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 3 Comments

What Can One Reliability Engineer Do?

What Can One Reliability Engineer Do?

Lately, I’ve seen some evidence of reliability engineers giving up.

Throwing in the towel. Going with the flow. Not rocking the boat.

Is that our charter? To roll over and accept that we cannot make a difference?

No, it’s not.

The obstacles we all face

Not every organization is solely focused on creating reliable products or running equipment at the highest availability possible. In fact, few organizations are, in my experience.

What I have seen most often is organizations trying to create and ship products that meet customer needs. Products that solve a problem or make the customer’s life a bit easier or enjoyable.

Factories that want to create and ship products using the equipment on hand. Today’s deadlines are urgent and believed important.

We do not have enough time for accelerated testing or design of experiments, even though we all know they both actually can save us time in the long run. We don’t have time to apply the right sample size calculation, so grab a standard value.

We lack time for failure analysis and root cause investigations so we see the same problems.

The money, time, space, samples, tools, are rarely all ready to go. Even if they are, we don’t have the staff of experts to make it all work well.

We are alone.

We alone bring to the table the concerns about failures in the hands of our customers and on the plant floor. We represent bad news, caution, and tell stories of potential problems.

What can we do?

To start we can change decisions.

That is what we do. We inform, advise, cajole, and influence decisions across the organization. We do represent reliability, including the failures, yet we also represent what happens when the equipment operates reliably, or products “just work”.

You can provide insights that lead to selecting the right vendor even if it costs a tad more. If the reduction in failures outweighs the cost of purchase, it’s the right thing to do based on cost alone. And, it has the added benefit of reducing time sorting out why those parts fail.

You can present data that changes the warranty or maintenance policy. Clearly understanding the nature of failure rates allows us to manage the cost of warranty, or to determine if our maintenance program is effective or not. Just a graph of the time to failure data. It works wonders.

You can ask questions about what if it “just works”. Get others thinking beyond the cost of the parts, the time spent down for maintenance, and focus on the benefits or value of the product or equipment just working.

I’ve personally used reliability engineering tasks and results to change the focus of a development team (FMEA), avoid an expensive product recall (root cause analysis), and avoided the construction of a major factory (Weibull plot).

Some of our projects are small, some large. Some are required and some just make sense to do. With each and every reliability task you undertake, determine how it impacts the organization and customer. Find and understand the value you provide and work to make sure that value occurs.

If you want to simply fill out forms or record meaningless test results, that is your choice. I think you are missing a chance to make a difference, enjoy your work, and earn the respect you deserve.


Related:

Successful Reliability Engineers Add Value (article)

Success as a Reliability Engineer (article)

Reliability as Part of Every Decision (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 People Skills of a Good Reliability Engineer
What Can You Do to Improve Reliability? »

Comments

  1. Kashif Ali says

    April 20, 2016 at 10:01 PM

    I really like the comment in the last paragraph. I have worked with reliability engineers who are just content with filling out forms. Thus, by not using reliability toolkit are not making a difference,miserable and not enjoyinh their work and most of all not getting the respect.

    Reply
    • Fred Schenkelberg says

      April 21, 2016 at 11:51 AM

      We can and should make a difference – to some extent it is a personal choice. I hope by sharing what has been done or possible, that more will take on challenges and make a difference. cheers Fred

      Reply
  2. Hilaire Perera says

    June 18, 2019 at 12:05 PM

    When components in a system have constant Failure Rates, Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) of the system can be used to represent or calculate Reliability at any time within the Useful Life period. This is usually done by a Reliability Engineer

    The mean life function (often denoted as “MTBF”) is not a good measurement when used as the sole reliability metric. Instead, the use of a reliability value with an associated time, along with an associated confidence level, is a more versatile and powerful metric for describing a product’s reliability

    For people who are unable to establish a Failure/Time distribution to calculate reliability of their product, the easiest way to track Reliability is to use MTTF(MTBF) periodically. “Single Point” calculations are not suitable for warranty, spares allocation, etc. Should calculate the MTTF(MTBF) number at a Confidence Level.

    Confidence limits for the mean are an interval estimate for the mean. Interval estimates are often desirable because the estimate of the mean varies from sample to sample. Instead of a single estimate for the mean, a confidence interval generates a lower and upper limit for the mean. The interval estimate gives an indication of how much uncertainty there is in our estimate of the true mean. The narrower the interval, the more precise is our estimate.

    Reply

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