Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Lifetime Evaluation v Measurement

by Oleg Ivanov Leave a Comment

Lifetime Evaluation v Measurement

Lifetime Evaluation v Measurement

Lifetime: Evaluation vs. Measurement

Guest Post by Oleg Ivanov

How can we tell whether an iron is hot enough? The answer is obvious: We can measure temperature by using a thermocouple and a meter. But, in practice, we lick our finger and touch the iron. Sizzle…. Yes, it’s hot!

We know a priori the boiling temperature of water and we can evaluate the temperature of the iron. This method has a lower cost.

How can we know whether a product has a long enough lifetime? The answer is obvious too: We can test 100 products till their failure and find out that we have one mechanism of failure with a lognormal lifetime distribution, an expectation value of 7.6, and a standard deviation of 0.3. We can be sure that the reliability of this product is R = 0.99 during T = 1000 h of operation.

OK; the reliability of a product is high enough: It is the measurement that is expensive.

We can reduce testing cost by using the information we may already have available. Any information can be useful, including the results of testing of the materials and elements, as well as operation experience with similar products. If we know a priori that the product has one mechanism of failure with a lognormal lifetime distribution and a standard deviation of 0.3, we can test two products for three lifetimes (3000 h). It is an application of Six Sigma method for the life time (Fig.1). If these test yield satisfactory results, we can be sure that the reliability of this product is R = 0.99 during T = 1000 h of operation with CL = 0.99.

Fig1

Fig.1. The application of Six Sigma method for the life time.

 

This is the evaluation. The results of evaluation and measurement are the same, but the cost of evaluation is less than the cost of measurement.

What is the payment for such a cost reduction?

In the case of the hot iron, we can burn a finger or our favorite shirt. In the case of the product lifetime, the product should have large durability reserves to pass this strong of a test (Fig.2). This is the drawback of evaluation.

Fig2

Fig.2. The large risk of the supplier for the evaluation of the lifetime.

Note that evaluation is the foundation for certification of aircraft engines now. We can make an aircraft engine 10% lighter if we can measure (not evaluate) the Engine Critical Parts durability.

Filed Under: Articles, NoMTBF

About Oleg Ivanov

Oleg Ivanov is an aircraft engine design engineer with experience creating accelerated tests of aviation products (auxiliary power units, turbo generators, turbopumps, electro pumps). I see the shortcomings of standards and theory reliability/lifetime tests. My passion is to create new approaches (methods, tools) for accelerated tests. Life Cycle Simulator is one of these new tools.

« 15 Ways to Safely Reduce the Size of Your Maintenance Crew!
Hypotheses Testing – What is That? »

Comments

  1. Michael Dashuta says

    March 17, 2016 at 8:55 AM

    http://www.zvei.org/Publikationen/Robustness-Validation-Semiconductor-2015.pdf

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The NoMTBF logo

Devoted to the eradication of the misuse of MTBF.

Photo of Fred SchenkelbergArticles by Fred Schenkelberg and guest authors

in the NoMTBF article series

Recent Posts

  • Gremlins today
  • The Power of Vision in Leadership and Organizational Success
  • 3 Types of MTBF Stories
  • ALT: An in Depth Description
  • Project Email Economics

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy