stack of data – can you make any sense of this – please? Can you believe the analysis results? Designing systems to capture the data you need, not the data you have. How do you work with less than perfect failure information? What happens when we mix end of life data with functional failure data – when do we “informatively censor” and how do we treat this type of data? Interwoven life renewal data and asset failure – how do we “see” missing data? Deploying the Reliability Performance Index (RpK) – how to adapt Statistical Process Control topics (SPC) Reliability. What is Integrated Process Control (IPC), Key Input Variables (KIV) and Key Output Variables (KOV)? What is an Asset failure? How to manage data from our CMMS or ERP system – how to deal with data sets with only replacement events? Key Points Join Philip and Fred as they discuss these great topics which include: Consider the source and collection method Is the data fit for purpose? Does it match the intent of your analysis software? What sections of data are missing? Separating clerical push the button tasks from the analysis steps where you need a brain. Consider what we are trying to learn and need to know Plot the data – dot plots, histograms, etc. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 911 Dealing with Data appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Consumable Product Reliability Abstract Chris and Fred discuss how to approach reliability objectives and testing for consumable elements of a product or system. Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss how to deal with consumable product reliability … that is the bits of your system that aren’t ‘components’ or ‘subsystems’ and are like fuel to your constantly degrading system. What is the reliability of these things? Topics include: Consumables either work or they don’t (usually). Think of things like gaskets, batteries, lubricants, glues and bonding agents. These are often forgotten when it comes to system reliability analysis. But if your system fails when a consumable stops doing what it is supposed to do before you think it should … then you have to place consumables into your system reliability model. Some consumables have a shelf life – which we can treat like reliability. Some people call this ‘shelf-life’ reliability, or ‘ageing.’ Whatever you call it, what happens to your consumable while it is sitting on a shelf (or a shipping container in a tropical environment) before you put it into your system also needs to be thought of. What can we do without time to failure data? Consumables can be a lot easier to deal with when it comes to more complex components. For example, we usually have a pretty good idea of how we need to store glue in order for it to be ‘sticky’ when you use it. And suppliers are often able to give you shelf-life guidelines that help you keep track of that bottle of glue while it sits on your shelf (in perhaps a controlled environment). The easy thing to do is to assume that your consumables are ‘perfect.’ If failure of a consumable costs you money, then it is a reliability concern. … and understand what failure is. Does your smart lock ‘fail’ if the batteries run flat? … or does it fail if the batteries run flat with you getting no warning? So you absolutely need to take consumables into consideration for your system. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 910 Consumable Product Reliability appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Assumptions and Analysis Abstract Philip and Fred discuss a fundamental element of all statistical analysis. Key Points Join Philip and Fred as they discuss Topics include: Every analysis or model has assumptions – understand them first Check the assumptions Assumptions are not true because we wish they were 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 909 Assumptions and Analysis appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Why is Reliability a Process? Abstract Carl and Fred discuss the process of reliability, which also happens to be the name of their new book. They answer the question “why is reliability a process”? and discuss what happens if reliability is only approached as a series of methods. Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss the process steps to attaining high reliability and the principles behind the steps. Topics include: Is there a set formula for achieving reliability? What will influence decisions to add the most value? What will guide the team to make the best products? Everything in life is a process; cooking is a process Stepping back and determining the specific steps to achieve reliability Measure how well you achieve your reliability goals Each step in the 6-step process to achieve high reliability requires knowing the principles behind the step. People who take the time to learn the process of reliability will do well Always ask why you are doing a method or step Passing a test vs understanding why you are testing There is a place for standards, but they have limitations; you need to know the principle behind the standard There is no “bulletproof” standard The process of learning is making and learning from mistakes If you are a mentor or instructor, don’t just tell your student what to do, ask them what to do and why. Always begin with the vision for where you are headed Fred and Carl discussed the possibility of hosting a webinar on “the process of reliability” with an interactive forum, encouraging lost of questions. Price of entry is bring one question. 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 908 Why is Reliability a Process? appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

How Root is the Cause? Abstract Carl and Fred discuss the broad subject of identifying root causes and how deep to go.  It’s not as simple as getting to the “root.” Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they share experiences in root cause analysis and how it is applied in various reliability engineering methods. Topics include: There is no single method for identifying root cause; it depends on the analysis being used. Root cause for Design FMEA goes down to the design deficiency level; whereas root cause for Supportability FMEA goes to the maintenance-actionable level Ask: at what level is it appropriate to take action? Fix problems now, and systemically, both Some root cause analyses continue to the human level, ask: what is the human system and how does human error contribute to the root cause? The level of the analysis should be agreed on before beginning What about multiple causes, is there more than one root? Is the human deficiency part of the root cause for Design FMEA? Ask: where are you going to take action? what part of our process enabled this to occur? Eight Disciplines (8D), step 4 is determine, identify, and verify root causes Severity and occurrence are both part of risk analysis Don’t merely blame the supplier or operator The root cause needs to be something you can remedy One of aspects of root cause is to ask if resources are available to fix the cause 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. Download Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 907 How Root is the Cause? appeared first on Accendo Reliability.