Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Way of the Quality Warrior
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • 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 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
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • 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
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • 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
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Fred Schenkelberg Leave a Comment

Basic Approach to Achieve Process Stability

Basic Approach to Achieve Process Stability

Everything varies.

Your vendors provide components with a range of values. Your production process varies, too.

Creating, monitoring, and maintaining process stability enhances your product reliability performance.

When I started my professional life as a manufacturing engineer, a senior engineer told me we take a product design and can only make it worse.

He said if we could make every unit exactly according to the nominal values of the drawing, every unit would work well.

This made sense to me as I’d been analyzing data gathered from every unit produced.

We had just installed a new measurement tool to an early stage of the production process.

The tool measured the resistivity of the core of the product (a heating cable).

The target for a product may be 500 ohms. There was not a flat line of readings at 500 ohms.

The reading bounced from 423 ohms to close to 600 ohms.

Sure the bulk of the readings were just above 500 ohms, yet a quick scan of thousands of reading did not find any exactly at 500 ohms.

The trick to process stability

This often eludes many.

You have to measure something that actually relates to the final product’s performance.

It is possible to measure many elements of a product in production, not all of them are important.

Start with the FMEA or a discussion with the design engineers. What are the critical elements of the design?

What has to be right on the specifications to best ensure the final product will work?

Sometimes we have to measure a surrogate or something that relates or predicts the final performance.

When we find and start measuring an element of the product that is the source of the final product variability.

We’re about to learn something- that not all products are the same.

They should be, and they are not.

Plan, do, check, act

Deming and others have long advocated process improvement based on data. So, given our measurements, we have data.

Now we need information.

A common approach is to prepare an experiment or adjustment concerning the process or materials.

In essence, this can be as simple as changing something, like polymer blend drying time from 30 minutes to 45 minutes. Do not just run down to your production floor and start changing things and see what happens.

That is a recipe for chaos.

Instead, think about what should occur and why.

Create an experimental plan. Prepare to collect sufficient data to allow your experiment to create clear results.

The sample size or run time is part of the experimental planning and using the appropriate statistical tools.

Run the experiment and collect the data. Do the analysis.

Check the results. Often with another run of the experiment or pilot run of production. Double check. Did the reduction in variability occur, or did the shift of the mean occur, or both?

Act. Implement the changes and monitor. At this point, I find we have other experiments to run as we notice other opportunities for improvements.

Statistical Process Control (SPC) and capability analysis

The measurement step is critical.

Once a meaningful measurement system is in place and the product is meeting specifications (mostly), we need better tools than a series of experiments and adjustments.

SPC tools allow us to efficiently monitor the variability of a process. SPC alerts us to changes (good or bad) soon after they occur.

If the process is stable, SPC will provide the evidence (the data) that the process is stable.

Once stable, it’s time to conduct a capability analysis.

This tool provides design and manufacturing engineers the information they need to create new products that the current process has the ability to actually produce well.

Summary

PDCA, SPC, and capability analysis are common tools to assist you to create products that perform as expected.

No two individual products from your assembly line are the same.

Different is okay within reason when it comes to product performance.

Measure, adjust, improve, and monitor your processes. Understand and correct causes of unwanted variability.

Keep your process under control and your customer’s happy.


Related:

Introduction to Control Charts (article)

Reliability Block Diagrams Overview and Value (article)

Introduction to Derating (article)

 

 

Filed Under: Articles, Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics, on Product Reliability

About Fred Schenkelberg

I am the reliability expert at FMS Reliability, a reliability engineering and management consulting firm I founded in 2004. I left Hewlett Packard (HP)’s Reliability Team, where I helped create a culture of reliability across the corporation, to assist other organizations.

« The MTBF Conspiracy Theory
The Liability Part of Reliability Engineering »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Article by Fred Schenkelberg
in the Musings series

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

Recent Articles

  • test
  • test
  • test
  • Your Most Important Business Equation
  • Your Suppliers Can Be a Risk to Your Project

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