Abstract
AbstractElectronic equipment designs embody measures and techniques to enhance reliability. Often, concepts of designing for failure avoidance are inferred from various failure prediction methodologies (FPM) such as MIL‐HDBK‐217,1 BellCore2 etc. However, these FPM models do not accurately predict actual failures of completed assemblies, for they usually emphasize component parts as the dominant cause of problems, and the models cannot be kept up to date. Furthermore, the true causes of failure are not described, and thus they cannot be accomodated by design. As such, use of FPM as a source of guidance for reliability‐enhancing activities in producing reliable products may have less effectiveness than originally intended. Some FPM encouraged features can impose heavy costs, complexities and other penalties. By adopting solutions to problems that are inaccurately defined, true problems may be unaddressed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
