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

Warranty Analysis for Repairable Systems Abstract Chris and Fred discuss how we do warranty analysis … which usually means trying to understand how many things fail during a warranty period (before you need to start paying for it …) Where do you start? Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss warranty analysis … based on a question from a listener who wanted to know how we do it for a repairable system. So … how do we do it? We didn’t get a lot of specifics from the listener … so we had to ad lib a bit? Topics include: What are you trying to do? Don’t rush through this question. Are you trying to predict what fraction of products will fail in the warranty period. Or … do you have a warranty reliability target and instead want to learn how long it will take for your product’s reliability to drop to that level to find the warranty period. Or … are we on track? Or … are we having too many warranty failures and need to find out why? Or … something else? This let’s you know if your analysis is quantitative or qualitative. Do you need to know why something is failing more than it should … or what percentage of things you expect to fail. That’s a big deal. But what should our targets be? Well … we sometimes miss this as well! But it’s the first and most important bit. We have seen lots of organizations furiously (attempt) to analyze warranty reliability, but not really know what ‘good enough is.’ Have you ever asked your boss or leader why we are analyzing something, and they something like ‘just to get an idea of where we are at‘ but without them being able to tell you where we need to be? This is BAD. And the reason it is bad is that we might come up with a number and then decide if it is good (or not). This usually always results in us coming up with our own criteria to justify the outputs of our hard work. Instead … take the time to work out where you should be first (with minimal emotions, and lots of business planning) and then see if you are there or not. The truth not only hurts, but it also sets you free. 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 1031 Warranty Analysis for Repairable Systems appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Starting a Consultancy Abstract Dianna and Fred discuss starting a consultancy. Key Points Join Dianna and Fred as they discuss starting a consultancy. Interested in becoming a consultant? This episode dives into the realities of starting a consultancy. Listen to learn more about: the consulting career path, which is not always clear cut and involves a significant learning curve from being an employee to a business owner, requiring new skills and knowledge. how consultants need to be problem-solvers who can identify the root cause of a client’s issue and understand the business implications, not just treat the symptoms. why building a strong network, social profile, and online presence are crucial for attracting clients and establishing credibility in the competitive consulting landscape. 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 In this episode, Fred and Dianna discuss starting a consultancy, a topic prompted by a question from two individuals looking to start their own consultancy. They share their personal experiences and offer advice on the transition. The conversation highlights the many challenges that come with managing the administrative side of consulting, including navigating business licenses, taxes, and banking. They touch on different business structures, such as sole proprietorships and limited liability companies. There are also different types of consultants, which they describe. They address some of the less glamorous aspects of consulting, such as dealing with long payment cycles and a lack of benefits. However, they also point out that consulting can provide flexible work options and opportunities to learn about different industries and ways of doing things. There are two key pieces of advice: It is crucially important to network, build a social profile, and create a strong online presence to attract clients. They also underscore the need to be visible, such as through presenting papers at conferences, participating in committees, and building an email list or contact list. Act like consultants in your current roles, so you can gain experience and develop necessary skills. Fred's experience as an internal consultant at HP provided him with significant training in client interaction, problem-solving, and proposal writing, which he now applies in his consulting work. Dianna advises that people think of their internal customers as if they were external customers and start practicing. It can only help you today while also preparing you for a potential future career in consulting. The post SOR 1030 Starting a Consultancy appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Kirk and Fred explore the critical role of thermal HALT in uncovering signal integrity issues in high-speed digital electronics. They discuss how increasing bus speeds impact data transmission errors and the challenges posed by nanoscale engineering. The conversation highlights the importance of temperature in electronic systems, illustrated with a malfunction case study. Additionally, the two emphasize the need for collaborative learning and information sharing in the reliability engineering community to address gaps in current methodologies.

Dealing with Ongoing Changes Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss the challenge of adding changes to a product during the development process so that they can design and build the prototypes. Key Points Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss how companies are adding new features to stay competitive with market developments. Topics include: Automobiles, especially EVs, are excellent examples of the evolution of technology. They are increasingly complex and dependent on electronics. Product engineering changes after introduction to the marketplace are required for many reasons, such as when a component supplier discontinues a part and substitutes a new part. Testing the reliability of every change in a large manufacturing company is challenging. Sometimes, the simplest  designs are the most reliable and have the needed capabilities for most users. Many of today’s software applications have complex functional capabilities, yet most users do not need to access them. Engineering always has to deal with tradeoffs during each change in design or manufacturing and judgments about each risk. Many times, we have to make a fast decision on reliability risk based on experience, past field histories, and the collective knowledge of the engineering 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 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”. It is in the public domain, so please distribute freely. Trying to predict reliability for development is a misleading a costly approach. 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. 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 1028 Dealing with Ongoing Changes appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Executing the Plan Abstract Carl and Fred continue discussing the listener question about building an effective reliability program. After discussing some of the finer points about creating the reliability plan, the podcast focuses on execution of the reliability plan. Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss some of the finer points about building a good reliability program. In this case, the company already has a reasonably solid testing program, but needs to put more effort into reliability in design. Topics include: How to supplement testing with Design for Reliability tasks. Consider developing a reliability plan year by year: first year tasks, second year tasks, etc. The objective is not to build a large reliability team; the objective should be to implement good reliability practices into the organization. Embed reliability into engineering We want to create reliability, not jobs Look for internal “champions” in senior management. Get value from early wins. Implementing reliability in design requires building relationships. The key to successfully implementing a reliability plan is to involve the key stakeholders in the creation of the plan. The reliability plan needs to be executed as part of project management. There will be hurdles that come up. The plan needs to be adjusted, as needed. Participate in the engineering project team meetings. Be part of the engineering process. Reliability looks at system as a whole, in addition to the parts. How to influence engineering to create reliable designs. Be engaged. Helping engineering establish correct special product and process characteristics that enable high reliability. 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 1027 Executing the Plan appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Carl and Fred dive into the essentials of building a reliability program, emphasizing the need for a strategic team and essential tools like FMEA. They discuss overcoming challenges related to design for reliability, highlighting the importance of management support. Evaluating supplier reliability is also covered, pointing out lessons learned from major corporations. The hosts stress the significance of developing a tailored reliability plan and conducting gap assessments, ensuring a strong foundation for improving reliability practices.

Discover the essentials of vibration testing and its importance in product design. Learn how to consider real-world usage and customer interactions during testing. The dangers of blindly following standards are highlighted, urging a tailored approach. Explore methods for assessing mobile phone durability and the complexities of simulating real-life conditions in labs. Gain insights into managing stress factors in testing for improved accuracy, and laugh along with anecdotes that underscore the need for thorough longevity testing.

MTBF and an Indicator Abstract Chris and Fred discuss this thing called the MTBF … and how it (perhaps!) can be used in some reliability engineering applications … sometimes! Key Points Join Chris and Fred as they discuss if (and how) the MTBF can be useful for reliability applications. But haven’t we been really, really, really adamant that it is a bad thing? And to be clear … the MTBF stands for Mean Time Between Failure. Wouldn’t we want to measure the MTBF to see if things are failing less often? Topics include: Can the MTBF be helpful? Perhaps. But only as an INDICATOR of system health. That is, if you try to improve the reliability, availability and maintainability performance of a product or system, you would expect the MTBF to improve (get better). So it then becomes an indicator that can help validate if there is an improvement in something. But the MTBF is not helpful as a PARAMETER. What does this mean? If you want to improve availability by optimizing servicing intervals, then the MTBF will not help you in any way. You instead need to understand the Rate of Occurrence of Failures after Servicing (ROFAS) of your system, model the maintenance-induced failure rate of your servicing activities and so on to find the right servicing interval. And once you do, you will see an improvement in overall system MTBF without the MTBF of any components being used to get this improvement. In fact … trying to use the MTBF in order to improve the MTBF … usually gets in the way of improvement. … and the MTBF comes with BAGGAGE! The MTBF is the most over-used, ridiculously simplified metric in the world of reliability engineering. Many people believe that the reliability IS the MTBF. It isn’t. Trying to do reliability and availability improvement using the MTBFs of components and system elements NEVER works. It hides the information you need to make the right decisions as it is over-simplified. And so it is very hard for an organization to have the MTBF as an indicator to NOT have its toxic over-simplification seep through the rest of reliability, availability and maintainability decision-making. Which is why we are VERY CONCERNED WHEN ANY ORGANIZATION USES IT! What’s the answer? Start with understanding what decision you are trying to make. What you are trying to improve. What the value of that improvement is. And then truly understand HOW your system will likely fail (the ‘vital few’). Study and understand those ‘vital few’ and what makes them happen. Before you try and characterize them with a number, try and remove the ‘root causes’ that allow them to happen. Quickly. And once you know your ‘vital few’ and have exhausted all the ‘fast, simple and cheap’ corrective actions that will improve reliability, THEN characterize the likelihood of failure over time (which needs more than the MTBF). And keep going! 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 1024 MTBF and an Indicator appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

What Counts Abstract Carl and Fred discuss a listener question about what type of field or test issues to count when assessing or estimating reliability in a project. Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss how to collect and maintain field and test data when calculating or estimating reliability. Topics include: Do you consider only failures that occur when the product is used as specified? Or, do you also consider failures that occur during misuse of the product? What types of field returns would you not use when estimating reliability? You have to define the environmental and operating conditions. Carefully consider which potential misuses will be included in reliability estimation. Err in the direction of including unintended uses in the failure database, so that a business decision can be made on warranty or customer service. Usage environments are a distribution of data, and it is important to know the nature of the distribution. ISO standards use the term “anticipated misuse.” You need a broad application of what you keep track of in your reliability database, however this doesn’t mean you have to take action on everything in the database, Pareto still applies. Business decisions are important. Field data can be filled with noise. Learn how to differentiate signal from noise. If someone complains or returns a product for any reason, learn why, so you can make informed decisions. 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 1023 What Counts appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Facilitator and Deep Understanding Abstract Carl and Fred discuss  an Inside FMEA reader question: “does a facilitator have to have a deep understanding of the subject matter they are facilitating?” Key Points Join Carl and Fred as they discuss the level of knowledge a facilitator must have about there subject being facilitated, in order to be successful. Topics include: What type of knowledge is helpful to the facilitator? It is essential that the facilitator have excellent facilitation skills. Having no knowledge at all of the subject being facilitated does not work. It is not necessary for a facilitator to have deep or expert knowledge of the subject matter. The laser is in between these extremes. The best answer to the question being posed is that the facilitator should have sufficient overview of the subject, so he or she does not impede the meetings (team members feel like they have to”educate” the facilitator) and can guide the team to good thinking and results. Avoid “expert” facilitators who know nothing about the subject being facilitated. Minimum is to know the scope, language, and a high-level overview of the topic. This might take a few hours of immersion. Avoid having the subject matter expert (who is unskilled in facilitation) being the team facilitator, because the team needs good facilitation to get to its best thinking. The skills of facilitation are covered in the series called “FMEA Facilitation Series,” which are part of Inside FMEA. A link is in the show notes. Example facilitation errors are discussed, along with comments on how to address. 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 To read the “FMEA Facilitation Series” use this link: https://accendoreliability.com/inside-fmea-index-articles/ and cursor down the the facilitation series of articles. The post SOR 1022 Facilitator and Deep Understanding appeared first on Accendo Reliability.