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

Extended Bogey Testing

Extended Bogey Testing

Reaching for a goal may include taking some risks. In reliability testing, we are often limited by the number of samples available for testing. And, in the case where time is available or the acceleration factor is high we can take advantage of testing longer.

The success testing formula

$$ \large\displaystyle n=\frac{\ln \left( 1-C \right)}{\ln \left( R \right)}$$

works when testing each of the n units for one lifetime. One way to reduce the number of samples needed to show the same confidence and reliability is to run the test longer. The above equation is a reduced form of

$$ \large\displaystyle n=\frac{\ln \left( 1-C \right)}{{{m}^{\beta }}\ln \left( R \right)}$$

where m^β is equal to one. Wasserman’s Reliability Verification, Testing, and Analysis in Engineering Design has more information and the derivation.

m is the number of lifetimes. For example, if we know that 10,000 cycles of the door mechanism (open-close cycles) is one lifetime, then running 20k cycles would set m to 2. And, a quick calculation shows that needed number of samples, n, is cut by half. And, with a little thought you can see there is a diminishing return with longer and longer test runs.

The other issue is related to the success testing criteria that there are no failures. The longer the test runs over the expected lifetime, the higher the chance some other failure mechanism will appear – something the is not very likely at one lifetime, yet maybe very likely at five lifetimes. This would negate the test. It’s a risk.

In general, keep m below 5.

Beta, β, is used when the Weibull life distribution for the expected (dominate) failure mechanism is known. If it’s not known, use β = 1. Beta is often difficult to know, and this ‘Weibayes’ approach is for those rare cases when you have supporting information or data that β is not equal to one.

The entire idea is with fewer samples it will take longer before a failure is expected given a fixed failure life distribution. It’s risky, yet often a practical means to reduce sample size.


Related:

Sample Size – success testing (article)

Success Testing Formula Derivation (article)

Sources of Reliability Data (article)

 

Filed Under: Articles, CRE Preparation Notes, Probability and Statistics for Reliability, Reliability Testing Tagged With: failure mechanism, Qualification Demonstration Testing, Reliability test planning, sample size, Sample Size Determination

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.

« Sample Size Success Testing
Weakest Link »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

CRE Preparation Notes

Article by Fred Schenkelberg

Join Accendo

Join our members-only community for full access to exclusive eBooks, webinars, training, and more.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Get Full Site Access

Not ready to join?
Stay current on new articles, podcasts, webinars, courses and more added to the Accendo Reliability website each week.
No membership required to subscribe.

[popup type="" link_text="Get Weekly Email Updates" link_class="button" ]

[/popup]

  • CRE Preparation Notes
  • CRE Prep
  • Reliability Management
  • Probability and Statistics for Reliability
  • Reliability in Design and Development
  • Reliability Modeling and Predictions
  • Reliability Testing
  • Maintainability and Availability
  • Data Collection and Use

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