Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance
Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance episodes
- Standards and IntentStandards and IntentAbstract
Chris and Fred discuss how we use standards for reliability engineering, safety, and other similar fields. Standards have a place in everything we do. But issues come when we stop thinking about the thing we are creating and rely on the standards to guide really important decisions. Why is this silly? Listen to the podcast!
Key PointsJoin Chris and Fred as they discuss
Topics include:
- Safety Integrity Levels (SILs) and other arbitrary ‘measures’ of goodness. These are somewhat subjective categories of ‘safety’ as it relates to functional safety. Functional safety is the characteristic of a product that has the ability to ‘actively’ do something in response to an unsafe condition. But this is of course … subjective! So we, as humans, tend to create these levels and measures that help us say this is ‘good’ or otherwise.
- … which brings us to ‘standards.’ Standards bodies are the ones that enshrine things like SILs. But the problem with trying to standardize and formalize approaches to safety and reliability in a way that tends to be formulaic and NOT promote critical thinking.
- … for example? The 85-85 test. This is a test where we raise the temperature to 85 ̊ Celsius and 85 % relative humidity. This test was first created for early electronic components. But we now see it everywhere for things ranging from fully sealed electronic components (humidity doesn’t touch anything) through to plastics. Why? Because the standards bodies have stopped thinking about today’s challenges.
- Standard committees and bodies are 5 – 10 years behind. Minimum. And they are not keeping up with technology. Not even a little bit.
- … and they are written by people who pay to be there. That’s right. They are volunteers who have to give up their time, often pay for their own flights and hotels to meet to talk about what the next standard should say. Relying on paying volunteers is simply not going to attract pioneers, luminaries, the ‘younger generation’ or anyone else you might think should be represented in a standards committee.
- … and standards simply formalize what might have worked best in the past. So why are you doing a salt test for a product that is nowhere near the ocean?
- And all this is the reason that technologies like autonomous vehicles are on the road yet. Insane!
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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 598 Standards and Intent appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - Activities, Decisions, and ValueReliability Tools: Supporting Good Decisions and Adding ValueAbstract
Carl and Fred discussing the myriad of reliability methods and tools, and how they can be differentiated by how they support program decisions and add value.
Key PointsJoin Carl and Fred as they share experience in understanding reliability tools and methods, based on how well they support decisions that need to be made during product development.
Topics include:
- Organizing the set of reliability tools
- Common practice: organize tools by life cycle, alphabetically, favorites
- Best practice: organize tools by types of decisions
- Tools supporting requirements decisions
- Tools supporting design decisions
- Tools supporting assurance decisions
- Tools supporting maintenance decisions
- We have a wealth of choices; select vital few tools by important decisions that need to be made
- When selecting reliability tools, ask what decision is being supported?
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 RSSShow NotesPrimary Steps to Achieving High Reliability
The post SOR 597 Reliability Tools: Supporting Good Decisions and Adding Value appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - Approach to Platform ReliabilityApproach to Platform ReliabilityAbstract
Carl and Fred discussing a reliability approach where the focus becomes core functions. This is compared to approaching reliability at the project level.
Key PointsJoin Carl and Fred as they discuss different approaches to the scope of reliability management. Specifically, reliability improvements can be targeted at the functional (platform) level, or they can be targeted at the project level.
Topics include:
- What is meant by platform reliability?
- Targeting reliability at the supply chain
- Matrix system
- Pros and cons of focusing reliability efforts at functional or project level
- Application of reliability tools at functional vs project level
- Example: generic FMEA vs FMEA at project level
- Best practice is both functional and project level reliability
- In your company, who has responsibility for supplier reliability? Do you have reliability requirements for critical supplier parts?
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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 596 Approach to Platform Reliability appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - Lesson Learned Doing Virtual WorkLesson Learned Doing Virtual WorkAbstract
Carl and Fred discussing the timely subject of working from home in the virtual world. Whether you are running a meeting, participating in an FMEA, teaching, or collaborating online, what works and does not work?
Key PointsJoin Carl and Fred as they discuss some of the lessons learned for reliability engineers on the subject of conducting work more effectively in a remote environment.
Topics include:
- In person vs virtual – what have we learned?
- How can we be as efficient or even better when working virtually?
- Need to be able to run effective meetings whether in person or virtual
- Be fully present in meetings, limit distractions
- Online teaching – add more interactivity, ask more questions, use more exercises
- Online meeting norms – turn off phone and emails, keep video on
- Get balanced contributions from all participants
- Online FMEAs can be done with excellent facilitation
- Working with extroverts and introverts
- Dry-run online venue, surface technical issues in advance
- Practice what to do if connection is lost
- Big part of communication is body language, when online ensure audio and video is clear
- Ideal is to have first FMEA session, or first meeting, in person, if possible
- Consider video conference app along with Google sheets to enhance sharing information
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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 595 Lesson Learned Doing Virtual Work appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - FMEA and Legal ConsiderationsFMEA and Legal ConsiderationsAbstract
Carl and Fred discussing common sense legal guidelines for doing FMEAs. The focus of FMEAs should be first and foremost on improving designs and manufacturing processes, and consistent with company legal policy.
Key PointsJoin Carl and Fred as they discuss their experiences with FMEAs, with respect to good legal practices.
Topics include:
- What should be legal guidelines for FMEAs?
- Reference Effective FMEAs chapter 5, section 5.2.5 (posted in Show Notes)
- Focus on safe and reliable products
- Make factual entries into worksheets, absent emotional words
- Close loops in FMEAs with Actions Taken
- The document is for the design team, not for the legal department
- FMEA actions can be integrated into project tracking systems
- When should FMEA document be controlled?
- Never hide or omit raising issues
- What about recording FMEA sessions?
- Continue FMEA until risk is reduced to an acceptable level
- Safety is highest priority, even if occurrence is low
- Disagreement is an important part of getting to consensus
- Should management attend FMEAs?
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 RSSShow NotesExcerpt from Chapter 5, section 5.2.5 of Effective FMEAs:
5.2-5 Legal Guidelines for Doing FMEAs
It is important for the FMEA team to understand that FMEAs are legal documents that support the demonstration of due care in product development. As legal documents, they are subject to subpoena for legal proceedings. The FMEA team members should familiarize themselves with and adhere to any relevant company guidelines regarding legal documentation, and closely follow advises from company legal representatives. They should also follow common sense principles, such as:
- All FMEA database entries should be factual and absent of emotional words or exhortations.
- All FMEA database entries that state an action will be taken to address a problem should be closed out with a corresponding entry saying what specifically was done, leaving no open loops.
- All FMEA database entries should be detailed and specific enough so that anyone who is not part of the FMEA team can read the entry and understand the meaning and context.
- The FMEA team should never omit raising an issue or addressing a problem because it does not have an immediate solution or out of concern for legal ramifications. If there are important concerns that are legal in nature, the team should discuss these issues with management and company legal representatives.
- FMEA teams should continue the FMEA project until an acceptable level of risk is reached.
- Safety issues are always the highest priority, regardless of likelihood of occurrence. No FMEA is complete unless the FMEA team is satisfied that there are no unaddressed safety related issues within the scope of the FMEA project.
- When entering information into the FMEA database, care should be taken to characterize concerns as potential or possible when appropriate, unless the team is certain the issue will occur. One example is entering an effect that has a possibility of injury. Here it is appropriate to say with the possibility of injury rather than saying will result in injury.
Excerpt from Effective FMEAs, by Carl Carlson, copyright 2012, published by John Wiley & SonsThe post SOR 594 FMEA and Legal Considerations appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - What should a Body of Knowledge Do?What should a Body of Knowledge Do?Abstract
Chris and Fred discuss what a ‘body of knowledge’ or ‘BOK’ should do? And by this we mean a document or book that outlines the key ideas or things you should know for doing ‘something’ … like reliability. There are many textbooks which are (let’s face it) not helpful because they are ‘too technical’ – and not useful for the majority of reliability decisions. But we can go too far the other way as well and make things too simple – so we just plug and play tools. Without knowing what each tool does. Sound familiar? Listen to this podcast!
Key PointsJoin Chris and Fred as they discuss what a reliability ‘body of knowledge’ or ‘BOK’ should be. There are so many BOKs out there – but are they useful?
Topics include:
- BOKs that can be ‘tested.’ Really? There is a mini-industry of certifications out there that require you to pass a test. So a BOK that is published in support of that test needs to be ‘testable.’ And the easiest way to test? Multiple choice! This really limits the extent to which the BOK can help reliability engineers make their daily decisions. So money that engineers pay to pass the test and be certified becomes the main, driving force.
- BOKs that are different ‘vomits’ of ideas. Many listeners know that if you read a BOK from one of the established societies or reliability groups … you can clearly see how different authors write different parts of the BOK. And they often don’t align! So many BOKs are not well put together.
- … and BOKs are often a collection of the ‘favorite’ ways that authors have of doing things.
- BOKs should be the information you need to know to do your job well. And this differs from role to role. But there are some common activities and tests (for example) that should apply to everyone. But a BOK shouldn’t just be a list of things you can do. A BOK needs to help you know when to use these activities.
- What do you think? Tell us!
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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 593 What should a Body of Knowledge Do? appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - Knowledge vs RoteKnowledge vs RoteAbstract
Chris and Fred discuss the urge for (us) reliability engineers to rush to use a tool – and not understand what that tool does, how it works, or even if it answers the question you are trying to answer. Why is this? We sometimes (always) like solving problems. But in our rush to solve a problem … do we solve the right problem? Do we create more problems? What’s a ‘problem?’ Sound familiar or scary? Listen to this podcast.
Key PointsJoin Chris and Fred as they discuss the urge that you, me, and many others of us have to rush to a tool to solve a problem instead of creating a plan to work out if need that tool. Or another tool. And this is particularly relevant for
Topics include:
- A builder once said – I don’t have time to learn how to build a house – just tell me what tool I need to build it so I can start now. Sounds absurd … right? But this is what Fred and Chris and many other reliability engineers get asked to do all the time.
- The distribution smorgasbord! There are attitudes (and commercial software applications) out there where you can try from any number of probability distributions to describe the random process you are investigating. BUT … this means we are often shopping for distributions that best fit the answer I want. INSTEAD … understand failure so that you know which model (which a probability distribution essentially is) fits the phenomena you are looking at.
- Statistics and reliability engineering. Do we see job descriptions for reliability engineers who are ‘good’ at statistics or fluent in ‘reliability software X?’ Do we need to only know statistics and not business situations?
- … do you know the inaccuracies of the reliability software tools you use? That’s right, virtually all commercial reliability software is based on assumptions. So there are inaccuracies. We have talked about this at Accendo a lot! But the inaccuracies are there, and in many cases overestimate the failure probability of your product. So you could be losing millions of dollars in fixing problems that don’t exist if you assume your software tools are accurate. Which they often aren’t.
- If you rush to use a tool, you end up with the answer you want. Not the answer to the 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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 592 Knowledge vs Rote appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - MTBF, Reliability, and the CurveMTBF, Reliability, and the CurveAbstract
Kirk and Fred discussing how testing a small sample size of a new product results on a larger margin of error for the larger population.
Key PointsJoin Kirk and Fred as they discuss all the factors that go into making reliability estimates from the testing of samples and the size and confidence that it represents the whole population
Topics include:- Testing and sample size will not improve reliability if the failures are not analyzed and changes are made to the cause of the weakness
- Testing is an additional cost and the manufacturing department may be rewarded for cycle time only, and the costs of unreliability are not part of the production managers annual review, therefore is not performed as in “reliability testing is not my job”
- Kirk’s article on how technological obsolescence and the classic bathtub curve title “Why the Drain in the Bathtub Curve Matters” see link to it in the notes below
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 RSSShow NotesHere is a link to the article “Why the Drain in the Bathtub Curve Matters”
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 591 MTBF, Reliability, and the Curve appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - The Balance of Good EnoughThe Balance of Good EnoughAbstract
Kirk and Fred discussing the trade-offs between selling more reliable equipment for different markets, costs, and how reliable can we make a product
Key PointsJoin Kirk and Fred as they discuss different aspects of the balance of a marketable reliability and costs.
Topics include:- Most people owning iPhones add a case to help absorb the shock, as Steve Jobs may have put ID (industrial Design) and wanting a slim device over higher drop shock protection.
- A discussion about the many kitchen blender failures Kirk has had, but has decided not to buy a industrial strength restaurant blender for a premium as the commercial blenders fail too .
- The concern Kirk has with a AC-DC Li ion batter charger and potential high temperature of the outside surface how that may cause a burned hand as well as early life failure. (After creating this SOR Podcast the charger failed and Kirk’s FA showed a clear design weakness – may discuss in a later SOR)
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 RSSShow NotesFor 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 590 The Balance of Good Enough appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min - Ready to Use Field DataReady to Use Field DataAbstract
Adam and Fred discussing the best methods for integrating field data into established reliability programs.
Key PointsJoin Adam and Fred as they discuss the best methods for integrating field data into established reliability programs.
Topics include:- When product development programs are in motion they have tools to process test data. Why do these established tools not work for field data after product launch?
- Reliability Growth programs are designed to take in data sets from simulated customer use cases. We should design our RG programs to be ready for field data as the product transfers to the field.
- Internal users of data should be interviewed early in the reliability program . By including their needs up front the established data control systems will continue to be a valuable asset for as long as data driven information is needed.
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 RSSShow NotesThe post SOR 589 Ready to Use Field Data appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
0 min
About Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance
From the publisher's feed
Gain the experience of your peers to accelerate improvement of your program and career. Improve your product development process, reliability or warranty performance; or your plant uptime or asset…
performance. Learn about reliability and maintenance engineering practical approaches, skills, and techniques. Join the conversation today.
Best of Speaking Of Reliability: Friends Discussing Reliability Engineering Topics | Warranty | Plant Maintenance
Ranked by our users in the last 21 days