Dave,
I really agree with all you say - to the extent possible without your vast
knowledge and experience. It's really the warm and fuzzy suggestion you made
that has me concerned.
The company selling the software is a consultancy selling their reliability
wares. To me, they have a foot in the door each time they "give" away "free"
software of the type in discussion.
I have, and will continue to, informed my management they will have trouble
down stream if their customer continues pursuing the easy way to
reliability. They are quite aware of my position to the extent they want a
plan essentially to counter the claims made by the software consultants if
the customer continues its use.
I have such a plan and will implement it at time of all the product I did FA
work on while redesigning it using DFM/CE tools. When this happens, I will
provide all the evidence in my plan concerning not only the parts in
question, but the entire assembly. This will be based on industry data used
to construct documents such as several IPC types.
I am a quality and reliability hard case. I do not profess to compete with
fine folks like you, but I certainly can point to you as an example of
someone to call in if and when necessary. Sorry to say, I hope this does not
have to happen because if we in industry haven't gotten it close to right so
far, we never will.
Thanks,
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: <[log in to unmask]>
To: "pod" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 2:43 AM
Subject: Fw: [TN] BETWEEN A ROCK AND MY CAVE
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Douthit" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 10:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [TN] BETWEEN A ROCK AND MY CAVE
>
>
> > Earl,
> >
> > You asked for it!
> >
> > Trying to save money no matter how much it costs is not very bright
> >
> > Any form of history based data reliability predictions is "worse than
> useless" (not my
> > phrase).
> > The collection process is limited, filtered, or simply not done.
> > There is no real incentive to "improve" products (you make additional
> money fixing problems
> > on fielded products!)
> > Changes are occurring so fast it is difficult to correlate the new
product
> with old data.
> > Computer reliability programs suffer from GIGO.
> > The current "reliability" engineering process is in reality "infant
> morality" engineering
> > controlled by warranty limits.
> > This software can also be used as a "warm fuzzy" to justify almost
> anything by adjusting
> > input data.
> > Accurate operational in-sutu environmental testing must be done, data
> compiled, and
> > adjustments/corrections/changes made.
> > Anything short of this is a "Death Wish"!!!
> >
> > David A. Douthit
> > Manager
> > LoCan LLC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
