The Reliability FM network

By Fred Schenkelberg

Reliability Engineering Basics, Statistics, Accelerated Testing, Program Assessment and Improvement.

Listen in on in depth discussions held during the live monthly Accendo Reliability webinar series.... more

Download on the App Store

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play

FAQs about The Reliability FM network:

How many episodes does The Reliability FM network have?

The podcast currently has 623 episodes available.

The Reliability FM network episodes:

July 07, 2023Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Case Study
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Case Study
Abstract
Chris and Fred discuss the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) … A US Department of Defense vehicle that can perhaps teach us a lot about reliability (especially in the field of military and defense).
Key Points
Join Chris and Fred as they discuss the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) – an armored vehicle that is being used as a ‘general service’ vehicle that is intended to provide what the Army Jeep once did … but this time with a lot more protection and capability. So what has this got to do with reliability?
Topics include:
How did this start? The US Department of Defense essentially had a large number of companies design different types of armored vehicles from which they would then select the ‘best’ one to go on and become the JLTV.
The vehicle that Oshkosh designed appeared to be the best … based on reliability performance. Why do we know this? The vehicle that Lockheed Martin designed came in second. So Lockheed Martin lodged a protest complaining that their vehicle was not selected. In response, the Department of Defense pointed out that when all the vehicles were subjected to reliability demonstration testing, the Oshkosh vehicle appeared to be three times more reliable than the requirement. Plus, five times more reliable than Lockheed Martin’s vehicle. That’s right … Lockheed Martin’s vehicle did not meet the reliability requirement.
So Oshkosh was asked to build thousands of ‘JLTVs’ … but they turned out to be unreliable. Reports to the US Congress revealed that once these vehicles were mass-produced, Oshkosh JLTVs did not meet the reliability requirement, with issues revolving around engine wiring, braking systems, tire system issues and doors not opening properly when they were supposed to. There were lots of other problems as well, including poorly written manuals, onboard prognostics not being particularly accurate, overly complex subsystems, and plenty of others.
Fast forward a few years … and Oshkosh’s JLTV design is now being built by another company called AM General. AM General was coincidentally one of the companies that were unsuccessful in convincing the Department of Defense to purchase their design for the JLTV. We don’t know exactly why the Department of Defense chose to ask AM General to build these vehicles … but perhaps we can guess?
Let’s not forget PR or spin … An article appeared in Forbes that was written by someone who is part of a military industry think tank … that is coincidentally funded in part by Oshkosh. And in that article, there is much complaint about this decision .. including a claim that Oshkosh has a proven track record in reliability. The article includes some other numbers that only someone intimately locked in with Oshkosh might know. Claims that Oshkosh only has a 7 % operating margin (and therefore anyone else who wins the contract on price is clearly quoting unreasonable numbers) is made by someone who is more a marketer than an engineering analyst.
What is the main takeaway? … why would you design something that is amazingly reliable, only to have terrible manufacturing take it all away? Military contractors and customers are particularly horrible at this … as they almost always focus reliability ‘demonstration’ on pre-production prototypes. But as this case study shows, reliability has never been demonstrated.
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:
RM 055: A Conversation with SMTA President Dr. Martin Anselm(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)
Anticipatory Leaders Leverage Future Facts (TM)(Opens article in a new browser tab)
The post SOR 876 Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Case Study appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
33min
July 04, 2023 Four Ways to Manage Supplier Risk
We will discuss four ways to manage supplier risk: 1. Accept 2. Diversify 3. Share and 4. Manage (control).
...more
1h 6min
July 03, 2023SOR 875 What Should a Reliability Engineer Do
What Should a Reliability Engineer Do
Abstract
Chris and Fred discuss what should a reliability engineer ‘do’? Isn’t this obvious? … is it?
Key Points
Join Chris and Fred as they discuss what should a reliability engineer do. Perhaps this is ‘common knowledge.’ But one of the many issues with ‘common knowledge’ is that it is not as common as you might think. And there are a lot of people out there who are excited to become reliability engineers … but as soon as they try and find out what they are supposed to do, things get murky.
Topics include:
Reliability engineering is not ‘measuring reliability.’ ‘Measuring reliability’ can be important, but it is not as important as making reliability happen. And by ‘measuring reliability’ we mean things like reliability tests to work out how long we think things will last, the likelihood of things failing in warranty periods and so on. If that is all you do … then you are not engineering reliability. In the same way that a coach of an Olympic sprinter will (from time to time) measure how fast their sprinter is, most of their role involves working on strength, conditioning, techniques, mindsets and so on.
A reliability engineer is not a ‘title.’ Many organizations anoint someone as being a reliability engineer … simply because they want to think that their organization does reliability. This is not the case … and you need virtually everyone in your organization to ‘be’ a reliability engineer for at least some part of most days.
A reliability engineer implements the ‘reliability strategy’ of your organization. This might mean that the reliability engineer for an organization that values Failure Modes and Effects Analyses (FMEAs) oversees the training, facilitation, monitoring and ‘maintenance’ of the collective FMEA skillset. He or she is not doing FMEAs for their team … they are coaching their team on how to do it. And part of this is motivating the team to see FMEAs as useful, a good use of time, and likely to start saving everyone lots of time and money ‘now.’
A reliability engineer needs to understand what it is that adds value. Not each successful reliability strategy involves FMEAs. Perhaps an organization needs to revolve around Highly Accelerated Life Testing (HALT) and how it can quickly identify the weak points of early prototypes. Perhaps it is another activity. Perhaps there is a blend of activities. And once we work out what adds value … that becomes part of the strategy that the reliability engineer needs to implement.
It is not what most textbooks say. Or at least feel like they are saying. Most textbooks correctly characterize themselves as a toolbox. It is still up to the reliability engineer to work out which tool needs to be used. And when. And when not. If the only tool you use (or like) is a hammer, then everything becomes a nail.
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 484 FMEA: Top Down or Bottom Up(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)
Getting Started Learning Reliability Engineering(Opens article in a new browser tab)
The post SOR 875 What Should a Reliability Engineer Do appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
30min
June 30, 2023SOR 874 Redundancy by Design
Redundancy by Design
Abstract
Kirk and Fred discussing the use of backups and system redundancy in the design of electronics for increased reliability.
Key Points
Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss how a company that wants to use two combined stresses simultaneously, at three intensity levels, but not the same stress combinations at each level may not provide useful life estimate data.
Topics include:
Determining the life estimates of a component or system using an accelerated life test with one stress stimulus is difficult without knowing the wear-out mechanisms that drive the device to failure. Using combination stresses makes the quantification of product life determination even more challenging. For example, a cracked solder joint will propagate with either vibration or thermal cycling, and combining those two makes it more difficult to quantify the relation to the field stresses.
If one is using HALT, which is not for quantifying life, it is recommended that the first application of stress is to use a single stress to the operation limit, then later combine stresses to accelerate the precipitation of latent defects. The idea is to keep it simple to make it easier to determine the physics of the accelerated stress-induced failures.
Doing an accelerated test to quantify life requires that one know what the life cycle stress environments that the product will be subjected to. Most electronics, especially portable or mobile systems will have significant variations across the world and user applications, and therefore many different rates of fatigue damage.
Kirk’s 30 years of doing testing and failure analysis is that the vast majority of failures in the early years of use are from assignable causes, which are either errors in design, manufacturing of components, or final assembly. The life entitlement of most electronics is well beyond its technological obsolescence, and finding and eliminating the causes of latent defects is much more cost-effective than the delusion that complex electronics systems’ nominal life entitlement can be determined through stress testing. We do not know the actual lifetimes of today’s electronics, as most get discarded before wearing them out.
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.
Related Topics:
When You Should (And Shouldn’t) Use Redundant Equipment To Improve System Reliability(Opens article in a new browser tab)
SOR 356 How Reliable Does Your Product Need to Be(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)
The post SOR 874 Redundancy by Design appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
31min
June 27, 2023 10 Reasons to Do Reliability
Besides discussing what is involved in reliability, let's explore a short list of reasons to use reliability thinking with your team.
...more
3h 29min
June 26, 2023Wishful Accelerated Testing
Wishful Accelerated Testing
Abstract
Kirk and Fred discussing a accelerated stress test that a listener was going to use a different combination of stresses on samples to determine life estimates.
Key Points
Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss how a company that wants to use two combined stresses simultaneously, at three intensity levels, but not the same stress combinations at each level may not provide useful life estimate data.
Topics include:
Determining the life estimates of a component or system using an accelerated life test with one stress stimulus is difficult without knowing the wear-out mechanisms that drive the device to failure. Using combination stresses makes the quantification of product life determination even more challenging. For example, a cracked solder joint will propagate with either vibration or thermal cycling, and combining those two makes it more difficult to quantify the relation to the field stresses.
If one is using HALT, which is not to find quantified life, it is recommended that the first application of stress is to use a single stress to the operation limit, then later combine stresses to accelerate the precipitation of latent defects. The idea is to keep it simple to make it easier to determine the physics of the accelerated stress-induced failures.
Doing an accelerated test to quantify life requires that one know what the life cycle stress environments that the product will be subjected to. For most electronics, especially portable or mobile systems will have significant variations across the world and user applications, and therefore many different rates of fatigue damage.
Kirk’s 30 years of doing testing and failure analysis is that the vast majority of failures in the early years of use are from assignable causes, which are either errors in design, manufacturing of components, or final assembly. The life entitlement of most electronics is well beyond its technological obsolescence, and finding and eliminating the causes of latent defects is much more cost-effective than the delusion that complex electronics systems’ nominal life entitlement can be determined through stress testing. We do not know the actual lifetimes of today’s electronics, as most get discarded before wearing them out.
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 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.
Related Topics:
Accelerated Testing(Opens article in a new browser tab)
The post SOR 873 Wishful Accelerated Testing appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
27min
June 23, 2023Design Process Blindspots
Design Process Blindspots
Abstract
Carl and Fred discussing the interesting subject of “blind spots,” and how they can impede good designs.
Key Points
Join Carl and Fred as they discuss the nature of “blind spots” and how they can be addressed in teams.
Topics include:
On an FMEA team, why not have the design engineer make the decisions?
Why do you need an engineering team?
What are “blind spots” and how can they be mitigated?
Sometimes you can get so close to a problem that you cannot see the solution
Discussion of Henry Petroski’s book “Design Paradigms”
Three reasons to use teams to overcome blind spots
The solution to a problem can create other unintended problems
Some problems need a pause to see the solution
Look at problems from other points of view
People do not have the same blind spots
People are often unaware of their blind spots
Use of brainstorming to enhance solutions
Be open to other people’s ideas
You cannot anticipate everything; but you can minimize risk
If you do a very good job of FMEA preparation and facilitation, you can reduce risk to an acceptable level
Risk never goes to zero
Management needs to understand the limitations of individual engineers
The culture has to allow people to say something is not right
Reliability engineers need to speak up when there is a high-risk issue
What do you do if you see something, and the culture does not support speaking up?
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:
Why FMEA Needs to be Team-Based(Opens article in a new browser tab)

The post SOR 872 Design Process Blindspots appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
24min
June 19, 2023Giving and a Reliability Career
Giving and a Reliability Career
Abstract
Carl and Fred discussing how focusing on helping others can enhance your reliability career and provide a sense of community.
Key Points
Join Carl and Fred as they discuss a philosophy of life that relates to giving. Topics include:
The value of networking
The value of working on standards committees
Opportunities abound when your focus is on creating value
Doing something useful for others pays off to you in unpredicted ways
Don’t begin with what you can get, provide support and good will
Answer people’s questions, take the time to help others
There is no way to know ahead of time which outward efforts will result in benefit to you
If you are genuinely interested in helping others, it will come across
What is Content Marketing?
Presenting at conferences is a great way to create goodwill and enhance your career
What does it mean to work yourself out of a job?
What is “pay it forward”?
When interviewing for a job, do not focus on benefits, focus on how you can help solve their unique problems
Philosophy: if you do good things, good things come back to you
Accendo business model is to help reliability people share what they know
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 871 Giving and a Reliability CareerCarl S. Carlsonshare
Social:

Link:

Embed:
" readonly />

https://episodes.reliability.fm/sor/sor-871-giving-and-a-reliability-career.mp3

Download Audio RSS
Related Topics:
SOR 418 Sense of Community for Reliability Engineers(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)
What is Reliability Engineering?(Opens article in a new browser tab)
...more
26min
June 16, 2023Reliability Lunch and Learns
Reliability Lunch and Learns
Abstract
Dianna and Fred discussing how reliability engineers can promote engagement within their organizations, including reliability lunch and learns.
Key Points
Join Dianna and Fred as they discuss reliability lunch and learns and other ways that reliability engineers (and others!) can promote engagement within their organizations.
Goals of outreach programs hosted by reliability engineers include making themselves available, sharing knowledge, promoting understanding of how different functions of the organization interface, and showing how they can help.
Topics include:
Benefits of in-house engagement channels
Ideas for creating and managing email lists or forums
Monthly webinars: introducing topics and perspectives, and repurposing for onboarding
Mastermind groups set-up
Workshops with suppliers
v-blocks, pizza, and veggies in a doughnut box
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
Setting up outreach programs, like a reliability lunch and learn type series, can be a big benefit within an organization or company.
There are basic needs that internal channels address.
What resources are here and available to me?
Who can I talk to or interface with, and how do I best do that?
How can others help me?
In addition, internal channels provide a way to talk about and share proprietary information and knowledge within the company. This could be about specific technology or current trends and topics in a department or for the company at large.
Outreach programs require some management for success. Planning, engaging, and monitoring are some basic activities. Other ways to make them successful:
meet people where they are
make it a safe place, to openly ask questions or discuss ideas
be consistent
We invite you to share with us:
If you are doing outreach programs in your workplace, like reliability lunch and learns and the others we talked about: what are you finding that works for you? What doesn’t work?
How are quick searches, done online with a search engine, affecting you (helping or hurting)?
Related Topics:
SOR 742 Reliability and Quality(Opens podcast in a new browser tab)
The post SOR 870 Reliability Lunch and Learns appeared first on Accendo Reliability.
...more
35min
June 13, 2023 An Accelerated Life Testing Q&A
We’re received a few questions related to accelerated life testing. Let’s get together and address your questions related to ALT.
...more
1h 3min

FAQs about The Reliability FM network:

How many episodes does The Reliability FM network have?

The podcast currently has 623 episodes available.