Tag Archives: Fred Schenkelberg

#340 – ‘WHAT IF’ ANALYSIS – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

What if you knew all the possible outcomes for your product’s reliability performance due to component variations, for example? What if you knew the future with enough certainty to make a difference?

Building on brainstorming, what-if analysis involved using models or prototypes that allow you to change something and see how it alters the output or performance. What if we change this support bracket from iron to aluminum? What if we swap out this 100 ohm resistor for a 200 ohm one? Continue reading →

#339 – SHOWCASE YOUR RELIABILITY ACCOMPLISHMENTS WELL! – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

When a reliability engineer or manager does their job well, the product just works as expected. Maybe even a little better than expected. There isn’t any major problems that need a hero to resolve.

Work done well, may go unnoticed. To avoid that you need to master the art of promoting successes without coming across as bragging or boasting. For your career advancement, you need to be both successful and likable. Continue reading →

#327 – STRATIFICATION: A BASIC QUALITY TOOL – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Stratification implies layers or differences. A quick test for soil composition is to place a sample of soil with water in a clear jar and give it a shake. The sand, silt and loam will settle at different rates and create a layered appearance within the jar over time. The height of each layer provides information about the proportion of each type of soil within the sample.

Stratification as one of the seven basic quality tools (some lists use a run chart or flowchart instead) the idea of layers or differences still applies. The idea is to identify potentially meaning differences within a sample set. Continue reading →

#325 – LESSONS LEARNED VIA GOLDEN NUGGETS – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

One of the enjoyable parts of reliability engineering work is the consistent need to learn. We learn how new materials, designs, applications, and systems work, and fail. Sometimes we learn through proactive characterization studies, sometimes via unwanted field failures.

Failures will occur, it is what we learn from them that matters. The ability to gather and remember the lessons learned is a common and ongoing need for every organization. We are not very good at it, in general. Continue reading →

#324 – IMPROVING RELIABILITY WITH GOOD JUDGMENT – FRED SCHENKELBERG

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

At an early concept meeting discussing the technical strategy for the new product, the engineering teams were at an impasse. The decision matrix balanced out with three distinct options. Product reliability differed slightly with each option yet presented risks just as the considerations of cost, complexity, feature set, and time to market.

The project manager, the leader of the development program, asked a few questions, asked for input from the director of engineering, and selected a path forward. Continue reading →