Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliab 5i293l

Reliability Engineering Books Abstract Chris and Fred discuss talk about how to ‘rank’ reliability engineering books that are actually based on helpfulness (and perhaps not an algorithm). Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss the different reliability engineering books and how they ‘rank’ regarding their usefulness for reliability engineering. Topics include: What’s ‘wrong’ with Google and Amazon rankings? A couple of things. First is that reliability engineering books don’t sell hundreds of units a week (surprise!) So, a couple of sales here and there can change rankings markedly. The second is that some of the books teach oversimplified and incorrect topics very well. So, readers rank the book highly because it explains the wrong concepts very well. Many ‘staples’ are very theoretical. For example, a very well-known ‘Fault Tree Analysis’ textbook goes into great detail about how to implement algorithms to solve the equations that Fault Trees help create to describe system reliability models. But there is nothing in there ing Fault Trees for Root Cause Analysis. The book is highly rated, regardless, no doubt because those readers were interested in the algorithm. But it misses a big piece that means it is not complete. Algorithms can be manipulated … It is not unusual for academics to break down one paper into three, where each paper now conveys less information. Why? To increase the algorithm ranking for the author who has now published lots more papers. The same can apply to books … particularly for those written by professors for their own courses … It is up to you. The book is as good as you rank it. So see what the book is about, relate it to your problem or scenario, and then make a decision. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1073 Reliability Engineering Books appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Psychology and Reliability Abstract Chris and Fred discuss the psychology behind (bad) reliability decisions. Humans run (and ruin) everything! Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss the different ways psychology can influence reliability engineering decisions. Reliability is often something where is delayed. That is, failure will occur years after a shortcut was made during design. And that is where psychology steps in. Topics include: Let’s go nuclear. Australian politicians recently looked at creating a nuclear power generation industry where there previously was none. None of the conversations about feasibility revolved around psychology and the role that regulation and industry culture need to play. All the big issues in nuclear power plants have not been engineering failures … they have all been breakdowns in psychology. Humans are not good at properly dealing with rare events. Whether it is smoking, over-eating, speeding, climate change, safety, or reliability, we struggle to make rational decisions. Why? Psychology. We are animals, and not all animals are evolved to invest in the future. Society and civilization tend to involve us fighting out our primal urges to ‘eat all the sugar we can eat right now.’ And that includes sleeping today and not worrying about the disaster we might miss. And that sucks for reliability. It is really easy to delay/avoid/postpone reliability engineering stuff, as that offers immediate gratification (we don’t have to deal with it this week). But there is always a price to pay, and that price gets much higher the longer you delay/avoid/postpone. Even though you can do reliability and quality early enough to speed everything else up! Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1072 Psychology and Reliability appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Better Risk Management Abstract Greg and Fred discuss risk management tools specifically the advantages and disadvantages of using color -coded risk matrices. Play Episode

AI and Reliability Planning Abstract Carl and Fred discuss Key Points Carl and Fred as they discuss Topics include: point 1 point 2 point 3 Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 1070 AI and Reliability Planning appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

System FMEA Abstract Carl and Fred discuss a question from a listener about the scope and procedure for a System FMEA, and what is different from other FMEA types. Key Points Carl and Fred talk about the essential elements of applying FMEA to larger systems. Topics include: How early should you do a System FMEA? What part of system FMEA is “black box”? Which “black boxes” need further development? What is the scope of the FMEA? What are the boundaries? What are limitations of doing a single massive FMEA that covers all subsystems and components? Fewer FMEAs done well is better than hundreds of FMEAs done poorly Three primary differences of System FMEA: timing of analysis is early, analysis is kept at higher level, and analyzing interfaces More than 50% of problems occur at interfaces It takes excellent facilitation to keep System FMEA at high level Analyzing interfaces require the right team Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 1069 System FMEA appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Risk Planning Abstract Greg and Fred discuss risk planning and why folks don’t do it.  And, then they wonder what and why something happened. Key Points Greg and Fred as they discuss the fact we live in a world of uncertainty and risk.  Think fires.  Think tariffs.  Think AI.  What do you do about it? Topics include: What is risk planning? Why plan is a 4 letter word for most folks? Why risk denial or risk aversion is the new normal? What you can do to become risk aware and risk resilient. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 1068 Risk Planning appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Phantom Test Results Abstract Dianna and Fred discuss phantom test results in reliability testing. Play Episode

Sample Size Considerations Abstract Dianna and Fred discuss sample size considerations for reliability testing. Key Points Dianna and Fred as they discuss sample size considerations, tackling the frequently asked question: “How many samples do I need?”. Topics include: Understanding the trade-offs between desired reliability/confidence levels and the massive sample sizes often required. Balancing statistical significance with practical significance and defining acceptable criteria. How tools like FMEA can help justify your required confidence level. Overcoming real-world constraints like budget, sample availability, test method limitations, and measurement error. What to do when traditional run-to-failure tests aren’t feasible. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes Reliability engineers and quality engineers often face sample size considerations and questions. Fred and Dianna discuss that this question often arises, and the common answer is, “It depends”. A challenge arises when attempting to prove very high reliability and confidence levels. The required sample sizes can be astronomically large. They discuss the importance of understanding the math behind sample size calculations but also acknowledge that simply running two samples or choosing an arbitrarily low confidence level (like 10% or 50%) makes the results practically meaningless. Instead of solely focusing on statistical significance, consider practical significance and determine what criteria are considered “good enough”. Using tools like FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) or hazard analysis can help justify the required confidence level for a test by linking it to the severity of potential failures. This analysis helps focus testing efforts on what truly matters for the customer and product performance. Real-world constraints significantly impact sample size decisions, like the cost or availability of samples. It can also involve limitations of the test method itself, such as how long it takes to run a test or measure a sample. Measurement error in the test method can increase the required sample size to detect a meaningful difference. They highlight scenarios where practical constraints, not just statistics, dictate the testing approach. Alternative strategies can be employed when traditional testing is difficult. Using field data from existing products can sometimes eliminate the need for new demonstration testing if the product has a long history of no failures at high volumes. Degradation testing, which monitors how a property changes over time rather than waiting for outright failure, can provide useful data with fewer samples by modeling the rate of degradation. Overall, they emphasize that calculating the sample size from a statistics book is just the beginning. It requires a broader discussion considering all these factors. Ultimately, the best test is often the one you don’t need to do if the information is already available or the risk is deemed acceptable. The post SOR 1066 Sample Size Considerations appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Fault Tree Analysis Abstract Chris and Fred discuss Play Episode

Dismissing Failures Abstract Chris and Fred discuss Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss Topics include: point 1 point 2 point 3 Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1064 Dismissing Failures appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Test to or Fail Abstract Enrico and Fred discuss Key Points Enrico and Fred as they discuss Topics include: point 1 point 2 point 3 Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes   The post SOR 1063 Test to or Fail appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Traditional Reliability Methods Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss a question from a listener about why traditional reliability methods don't work for modern electronics. Key Points Kirk and Fred as they discuss why traditional methods, such as those based on prediction using classical references like Military Handbook 217F don't work with today's electronics.. Topics include: Please read the 1996  article from Professor Michael Pecht, founder of  CALCE,  linked  here “Why the traditional reliability prediction models do not work is there an alternative?” Military Handbook 217, which has not been updated in over 30 years and has historically served as the basis for reliability prediction of electronic systems. Unfortunately, it is still being referenced for current electronics reliability predictions in some companies. Please see the link here to the article from CALCE and the U.S. Army, Reliability Prediction Continued Reliance on a Misleading Approach. IThe decreasing dimensions of electronic components and circuit boards, along with significantly higher clock speeds in digital electronics, have made some third-order effects become first-order effects that were previously not considered Any product with a robust design can, at any time during the manufacturing period, become unreliable if a manufacturing excursion occurs, and there isn’t a crystal ball that can predict it. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. 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. Attempting to predict reliability  is a misleading and costly approach to use for developing a reliable system. 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 1062 Traditional Reliability Methods appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Adhesives Abstract Kirk and Fred discuss the reliability issues around using adhesives to attach mechanical assemblies. Key Points Kirk and Fred as they discuss the use of adhesives and testing the long-term reliability of adhesive bonds. Topics include: Mismatched coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE) pose a significant challenge for attaching glass, metals, and polymers. Epoxies that are used to encapsulate ICs in Plastic Encapsulated Microcircuits (PEM) are closely guarded formulas that match the TCE of the wire frame and leads. Many other factors can weaken the adhesive bond, including surface cleanliness, chemical degradation, and the differential thermal gradient between the bonded materials. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. 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. Attempting to predict reliability  is a misleading and costly approach to use for developing a reliable system. 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 1061 Adhesives appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Excessive Starts and Stops Modeling Abstract Chris and Fred respond to a question asked by one of our listeners … who is wondering about the number of ‘starts’ and ‘stops’ on electrical and mechanical systems when it comes to characterizing reliability. Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss how one goes about modeling the effects of ‘excessive’ ‘starts and stops,’ ‘power up/power down,’ ‘wind up/shut down,’ and so on. Topics include: Starts and stops create different stresses and failure mechanisms. You won’t experience these when you are testing or using your item ‘at full throttle.’ For example, the fan hub of aircraft jet engines cycles from having no centrifugal forces (when not being used) to high centrifugal forces (when flying). So when the hub fails due to fatigue, it is based on the number of ‘Landing Take-Off (LTO) cycles.’ It doesn’t matter how long you were flying for … it’s all about the number of times it starts and stops. … so you need to analyze failures during each operating cycle separately. There’s no way around it. There is no magic number … like saying that every time you turn something off and on it increases the failure rate by 5 %. Things like inrush current, cold bearings, unlubricated parts and so on all cause damage in different ways. Then there are mission or use profiles. A mission or use profile tells you how many times you think a product is going to be ‘started and stopped’ during its useful life … along with how much time will be spent ‘at full throttle.’ This allows you to take your analyses of failures in each scenario and get system reliabiltiy characteristics. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1060 Excessive Starts and Stops Modeling appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

EV Battery Life Abstract Chris and Fred discuss the long-term life of electric vehicles (EVs) and other rechargeable batteries, which tend to be longer than predicted. Why? Play Episode

How to use data from connected devices for derivation of mission profiles Abstract Enrico and Fred discuss the value of using real-world usage data to define mission profiles, advocating for a shift from deterministic to stochastic approaches. They touch on the impact of environmental conditions, the risk of selection bias in data analysis, and weigh the cost-benefit of using connected devices to improve design and reliability decisions. Play Episode

Intermittent Failure During a Test Abstract Chris and Fred discuss how you analyze the failure data from a test … where failure is sometimes intermittent? Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss intermittent failures during the test. What do you do? For example, let’s say something is being tested to see if it works every ‘cycle’ of operation. The idea is that it needs to last a certain number of cycles to work. What happens if the item es the test … but there were a couple of cycles during the test where it didn’t work – but it worked for the next cycle? Topics include: If you need to conduct Root Cause Analysis (RCA)? … then intermittent failures mean you there is often no physical trace of failure. So what do you need to do? Ensure that you use deductive RCA brainstorming to identify probable root causes, prioritize them for Corrective Action (CA), and see what happens. What is a ‘failure’? Will the customer care if the item works on the cycle after it fails? … however – beware of behaviors you don’t understand. This could be early warning of much bigger problems. Not sweeping these behaviors under the carpet has often led to discovering issues that might develop further when being used. So what do you do in of statistics? You (perhaps unfortunately) need to focus on what you defined failure to be, and what the criteria were at the start of the test. If there is no room for intermittent failures in any definitions of ‘failure’ up front … then statistically, you need to ignore them. However! Statistics are based on assumptions, even if you think you don’t make them. An assumption you make during testing is that the thing you are testing is representative of the thing that will be used. And you can’t understand where those intermittent failures come from … you can’t make this assumption. Until you do … statistics mean nothing. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1057 Intermittent Failure During a Test appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Is a PhD Worth It? Abstract Chris and Fred discuss the importance (or lack thereof) of having a PhD in reliability engineering. Is it worth it? Key Points Chris and Fred as they discuss whether having a PhD in reliability engineering is worth getting. There’s a lot to unpack here … Topics include: Simple answer … no. But it depends on what you are trying to achieve. Many reliability engineers are self-taught or have accumulated knowledge from lots of ‘little’ courses. And many reliability engineers with a PhD … are not good at their job! So what job do you want to do? Postgraduate reliability engineering learning specializes in theory. Not practice. So just because you have a PhD, it doesn’t mean you are a leader, can facilitate workshops, know how to compromise, know when to put your textbooks and equations away, and know when to rely on expert judgment. So again … what job do you want to do? You are as valuable as you are valuable. You are not as valuable as a certificate says you are. This is one of the issues with postgraduate study. The teachers (professors) primarily focus on research and high-level data analysis. If this is what you want to do for the job of your dreams … great! If you want to learn how to do this because you realize that sometimes you will need to do high-end data analysis but most of the time you rely on engineering judgment … great! But if you do this to achieve status and walk into a high-earning job where respect is granted and not earned … you will be in a lot of trouble. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes The post SOR 1056 Is a PhD Worth It? appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Long-form Reading Abstract Dianna and Fred discuss long-form reading. Is it in decline? Key Points Dianna and Fred as they discuss long-form reading. Topics include: the impact of the digital age on our ability to focus. why detailed reports and documentation are essential for engineering and reliability work. the risks of relying on checklists without understanding the underlying context and history. how documenting lessons learned can save time and resources for future teams and projects. Gain valuable insights into improving reading habits and the benefits of broad reading for problem-solving. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes In this episode, Fred and Dianna engage in a discussion about the importance of long-form reading, particularly within the context of engineering and reliability professions. They emphasize the critical role of detailed reports in their work, citing examples such as HALT testing and experimental reports. We also need to document findings, even negative ones, to provide valuable context for future work and prevent the repetition of past mistakes. They raise concern regarding the potential decline in the ability to focus on long-form content, possibly influenced by the prevalence of short-form digital media. Their discussion also touches upon the dangers of over-reliance on checklists and templates without a thorough understanding of the historical context and the “why” behind them. Both Fred and Dianna advocate for the value of reading diverse materials, including technical documents, biographies, and even fiction, as a means to broaden perspectives, enhance problem-solving skills, and foster continuous learning. They conclude by encouraging listeners to embrace reading as a vital tool for personal and professional development and to recognize the lasting impact of well-documented work. The post SOR 1055 Long-form Reading appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Using RBD Effectively Abstract Dianna and Fred discuss using RBD Effectively. Key Points Dianna and Fred as they discuss using RBD Effectively. Topics include: the key to effectively using reliability block diagrams (RBDs) for new programs. how to start simple with RBDs for team collaboration. how RBDs can be a powerful tool for driving critical decisions in your design and vendor selection processes. Hear a compelling story about how a basic RBD approach led a team to exceed their reliability goals. Enjoy an episode of Speaking of Reliability. Where you can friends as they discuss reliability topics. us as we discuss topics ranging from design for reliability techniques to field data analysis approaches. Audio RSS Show Notes In this episode, Fred and Dianna delve into the effective application of reliability block diagrams (RBDs). This is prompted by a listener’s question about implementing them on new programs effectively. They emphasize that while the mathematical aspects and various complexities of RBDs exist, the most crucial part is using them as a practical tool for team discussions and decision-making. Using RBD effectively is especially a benefit early in the design process. Start with a high-level overview of the product’s main building blocks. Sketching it out informally with the team or use simple visual aids like Post-it notes on a whiteboard. Facilitate team collaboration to create an RBD and expect it to rearrange and as the design evolves. A key takeaway is that RBDs serve as a communication tool to help everyone understand system dependencies. It’s also a decision tool to identify critical areas for reliability improvement and investment. They conclude that the effectiveness of any reliability tool, including RBDs, lies in its ability to informed decision-making within a team that understands its purpose. The post SOR 1054 Using RBD Effectively appeared first on Accendo Reliability.