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

Value of Certification Abstract Carl and Fred discussing a listener question about the value of certification in reliability engineering. Does it help one’s career advancement? Will it enhance one’s salary? What are the pros and cons? Does certification improve one’s prospects internationally? Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss the subject of training and certification in the field of reliability. Topics include: Some surveys show ASQ certification can increase income; question is whether this is causative or correlative. What is your objective for certification? If it is status or symbolic, that is not the best reason. If your objective for certification is to improve your understanding of the field and improve your value to your company or your clients, that is a good reason. What is your long-term career plan? Certification can be an excellent part of career plan. Value of certification overseas is dependent on the company and culture. Everything you do should have a reason. Same with certification. A long list of acronyms next to your name can be misinterpreted. 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 Related Topics SOR 496 The Value of a Certification(Opens podcast in a new browser tab) The post SOR 735 Value of Certification appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Can Organizations Change Abstract Greg and Fred discuss the increasing requirement for organizations to change. Key Points Greg Hutchins is the new podcast co-conspirator with Fred Schenkelberg. In our first joint podcast, join Fred and Greg as they talk about ‘Can Organizations Change’ in today’s uncertain times.  Listen up as they discuss: Today’s new normal – uncertainty and disruption. What organizations are changing. How organizations are adapting to uncertainty and disruption. As a newbie podcaster, Greg really wants your feedback.  He’s a believer of 1% daily improvement.  So, reach out to him. 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 Related Topics 7 Benefits a RAM Model can Bring to an Organization(Opens podcast in a new browser tab) The post SOR 734 Can Organizations Change appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Change Management with Humans Abstract Greg and Fred discuss the range of elements involved with change management. Key Points Join Fred and Greg in this first joint podcast on ‘Change Management with Humans.’  Fred is the quality and reliability guru.  Greg is a risk journeyman.  In these podcasts, we’re going to discuss the intersections and interventions of reliability, quality, and risk.  So, please join us. In this podcast, we’re discussing: Importance of people change management. How to communicate reliability and risk change management. Learn doable skills for engaging people to adapt new behaviors. Hard lessons learned around reliability change management. 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 Related Topics SOR 795 The Point of Your Role(Opens podcast in a new browser tab) The post SOR 733 Change Management with Humans appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Reliability Goals and Allocation Abstract Chris and Fred discuss reliability goals … and how we ‘allocate’ them to components and subsystems. This is really important, as subsystems and components are often built and designed by different designers or organizations. So how do we translate system-level goals to MEANINGFUL lower-level goals? Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss reliability goals and allocation. Getting reliability goals can be really challenging … mainly because it forces us to think and then draw some sort of a line in the sand! So how do we set RELIABILITY goals and then make these relevant to each part of your design team? Topics include: What is a reliability goal? Something that is unambiguous, objective, not ignored, not short cut or otherwise not dismissed as a ‘nice to have.’ A reliability goal is not complying with all standards and tests. The Blowout Prevent (BOP) on the Deepwater Horizon should be the final word on this. So a reliability goal needs to be some sort of characteristic particular to your product, system or service that represents what the user or customer wants. It is not what we have always done. It is not the reliability specification that is ‘as high as we can get it’ for our testing budget. It is something that matters. But there are some organizations that have no reliability goals … so why can’t I? Netflix (for example) focuses on continually trying to ‘break’ their system, analyze what went wrong, and then fix it. This sounds like ‘build-test-fix’ … which is almost always bad. Oh … and Netflix doesn’t have reliability goals – and yet they are one of the most reliable data networks there are. So if they don’t have goals, and all they do is ‘build-test-fix’ … why can’t we? The reason comes down to culture. Netflix is testing their system beyond what is ‘normal.’ They delete virtual instances, turn off data centers and do lots of other things which REALLY stresses their systems. They are continually looking for the weakest point of their system, even if that weakest point requires what might seem like ridiculous or ‘unreasonable’ stresses to get there. And their system (as of today) is actually ‘there’ when it comes to reliability performance. They are focusing on CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT as opposed to ‘build-test-fix’ until we pass a test. And then stop. These are two very different approaches. … are we there yet? This is a classic question we ask for ‘build-text-fix.’ That is, we keep ‘doing reliability stuff’ until we reach some sort of goal. The problem with this is that reliability decisions are most effective (and cheapest) when they are implemented early in the design. But … they can only be measured months or years later. This really slow feedback loop dooms most organizations, as it takes too long for designers to be aware if their decision was ‘good’ or not. Reliability Growth Testing (RGT) where the system is used in ‘at use conditions’ makes this issue really apparent. You need a ‘fully functional’ prototype to do RGT. By this stage, it is really expensive to change or improve reliability in design. So RGT often devolves into doing the least intrusive corrective action. But … you can track improvement in reliability. The other option is simply investing all your resources into making reliability happen as opposed to measuring reliability later on. This is always faster and cheaper. The key for success is …? A simple philosophy. Some organizations focus all their efforts on doing (proper) FMEAs. Others focus on using HALT to keep improving each generation of their product (sort of like Netflix). Successful organizations tend to have worked out which approach works best for them, and make sure that is deeply embedded in company culture. 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. SOR 732 Reliability Goals and AllocationChristopher Jacksonshare Social: Link: Embed: https://episodes.reliability.fm/sor/sor-732-reliabiity-goals-and-allocation.mp3 Download Audio RSS Related Topics SOR 492 Keeping Reliability Goals Relevant(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)

Easy to Ask Hard to Answer Abstract Chris and Fred discuss questions that are easy to ask … but hard to answer. And these questions are often hard to answer because the person asking the question hasn’t thought about the REAL question they are trying to answer. So how many samples do I need for everything to be OK??? Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss questions that are hard to ask but difficult to answer. This happens a lot in reliability engineering. Perhaps the most common question is … how many samples do I need to test? Good question. Actually … it isn’t. Topics include: What is the decision you are trying to inform? For example, if you are trying to test two candidate materials for an AMAZING new product … and your DECISION is only about selecting the best material, then you might not need many samples at all. Especially if one material is clearly superior to the other. We aren’t trying to estimate reliability to three decimal places. We are trying to work out which material we are going to use. How are you going to USE these samples? If we are trying to find out the probability of a tire lasting 40 000 km, one approach is to test sample tires for 40 000 km and work out how many have failed in the 40 000 km (or not). A much better approach is to test all samples until they fail. Let’s say you only test three tires, but they fail at 100 467, 98 629 and 98 756 km respectively. Do you need to test many more tires to know that there is a really good probability of tires lasting 40 000 km? … but what happens if you stop testing at 40 000 km and simply find out that the tree tires didn’t fail the test? Confidence is a measure of you … so what is it? Data analysis that investigates a random process (like failure) is inherently uncertain. That is why we see confidence bounds on many outputs. So what confidence do you need to make your decision? Hint … you can never get 100 % statistical confidence. … and how reliable is your product? If your product is REALLY, REALLY reliable, then you don’t need nearly as many samples to (for example) demonstrate that you meet your system requirements. But if your product is only JUST more reliable than the requirement, then you need LOTS of samples. What question do you WANT to hear? This is a big one. It is called bias. And when we have bias, we sometimes do whatever we can to pretend the answer we are hearing is not possible. Perhaps we say to those of us giving us these uncomfortable answers that ‘you need to PROVE it.’ Perhaps we don’t believe our subordinates and get a bunch of highly paid consultants. What is your (organization’s) bias? So … have you answered all these questions before you asked your ‘easy’ 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 731 Easy to Ask Hard to Answer appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

The Future of Reliability Abstract Carl and Fred discussing the future of the field of reliability engineering, including where we have been and where we are going. Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss how the field of reliability is changing and how this affects each of us. Topics include: The vital-few reliability methods that have been most useful The type of organization that best supports achieving reliability in design How reliability can integrate with model-based systems engineering What do we envision in the future, and which reliability methods will support the future vision? How our field is changing, and what we need to do to support the changes 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 Future of Reliability Engineering The post SOR 730 The Future of Reliability appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Unusual Reliability Applications Abstract Carl and Fred discussing unusual and interesting reliability projects that cross disciplines. Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss some of their more captivating and unique applications of reliability principles and methods. Topics include: Control systems in the field of evolutionary medicine. Examines the body of knowledge associated with control systems and applies to evolutionary biology and medicine to improve medical outcomes. Example: body temperature regulation FMEA applied to biological systems Beginning with requirements rather than symptoms Business processes: what is the process supposed to do? What other interesting applications have people encountered that cross disciplines? Application of reliability methods to amusement rides 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 Presentation: “Using FMEA to advance evolutionary biology research and application“ The post SOR 729 Unusual Reliability Applications appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

When a Proposal Fails Abstract Kirk and Fred discussing the challenge of getting a proposal for new testing (i.e HALT) accepted. Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss the many aspects of bringing a new approach to reliability development testing. Topics include: The many factors that are important to introducing a new test methodology depends on the stage of the companies product development, and their experience with field failures. The causes of failures for electronics manufacturers are rarely ever published so industry data on failure mechanisms that would be discovered in stress limit testing is not easily found. Even past product failures of your own company’s product can be difficult to find or access. If there is a history of warranty costs and evidence to show the causes of field failures, such as lose hardware connectors or solder defects, could have been precipitated and detected in a higher stress condition, then a business case of reduction of warranty costs tends to get managements attention if there is a good ROI. Some HALT stress evaluations do not require a HALT chamber. HALT is a methodology and a paradigm shift, not a chamber. 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 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 728 When a Proposal Fails appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

When to Stop Troubleshooting Abstract Kirk and Fred discussing the challenge of when to end efforts in troubleshooting a failure. Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss issues surrounding the efforts made to understand the root cause of a failure when they have had trouble recording this podcast. Topics include: In some cases the troubleshooting efforts removes or corrects the underlying cause, such a disconnecting a cable and then plugging it back in may clean off the contacts making an open connect closed again. Troubleshooting may require extensive monitoring and instruments, which may not be easily available, and access to other elements of a connected network or system that are not available such as the routers and servers in our podcast recording network. Both Fred and Kirk discuss both having a crystal manufacturing latent defect, which they had to determine whether it was a design or manufacturing issue. Low cost devices may never be sent back to the manufacturer and that makes development testing and in-house testing much more necessary. Every component manufacturer is trying to reduce their costs of manufacturing and sometimes the resulting changes may cause failures in your application among the many users of that device. 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 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 727 When to Stop Troubleshooting appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Statistics, Mechanisms, Facilitation Abstract Chris and Fred discuss how statistics, mechanisms, and other technical words that come from ‘reliability engineering’ in contrast to softer terms like ‘facilitation.’ This comes from discussions Chris has had during his Statistical Process Control (SPC) course that he has run previously. So what is the big deal about these words? Well … you can know everything there is to know about statistics and failure mechanisms – but if you can’t make things better then it is all for nothing! Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss how we actually go about making things that are high reliability and high quality. Topics include: Where did this talk come from? SPC. SPC stands for ‘Statistical Process Control.’ SPC is all about identifying statistical changes in a process. This could be manufacturing components or parts. It could be baking bread. It could be any sequence of events that are intended to create some sort of product. And these products usually need to comply with some specifications to be ‘good’ or ‘high’ quality. SPC is all about identifying when your system is ‘out of control’ as early as possible before you start making ‘low-quality products.’ What is ‘in control?’ ‘In control’ refers to processes that are behaving as you expect. There is nothing weird going on. There is still natural variation, but this variation is acceptable and understood. When the variation or average value of a character starts to change and you don’t know why … then your process is ‘out of control.’ And the earlier you can identify when your process is ‘out of control’ the more time you have to bring it back in control before the specifications are violated. And a process can be ‘in control’ even if it varies … as long as you know why. For example, a component length might slowly increase as the blade in the tool of the production line that is manufacturing wears out. But if that blade is replaced every two weeks and the component length is always in specification … great! This is still in control. What is ‘good’ and ‘bad’? Depends on the scenario. The mass of a loaf of bread can vary by up to 10 grams and be ‘OK.’ This is quite a bit of variation for loaves of bread that typically weigh 900 grams. But this amount of variation is not OK for the mirror of the Hubble telescope. SPC is all about trying to address an out of control process before your product becomes bad. But then comes working out what causes the ‘bad’ thing. Once we work out that something might be wrong, then we do things like Root Cause Analysis (RCA) to find the potential root causes. Not our favourite root causes. Not our gut feels. But a raft of potential causes that are based on FACILITATING a discussion that really harnesses our actual corporate knowledge. Sometimes gut feeling works. But when we get used to going with gut feel, and it doesn’t find the root cause, then we have blame, embarrassment, et cetera. This is never good. So go with (1) Statistics, (2) Mechanics and (3) Facilitation. Statistics can give us early warning that something is wrong. Understanding the mechanisms means that we research and truly know how things fail. And finally, we facilitate. We make sure that our collective efforts are combined in a systemic way as opposed to going with the gut or shooting from the hip … which is not a foolproof approach. 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 726 Statistics, Mechanisms, Facilitation appeared first on Accendo Reliability.