All posts by Fred Schenkelberg

About Fred Schenkelberg

I am an experienced reliability engineering and management consultant with my firm FMS Reliability. My passion is working with teams to create cost-effective reliability programs that solve problems, create durable and reliable products, increase customer satisfaction, and reduce warranty costs.

Replacing MTBF with Bx

MTBF

A Guest Post by Jim McLeish titled:

Replacing MTBF/MTTF with Bx/Lx Reliability Metrics 

Jim McLeish – Mid-West Regional Manager – DfR Solutions
(Rochester Hills Michigan)

jmcleish@dfrsolutions.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmcleish 

Expanded from the RIAC Reliability Information Analysis Center Linkedin Group Discussion on

“Great challenge for change from Fred – No MTBF!”

“Endless discussion and it seems there’s no real solution to get rid of MTBF”

See original and ongoing Linkedin discussion here.

 

I am absolutely astonished that the reliability profession and its noted experts are unable to develop a better metric to characterize reliability performance and specify reliability requirements.  I respectfully submit that there is a simple and eloquent solution that has successfully been used in the ball bearing and machine industry for decades (that actually predates MTBF/MTTF), that should be considered as a replacement to MTBF/MTTF. Continue reading Replacing MTBF with Bx →

“When you’re trying to create a career as a writer, a little delusional thinking goes a long way.” – Michael Lewis

Or when trying to eradicate MTBF – although I don’t think so.

Someone had to do it

MTBF

Take on MTBF, that is.

In a conversion with a colleague I mentioned the amount of traffic the NoMTBF site has been enjoying. For what started simply as a device for a discussion, the No MTBF movement has turned into quite an endeavor. We talked about the idea that unless someone starts and stays with the effort, MTBF will continue to erode the credibility of reliability engineering. We talked about the idea that unless we started the discussion to only use MTBF when it is proper to do so, that we would be plagued by the rampant misunderstanding and misuse for decades to come.

Continue reading Someone had to do it →

Teacher and Student

Engineering

Reliability engineer as teacher and student

Formal education will make you a living; self-education will make you a fortune. ~ Jim Rohn

The learning never stops. As a reliability engineer we constantly have something to learn. For those unfamiliar with reliability engineering, they have a lot to learn. From new Continue reading Teacher and Student →

Value

Uncategorized

Adding value to build your career

As a reliability engineer we work across the organization to bring a reliable product to market. The value of meeting the customers reliability expectations results in customer satisfactions, increased sales and in some cases premium pricing. We want a reliable product. Being a pivotal element in the process means you have provided value to the organization and to their customers. Continue reading Value →

Networked and Positive

Engineering

The benefits of being networked and positive

Part of what appears to be a series on what it takes to be a really good reliability engineer.

Networked

For professionals knowing enough of the right people, helping them solve issues, and asking them for assistance when needed is essential. This is what I mean by networking. Continue reading Networked and Positive →

Nuclear Power Plant Electronic System Reliability Study

Maintainability

Nuclear Power Plant Electronic System Reliability Study

by Andrew Rowland, CRE – a contributed paper.

Andrew is back with a paper describing using non-parametric approach to maintenance data. While not mentioning MTBF (which is good) the paper does provide alternatives to using a overly simply (i.e. MTBF) analysis of maintenance data.

A well written case study and analysis will provide you inspiration to try it yourself. Continue reading Nuclear Power Plant Electronic System Reliability Study →

NoMTBF Non-Users Group

MTBF

Let’s Create a NoMTBF Non-User’s Group Today

We do it right!

Those that read this blog regularly know that I, along with many others, have some passion for the eradication of MTBF from common use. We make arguments, create examples, describe the errors and encourage using other methods. The campaign seems to be going along well. Yet MTBF is still in use – in standards, in certifications, and even taught by those that should really know better. We’re making progress, but there is much more yet to do. Continue reading NoMTBF Non-Users Group →

Please don’t remove MTBF, part 2

MTBF

Please don’t remove MTBF, part 2

This note is the second part of my response to a forum entry by HL concerning two arguments he is attempting to refute. Of course, my arguments for the eradication of MTBF may stir up some resistance. My plea to use a better approach may challenge the status quo or ruffle a few feathers. So be it. That is expected. Continue reading Please don’t remove MTBF, part 2 →