SRC Forum - Message Replies


Forum: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic: Reliability & Maintainability Questions and Answers

Topic Posted by: Reliability & Maintainability Forum (src_forum@alionscience.com )
Organization: System Reliability Center
Date Posted: Mon Aug 31 12:47:36 US/Eastern 1998

Back to message list Topics List About this forum
Original Message:

Posted by: Ned H. Criscimagna (ncriscimagna@alionscience.com )
Organization:IITRI
Date posted: Fri Sep 25 15:26:46 US/Eastern 1998
Subject: Has DoD Deserted R&M?
Message:
Have Reliability and Maintainability Been Deserted by Dod? In the Second Quarter, 1998 issue of the RAC Journal (available on-line at URL ), my article on this subject appeared. The real question is what has motivated the DoD and military services to reduce their staffs dedicated to R&M? Even the Rome Laboratory (now the Air Force Laboratory Information Directorate) has relinquished its R&M role, a role not assumed by any other Air Force organization. What do you think prompted these actions? Do you see similar reductions in the numbers of R&M engineers employed in industry? If so, to what do you attribute these reductions? I really would like to hear your views.


Reply:

Subject: Reliability Engineering Growth
Reply Posted by: Joe Dzekevich (joe_dzekevich@ne.3com.com )
Organization: 3Com Corporation
Date Posted: Wed Oct 21 16:33:40 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
I think the reliability field reflects the industry it is in. If the industry is healthy and growing, it is hiring reliability engineers. If the industry is declining it is downsizing reliability engineers. We in the networking industry have been hiring reliability engineers. Likewise, our Boston IEEE chapter membership seems to have bottomed out and has rebounded a bit. On top of that, our local IEEE reliability chapter newsletter has been collecting more reliability wanted links by growing industries that need reliability engineers. From my viewpoint, we are on the rebound.


Reply:

Subject: RELIABILITY AUDIT
Reply Posted by: PARTHIBAN (kennedyjoshua@usa.net )SPIC-SMO
Date Posted: Sat Oct 24 13:38:20 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
I am a new entrant in the world of Reliability and would like to have your contact. I am a Maintenance Engineer specialising Rotating machienry maintenance. I would like to know about the basics of reliability, what exactly is Reliability audit, how it is carriedout, etc. I know very well that I am disturbing you. Still, if you can spare some time, please contact me in kennedyjoshua@usa.net Regards.


Reply:

Subject: Reliability and reductions
Reply Posted by: J.J.Ward (Joseph.ward@network.com )StorageTek
Date Posted: Wed Nov 11 15:25:16 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
I do not think the concepts of R&M have been deserted by the Military establishment, rather we (R&M Engineers)have been given a new license to reinvent ourselves and our methods for producing and sustaining reliable products. In the recent past too many rel engineers pointed to the 217 numbers and said there was a design problem, too many rel engineers were dogmatic in there stances on issues, the interface between design and the support groups was nonexistent. This was a forcing function for change. We are now blessed with concepts like concurrent engineering and product development teams and cost as an independent variable. We now have an open license to impact design and avoid the exactness of military documentation dogma. We now have a chance at keeping up with the design process and trying out ideas in the early development phases. This is a great time for Rel engineers. Companies who do not value the R&M aspects of design will fail, product margins are not sufficient to absorb poor product designs. Life is good for our occupation an profits are good for those companies who appreciate our knowledge and leverage us to advantage. Remeber Logistics won the war and R&M is the backbone of logistics. Joe


Reply:

Subject: DoD Deserting R&M
Reply Posted by: A K Seah (aseah@eagle.org )American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)
Date Posted: Mon Dec 14 18:10:00 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
While I do not have any inkling on DoD's motive, I do feel that it is not deserting R&M. I also think that DoD is looking to industry in general to support its R&M activities. We in the marine industry are only just beginning to introduce R&M albeit with almost insurmountable difficulties. Pockets of activities are going on, including collection of RAM data. Most without signigicant results. In my view, there is a lack of coordination on how and in what form reliability ought to be applied. Looking back on MIL-STD 785 for example, the regime defined therein is technically sound, but to apply it in commerical shipping industry would be a hard sell. The future for R&M is not at all gloomy; what it needs is to define a scheme - one less rigorous than MIL-STD but good enough to do the needful in system reliability prediction, maintenance management, life cycle cost optimization, etc. - which has commerical application. Most statutory regulations will migrate to a risk-based regime. And a very important element underlying this migration is application of reliability technology. We are looking at this and would like to know anyone that could help.


Reply:

Subject: I liked the response that Joe made--
Reply Posted by: Irving M. ("Mack") Baxter (mack_baxter@winea.com )
Organization: Widmer's Wine Cellars
Date Posted: Tue Dec 29 11:47:42 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
I am anovice at the REL field-- I used to be turned off by the 'dogma' that joe refers to-- Now I see this field becoming more 'in touch with reality' (maybe that is harsh -- sorry, I did not mean to offend!--) I look forward to learning more-- I am enjoying trhe articles in the 3rd quarter '98 journal RAC-- Sincerely, 'Mack' Baxter


Reply:

Subject: I liked the response that Joe made--
Reply Posted by: Irving M. ("Mack") Baxter (mack_baxter@winea.com )
Organization: Widmer's Wine Cellars
Date Posted: Tue Dec 29 11:49:07 US/Eastern 1998
Message:
I am a novice at the REL field-- I used to be turned off by the 'dogma' that Joe refers to-- Now I see this field becoming more 'in touch with reality' (maybe that is harsh -- sorry, I did not mean to offend!--) I look forward to learning more-- I am enjoying trhe articles in the 3rd quarter '98 journal RAC-- Sincerely, 'Mack' Baxter


Back to message list Topics List About this forum
Reply to this message