8D with ‘G’

Abstract

Dianna and Fred introduce a special guest, ‘G’, and talk about the 8 Disciplines method of problem solving.

Key Points

Join Dianna and Fred as they discuss 8D with ‘G’, Google’s AI assistant.
Topics include:

• Problem solving and the benefits of a structured approach like 8D (8 Disciplines)
• The hardest parts about RCA (root cause analysis)
• The steps of the 8D process
• Potential uses for AI

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.

Show Notes

Fred and Dianna discuss problem solving, in general, and the benefits of a structured approach like 8D.

They invite a special guest to the show to provide a different perspective. G is an advanced language model developed by Google AI. Capable of understanding and responding to a wide range of prompts and questions, G offers a unique and informative conversational experience.

The three hosts talk about:

• The hardest parts about root cause analysis, which is defining the problem well. Part of that is not jumping to conclusions.
• How RCA (root cause analysis) can change based on the intent of the researcher. For someone in a maintenance role, the focus may be on identifying the problem part and replacing it as quickly as possible. For an engineer, the focus will be on what caused that failure to occur, including stresses like special use cases and environment.
• Why 8D (the 8 disciplines) helps with RCA by providing a structured approach. They list the 8 steps, including step 0: preserving the evidence for investigation. They also talk about how to do the last step and the importance of not skipping it.
• Not seeing success with point systems and gamification!

Fred and Dianna also talk about ways to use interactive AI, like G.

• How to set the stage with prompting.
• Use it to help get unstuck.
• Try asking AI to challenge your assumptions with more technical issues.

Please let us know what you thought of this episode. Share your questions and comments, below!

The post SOR 1020 8D with ‘G’ appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Can Manufacturing Improve the Design

Abstract

Chris and Fred discuss how reliability and quality is destroyed by organizations that like to have a ‘razor’ split between design and manufacturing teams. Why?

Key Points

Join Chris and Fred as they discuss when organizations see design and manufacturing functions as distinct, separate, never to talk to each other, and completely unaware of the other (this is a bad thing by the way …)

Topics include:

• Around 80 % of quality problems start with design. That’s right. Most of those ‘manufacturing’ defects come about when the design teams come up with ideas that can work … but simply can’t be built with the machines in your manufacturing facility. Whether this is being metal at crazy angles, tolerances that need to be within one-millionth of one-millionth of one inch otherwise it catches fire, heat sensitive material that is next to welds and so on.
• Manufacturing teams can only make designs ‘worse.’ Of the 20 % of defects that aren’t rooted in crazy designs, the only thing that happens is that quality and reliability is reduced from what the design team were hoping.
• But all the (other team) does is tell us what they can’t do. That usually means they are responding to your crazy design/manufacturing process which assumes the other team can accommodate it.
• Instead … the teams need to speak to each other before they design and build to know what the other CAN do. And then work accordingly, so you have no conversations where they have to tell you what they CAN’T do.
• Do you have a team that re-designs things to make them manufacturable? Then we are talking about you. Designers are not special geniuses that need no boundaries so they can innovate. They need to be real world people.

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1019 Can Manufacturing Improve the Design appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Calculate Equipment Reliability

Abstract

Chris and Fred discuss how we can go about calculating equipment reliability … when you only have a small amount of information. Help!

Key Points

Join Chris and Fred as they discuss how you can calculate equipment reliability when you have a little bit of information. This comes from a listener who asked us to calculate the reliability of their equipment that failed four times in one month (with 400 hours of operation).  How do we find this system’s reliability?

Topics include:

• So what is the number? If we assume a constant hazard rate (yuck) then we can use the exponential distribution to work out that the reliability at one month (400 hours) is 1.8 %.
• Is this helpful? Our listener didn’t tell us why they wanted a reliability number … but 1.8 % is almost certainly useless in terms of making better decisions. Why? Well we don’t know if our equipment is wearing in or wearing out. We don’t know if we have 10 pieces of equipment working at the same time over this month, with only 4 of them failing. So what do we do?
• What is the DECISION? This is a common question (refrain). What are you deciding to do with this number? We can’t think of a single decision that this 1.8 % estimate will help. Again, we don’t know if the equipment is wearing in or wearing out … which would affect our estimate. Knowing the precise times of failure would be really helpful as well. But is the decision more useful if it is based on availability? It sounds like the equipment is being repaired, so how long does it spend being repaired? What is the DECISION!
• Don’t just stick with numbers … look for WHY? Are you doing root cause analysis (RCA)? If you can (for example) quickly identify that the four failures were caused by incorrect startup procedures, and a quick change to those procedures would make the problems go away … fix it! Stop doing statistics on numbers you can make go away.

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1018 Calculate Equipment Reliability appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Influence – How to Get It & How to Keep It!

Abstract

Greg and Fred discuss how to influence decision makers to get your ideas adopted and deployed.

Key Points

Join Greg and Fred as they discuss how to get your reliability and quality objectives  adopted into a project.

Influencing topics include:

• What are the critical constraints in a project?
• How to get your reliability objective or goal adopted by the program or project manager?
• How to develop KPI’s or metrics to ensure your objective can be measured?
• How to manage and measure achievement of your quality objective throughout the project’s lifecycle.

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1017 Influence appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Do it Right the First Time

Abstract

Kirk and Fred discuss the risks to reliability of having to rework or human handling of circuit boards and rework in general.

Key Points

Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss process control and hand soldering and how it increases the reliability risk compared to the original production line produced circuit boards

Topics include:

• Reworked solder joints are inconsistent and human touch-up carries a greater risk of failure than the original re-flow oven soldering.
• Rework and repair are often referred to as the hidden factory as the costs of touch-ups and failures of the rework are not always financially accounted for.
• A fundamental tenet of reliability engineering is that if you do not know the physics of why a system fails and why it's unreliable, you will not know how to make it reliable
• Customers, in general, expect more reliable products, and the smartphone industry has made them more shock-resistant and water-resistant in each new iteration of the design.

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.

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 1016 Do it Right the First Time appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Moisture Failure Mechanisms

Abstract

Join Kirk and Fred  discuss failure mechanisms caused by or accelerated by moisture.

Key Points

Join Kirk and Fred as they discuss how water, especially saltwater, can cause failures.
Topics include:

• Even if you think making an O-ring seal in outdoor equipment will keep moisture out, it will still leak enough over time to equalize the external moisture level. Every seal leaks; it is just a matter of time to change the rate of leakage as seals degrade
• Moisture in component encapsulations can cause popcorning in re-flow, which isn't immediately detected but makes a small crack that will eventually fail from moisture intrusion.
• Frozen water in the form of hailstones striking solar panels is a potential cause of failures that they must be able to withstand.
• Even though automobiles are designed to withstand all kinds of rain and other environmental extremes, the hurricanes hitting Florida and North Carolina have flooded many cars, which are not designed to withstand water immersion, resulting in many time dependent latent failure mechanisms.
• Humidity is sometimes increased in dry climates such as here in Colorado for electronics  printed wiring assembly manufacturing to reduce the risk of ESD damage

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.

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 1015 Moisture Failure Mechanisms appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Overcomplicating Systems

Abstract

Greg and Fred discuss how to reduce complexity in life and work.

Key Points

Join Greg and Fred as they discuss how complexity is over complicating our lives and work.   What do you think?  And most importantly, how do you react or respond to complex situations.

Topics include:

• What types of complexity and complications do we face?
• Why do systems have critical technical and social components?
• How can you design for technical and social components?
• What can engineers do to reduce complexity?

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1014 Overcomplicating Systems appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Two Approaches

Abstract

Chris and Fred use the safe return of the Boeing Starliner … without the crew! What does this tell us about its safety and reliability?

Key Points

Join Chris and Fred as they discuss the recent incident involving the Boeing Starliner crew module that managed to get a crew to the International Space Station (ISS) but was not deemed safe enough to return them. But it has since ‘safely’ landed. So was it safe? Is it safe? What about reliability?

Topics include:

• Russian roulette is ‘safe.’ If by safe that means that there are outcomes with no undesirable outcomes. Russian roulette (depending on who you ask) involves a single bullet being placed in the cylinder of a revolver (gun). The cylinder can hold six bullets. The cylinder is then spun so that there is a one in six chance that a bullet will be fired when the trigger is pulled. So there is a five in six chance that no bullet will be fire when you pull the trigger. So does this mean that Russian roulette is safe five times out of six and unsafe the other time? NO! It is always unsafe because it is all about the PROBABILITY of something bad happening.
• Is Boeing ‘safe’? No. NASA’s Inspector General has been very critical of Boeing’s ability to safely, efficiently and effectively develop spacecraft. Issues include not having enough people, not having enough of these people appropriately trained, not responding to corrective action requests from NASA and LOTS of others. Why? Well, while Boeing does have a history of space exploration dating back to the Apollo program, that history is dated. And no longer relevant. So Boeing won contracts from NASA to build spacecraft and THEN tried to create a team to build it. Compare that with SpaceX, which is much younger, but was established with the unambiguous goal of creating all manner of spacecraft before NASA came along offering contracts. So SpaceX built it’s own workforce, worked out its own development processes, put its own skin in the game by building its own spacecraft before signing contracts from customers like NASA, tested to learn and not testing to pass and so on. So this is why SpaceX spacecraft will now return Boeing’s stranded crew back to Earth.
• Organizations hunting for money are destroyed by organizations that have found their purpose. General Motors famously developed an electric vehicle ages ago, until it was killed off because it wasn’t making money straight away. If General Motors was able to go back in time … it would almost certainly reconsider! If they had maintained their electric vehicle program they would potentially be a market leader today (which they are not … they are just a ‘player’) noting that groups of countries are starting to only allow electric vehicles on the road.
• So what do you do? Does your organization only judge success based on immediate returns? Meaning that everyone is hunting profits by week? This means there is no long-term vision which means you meander your way to obsolescence. It is those companies that stick with their long-term vision through highs and lows. Amazon took decades to create a meaningful profit … but it is kind of a big deal now!

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1013 Two Approaches appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

The Trouble with Habits

Abstract

Chris and Fred discuss the issues we often have with ‘habits.’ Habits can be good for us. But ‘bad habits’ are just that. Ever heard the excuse ‘but that’s the way we have always done it?’

Key Points

Join Chris and Fred as they discuss how ‘habits’ dominate our lives … both for better for worse. So what does this mean?

Topics include:

• Decisions are about CONFIDENCE.  You can be ‘confident’ to make the right decision because you fundamentally know and understand all aspects of a problem, and know what will remedy it. Another form of ‘confidence’ occurs when you look for standards or procedures to comply with … which usually only happens when you don’t know and understand all aspects of a problem. You can get ‘confidence’ from having what appears to be a water-tight legal contract. You can also get ‘confidence’ from simply doing what has always been done.
• So not all CONFIDENCE is equal. And it comes down to culture. If you are a leader, and want to look for someone to blame when something goes wrong, then you are creating an organization that is based on ‘confidence’ from doing what has always been done. So no one risks anything. Nothing changes. You slowly drift toward mediocrity, and then to irrelevance.
• The best form of CONFIDENCE is the stuff you get from KNOWLEDGE. Which again comes down to leadership. If people make the right decision based on seeking information on hand and using it, AND you reward that decision even if the outcome is not optimal or desirable … great! This means you become an organization that fails fast, and fails your way to the top. You are actively pushing the boundaries of your organization’s knowledge by having this mindset. And this is what you tend to see in true industry leaders. So what organization is yours?
• But don’t get LAZY. If you used Highly Accelerated Life Testing (HALT) for a component last year to great effect … that doesn’t mean that this is the right thing for all components moving forward.

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.

Show Notes

The post SOR 1012 The Trouble with Habits appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Design Justice

Abstract

Dianna and Fred discuss design justice: what it means for engineers in industry.

Key Points

Join Dianna and Fred as they discuss design justice from the point of view of design processes in industry.

Topics include:

• How industry relates to design justice ideas.
• Shifting roles in design.
• Ways to incorporate design justice into your work.
• Velcro for mars rovers, sandbags on circuit boards, and high-tech theatre sets

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.

Show Notes

Dianna and Fred talk about what design justice means to engineers in industry.

Key Points:

• The Evolution of Design Justice: Understand how the principles of design justice, rooted in community, politics, and economics, are being applied to modern engineering practices.
• The Shifting Role of the Designer: Explore the transition from the designer as a sole decision-maker to a collaborative facilitator working alongside communities and customers. Dianna and Fred talk about the mindset shift needed to be successful.
• The Shifting Role of the Customer in Design: Discover how involving communities and customers in the design process leads to more equitable and innovative solutions. Instead of customer focus groups and gathering feedback on prototypes, the customers are actively designing.
• Design Justice and Other Methods: Dianna and Fred talk about how design justice relates to other design methods, including Design for Usability. They share stories of how design justice can lead to simplicity in solutions.

Listen-in to get practical advice on how to implement design justice principles in your own work, including focusing on the design process, offering options, and embracing a collaborative “yes, and” approach.

See this link for the 10 Design Justice Network Principles.

The post SOR 1011 Design Justice appeared first on Accendo Reliability.

Uneasiness with AI

Abstract

Dianna and Fred discuss sources of uneasiness with AI and its use within industry.

Key Points

Join Dianna and Fred as they discuss sources of uneasiness with AI.

Topics include:

• The challenge of AI to authenticity.
• Integrating AI into our current processes and what that could mean for reliability.
• The availability of AI: it’s challenges for computing power and source data.
• How to approach AI right now for tomorrow.
• Artists, technical writing, flowcharts, and tomato processing.

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.

• Social:
• Link:
• Embed:

Show Notes

There is a general uneasiness with AI with some in industry, but it can be hard to really get to the root of why. Dianna and Fred discuss what they’ve been hearing from others.

• There’s an unease about authenticity.
  • AI challenges the idea that humans are unique in thought and creativity in art, writing, and more.
  • There is an increase practice of listing “this will be done by humans” in services and products (things like resumes, technical papers, and more).
  • AI is forcing a restructuring of how professionals structure fees, from time-based to result-based.
• Integration of AI is becoming commonplace.
  • The integration of AI in so many daily tools are now competing with each other.
  • The interfaces of AI with other logic tools – what are the failure points?
  • Using AI can complicate what should really be simple. Just because we can doesn’t mean it adds value.
• AI is available, or is it?
  • There is a huge computational cost for using AI.
  • Most are not really knowing what to use AI for and how. We’re still figuring it out.
  • All knowledge is not available. Trade secrets are limiting databases.
• How can we approach AI right now for tomorrow?

What questions do you have for Fred and Dianna? Try asking AI to generate a list of five potential questions to ask, then let us know!