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

Introduction to Derating

Introduction to Derating

Derating is the selection of components and materials according to a set of standardized safety-margin definitions.

It is used by design engineers to ensure the selected elements of the design do not experience performance problems due to overstress conditions.

Derating, like stress-strength analysis, assists the designer when selecting elements for the product or system.

The outcome is a robust design able to withstand the expected, and some of the unexpected, stress applied.

The derating process

Start with a derating guideline.

Note: derating guidelines are typically listed with information for electronic components, yet the concept applies to a mechanical element as well. For mechanical systems, we generally use safety factor or margin guidelines, not derating guidelines.

There are a number of derating guidelines publicly available.

Your organization may revise an existing guideline or craft one for use in your applications.

A comprehensive guideline is SD-18 compiled by the Navel Sea Systems Command, NSWC Crane Division.

MIT published a guideline for EE-INST-002 in 2005.

Component vendors typically provide derating guidelines for their products.

For example, Kement provides voltage and temperature derating guidelines for their line of capacitors. Voltage and temperature derating guidelines – Kemet

There are derating guidelines from standards bodies, from space agencies and military organizations.

In a study we did at HP when updating our internal derating guidelines, we found the various guidelines generally agreed with each other.

The key for the derating process is to have a documented set of guidelines and to enforce the routine use of the guidelines.

A typical derating guideline and how to use it

From the NavSea set of guidelines, the derating guideline states:

Maximum Allowable Rating:

Current/Voltage — 80%

Power — 50% (See Notes 1 and 4 below)

1. For repetitive pulse applications, the average power is determined by dividing pulse duration by duty cycle, and multiplying the result by the peak power.

4. Derating values for thick film resistors is taken from IPC-MC-790, “Guidelines for Multichip Module Technology Utilization”; August 1992.

To use this information consider the situation where you wish to use a thick film capacitor on a circuit with a nominal 5 volts applied across the capacitor.

You may be able to find a capacitor rated by the vendor for 5 volts.

This is the vendor’s rated voltage. Thus in an application using 5 volts, it would experience the voltage stress that is 100% of the rated value.

This is above the derating guideline and to be avoided.

Instead, let’s do a little math.

We need to find a capacitor with a rated voltage that is high enough that the applied 5 volts are at 80% or less the rated value.

If we divide 5 volts by 0.8 (the guideline 80%) we find 6.25 volts.

Our capacitor vendor may not provide a solution rated at exactly 6.25 volts, which is fine. This is our minimum rated value to meet the guideline.

So, if we find a capacitor rated at 10 volts, that should work for our situation. The application voltage of 5 volts divided by the rated value of 10 volts shows we are at a 50% derated condition.

This is below the maximum allowable and fine.

The same process applies for current and power.

Each component may have one or more parameters to consider for derating. The selected component should satisfy each piece of the guideline.

The best approach to apply the guidelines is during component selection.

For items that may violate the guideline or are simply close the maximum recommendations, that is a prompt to understand the risks involved.

The derating and reliability discussion

The guideline is, well, a guideline.

There will be times you need to select a part which violates the guideline.

The guideline should prompt discussion and understanding of the risks involved when selecting a component which doesn’t meet the guidelines. Even those which are close, yet strictly do meet the guidelines, should prompt further consideration.

The elements at or above the derating guidelines have little to no margin.

They may work and may work well for your specific application.

It’s just the recommended margin is less, thus that part will not be capable of withstanding the variations in:

  • Applied stress
  • Manufacturing
  • Transportation and storage
  • Installation
  • Power line
  • Environment
  • Use

Every component in your product will experience a broad range of stress variation.

Having ample margin helps your system operate with fewer failures.

Summary

As your organization employs a derating guideline, your product will become more robust, and reliable.

The higher rated parts may cost a bit more, yet the savings through fewer failures and happier customers is ample return on the investment.

It does take some discipline to adhere to a set of derating guidelines. With a bit of training and practice, it really doesn’t take too much effort to make it happen.

The added benefit of identifying potential weaker elements of your product may assist you and your team better characterize the reliability risks within the design.

Do you and your team use a derating guideline? How well is it working? What are some of the difficulties you’ve seen?

Leave a comment, join the conversation.

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

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.

« Developing a Strategy to Achieve Excellence in Maintenance
Tolerance Specifications Impact on Reliability »

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