As mentioned before we were present at RAMS again as a sponsor and with a booth.
We managed to welcome a lot of our members, during the conference and while having our annual RAMS dinner.
The dinner with special announcements took place at Brickworks American Restaurant. More about the actual RAMS symposium in later posts on our website.
We overcame challenges with Eventbrite and were able to set up the dinner for all ASQ RRD members. We welcomed our members with a nice dinner that was co-hosted by ASQ ECD and ASQ RRD.
There was a speech from our Chair Trevor talking about past year, future plans and thanking the numerous volunteers for their hard work for the Division and in particular David Auda for the year in, year out perfect webinar organizing and (co-)hosting.
There was one award presented this year for the 2018-2019 QE best reliability paper award that was announced by Rong.
Winner: Jeff I. Abes, Michael S. Hamada & Charles R. Hills (2018) Comparing methods for assessing reliability uncertainty based on pass/fail data collected over time
It became a nice evening, as indicated before, there will be more details on the actual conference in later posts. but to conclude for now: Carrot cake!
Presenter: Feng-Bin Sun – Senior Staff of Reliability Engineering, Tesla
The purpose of this presentation is to use numerical examples to demonstrate the data analysis for various fractional failure scenarios with the most popular commercial software in the market (such as Weibull++, JMP, and Minitab), including:
fractional failure determination,
data entry format,
life distribution parameter estimation,
reliability quantification, and field risk prediction.
Dr. Feng-Bin (Frank) Sun is currently a Senior Staff Manager of Reliability Engineering and Technical Lead of Manufacturing Reliability at Tesla Inc. with over 30 years of industry and academia experience. Prior to joining Tesla, he worked at HGST, a Western Digital Company, as a Senior Technologist of Reliability Engineering from 2010 to 2015, at Western Digital Corporation as a Technical Team Leader from 2003 to 2010, and at Maxtor-Quantum Corporation as a Senior Staff Reliability Engineer from 1997 to 2003. He has published two books, both by Prentice Hall, and more than 50 papers in various areas of reliability, maintainability and quality engineering. He received his Ph.D. in Reliability from University of Arizona. Dr. Sun served in the editorial board as an Associate Editor for the IEEE Transactions on Reliability from 1999 to 2003 and from 2016 to present, Program Chair of ISSAT International Conference on Reliability and Quality in Design since 2014, and a committee member and session moderator of numerous international conference on reliability. He is a member of ASQ and the President for Society of Reliability Engineers Silicon (SRE) Valley Chapter. He is also the program manager in charge of ASQ Reliability Webinar Mandarin Series. Dr. Sun received the RAMS 2013 A.O. Plait Best Tutorial Award.
On Nov 14, 2019, Mark Galley presented the webinar: “Facilitate, Document & Present a Root Cause Analysis: Learn to Diagram with the Second Cursor in Excel” Included the slides and video recording of the webinar
ASQ RRD Series: FMEA Ratings – What They Mean and Why Most People Set Them Incorrectly
Thu, Feb 6, 2020 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM EST
Presenter: Richard Harpster
The primary purpose of the Design FMEA and Process FMEA is to allow companies to efficiently manage risk. No company has unlimited resources. When properly used the Design FMEA and Process FMEA can help companies target the use of their limited resources to achieve the greatest reduction in design and manufacturing related risk.
To be used effectively as risk management tools, one must properly populate the rating columns of the Design FMEA and Process FMEA. If you have participated in the creation of a Design FMEA or Process FMEA there is a high likelihood that you have spent considerable time populating the rating columns. There is also a high likelihood that you probably did so improperly. How do I know this?
For one, every commonly used FMEA Manual/Standard/Guideline that I know of in publication including the latest AIAG VDA FMEA Handbook instructs the users to populate one of the most important rating columns in both the Design FMEA and Process FMEA incorrectly. During the webinar you will learn which one it is and why because of this improper instruction most Design FMEAs and Process FMEAs are ineffective as risk management tools. By now everybody should know that RPN should not be used to determine what to work on. But did you know that new selection tools such as the new AIAG VDA FMEA Handbook “Action Priority” or “AP” should not be used either if you want to effectively target your resources at the highest risk issues. During the webinar you will learn what should be used.
The class column of the Design FMEA and Process will be examined. You will learn why design engineers should never identify “Special Characteristics” for manufacturing personnel and why this one act is costing manufacturing companies millions of dollars. Contrary to what many “FMEA Experts” teach, there is no link between special characteristics in the Design FMEA and special characteristics in the Process FMEA. You will learn why the removal of the Class column from the Design FMEA in the AIAG VDA FMEA Handbook significantly reduces the effectiveness of the Design FMEA as a design risk management tool.
After attending the webinar, I guarantee you will appreciate the disclaimer found in the beginning of most FMEA manuals which states that the rating tables represent guidelines only and the creator of the FMEA should modify them as required. Rather than the understanding of the proper use of the rating columns improving as new FMEA manuals come out, it seems to be getting worse. The webinar will show why the latest ratings in the AIAG VDA FMEA Handbook should lead to both increased FMEA creation time with a proportional decrease in FMEA effectiveness.
Richard Harpster is president of Harpco Systems Inc. which he founded in 1987. Harpco Systems specializes in providing software, training and consulting for Risked Based Product Lifecycle Management (RBPLM®). Over the past 30 years Mr. Harpster has helped hundreds of companies implement improved risk based design and manufacturing systems in a wide variety of industries. He is a recognized expert in the application of FMEAs and invented several new concepts including the linking of Design FMEAs to Process FMEAs in 1990 which became an automotive industry standard eighteen years later. His latest inventions in the field of RBPLM® include Requirements Risk Assessment™ (RRA®), Usage Risk Assessment (URA™), Multiple Integrated Cause Analysis (MICA™) and Rapid Integrated Problem Solving (RIPS®). He has published several papers on the topic of RBPLM®.
Prior to starting Harpco Systems, Richard spent 14 years at Ford Motor in a wide variety of positions including Plant Manager. His education includes a B.S.E.E. from Penn State University, M.S.E.E from the University of Detroit and an M.B.A. from Eastern Michigan University. He is a registered PE in the State of Michigan.
Safety is a topic that usually gets lots of attention when it fails. This webinar will discuss Safety, or for the lack of a better term, Unsafety. The objective of the webinar is to clarify the distinctions and dependencies between and among Safety, Reliability and Quality. Material content will include coverage of emerging tools/methodologies intent on improving the prevention of Unsafety in complex systems.
The ASQ Reliability & Risk Division (RRD) is offering a workshop during the RAMS symposium. The workshops will cover the Practical Development and Application of Risk Management Framework. The workshop will be held on Thursday afternoon January 21st, 2020 and Friday morning February 1st, 2020. More info on http://www.rams.org/
Practical Development and Application of Risk Management Framework (1 Day)
The workshop will provide a comprehensive overview of risk and risk management frameworks. An overview of risk management will be provided that includes the general components of a risk the ISO 31000 risk management framework, including elements of risk assessment (identification, analysis, and evaluation), risk treatment, communication, and monitoring. The emphasis of the workshop will on applications associated with industrial facilities and infrastructure and will include both design-phase and maintenance-phase perspectives.
Major components of the workshop include:
Foundational definitions, including relationships such as risk & uncertainty and risk & reliability
Competing risk frameworks (ISO 31000, COSA, others)
Establishing organization and problem context
Qualitative versus quantitative approaches
Tools for risk identification and risk analysis
Risk monitoring and review
Enterprise risk management
The workshop approach will be direct and practical. Insights will be provided into the strengths, pitfalls, and challenges associated with different situations that impact reliability, risk, and professionals working in different industry sectors. An emphasis will be provided on providing participants with practical “how” rather than theoretical “what” to do.
The workshop will be conducted by an experienced facilitator using lecture style presentation combined with interactive support tools such as an audience response system (ARS), small group breakout sessions, and several exercises to enhance the learning experience. The session material has been presented successfully in corporate and professional development settings.
The primary learning objectives include:
Understanding of core risk and risk management definitions and concepts
Ability to effectively apply the international risk standard, ISO 31000
Determining the applicability of qualitative and quantitative risk approaches
Evaluate 24 risk tools and their applicability to practical situations
Incorporate the role of cognitive biases and risk appetite into decision making
Apply good practices for practical implementation of risk treatment and mitigation strategies
Understanding risk tracking in the context of enterprise risk management systems
The workshop is targeted at the intermediate level. It is applicable to a full range of reliability, risk, quality, safety, security, and financial professionals.
About the Facilitator:
JD Solomon, PE, CRE, CMRP
JD Solomon is a practice leader with Jacobs whose practice includes strategic planning, asset management, O&M consulting, data integration and financial management. JD’s areas of expertise include decision analysis, reliability, risk, resiliency, and facilitation. In addition to being a licensed professional engineer in several states, he is a Certified Reliability Engineer (CRE), Certified Maintenance and Reliability Professional (CMRP), is certified in Lean Management, and is a Six Sigma Black Belt.
JD has a Professional Certificate in Strategic Decision and Risk Management from Stanford, an MBA from the University of South Carolina, and a BS Civil Engineering from NC State. He is active in several professional societies including the ASQ Reliability & Risk Division.
JD’s knowledge of reliability and risk has also been shaped by his service on boards and commissions. JD served as chairman of the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission under governors of two different political parties. He also has served by gubernatorial appointment to North Carolina’s State Water Infrastructure Authority (SWIA) and the state’s Blue Ribbon Commission for Financing Public Buildings and Infrastructure.
“With multiple generations now sharing the workplace there have been numerous observations about the differences in value systems, expectations, worker loyalty, etc. between groups of the Millennials (Born 1981-1996 (22-37 years old), Gen Xers (Born 1965-1980 (38-53 years old) and the baby boomers (born 1946-1964 54-72 years old). This interactive webinar will discuss the particulars of how the Millennials are integrating and progressing in the professional ranks. One observation has been on the topic of productive engagement of this generation. This webinar will be interactive (via live polls) to both explore the stereotypes of Millennials as well as to gather further information from our global audience. If you are Gen Xer or a baby boomer and wondering how to improve engagement of the Millennial worker, or a Millennial that wants to share experiences, tune it to this event.“