# SLIDES AND VIDEO OF THE WEBINAR ASQ RRD SERIES: GEOMETRIC DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING (GD&T)

On Mar 12, 2020 the webinar “Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) ” was presented by Tec-Ease .

Slides:

Recorded webinar:

Posted in General

# TECH SPOT: SAMPLE CRE QUESTIONS (Part 9)

1. The effects of failure rates on increased temperatures is called the:

a. Thermal model

b.  Full scale Model

c. Arrhenius Model

d. Derating effects

2. Recognizing the nature of process variability, the process capability target is usually:

a. looser than product specifications

b. the same as product specifications

c.  tighter than product specifications

d. not related to product specifications

3. (blank)  software failure are the result of design errors.

a. All    b. Most    c. Many    d. No

4.  How can linear acceleration be verified?

a. with a probability plot

b. with a hazard plot

c. either a. or b.

None of the above

5. The purpose of derating parts is to:

a. Increase parts life

b. Enhance overall system reliability

c. Improve circuit design

d. All of these

6.  A sequential test plan is graphically  shown in the figure below. If the first  3 items tested fail, and the next 18 succeed, what is the status of the test?

a.  Reject the null hypothesis

b.  Accept the null hypothesis

c. Continue testing

d. None of these

7. Inherent of intrinsic reliability:

a. is that reliability which can only be improved by design change

b. can be improved only by an improvement in the state of the art

c. is that reliability estimated over stated period of time by a stated measurement technique.

d. is not an estimated reliability

8.An item has a constant failure rate of 50, and a constant repair rate of 22, what is the steady-state availability?

a.  0.983     b.  0.924   c. 0.815   d. none of the these

9.  The failure rate for a carpet manufacturer is 3.7 per 1000 square yards. What is the probability of finding no defects in  a  random sample of 100 square yards.

a. 0.7145    b. 0.6907    c. 0.9581     d. none of these

10. Given a shape parameter of 1.7 for the Weibull distribution, and assuming no failures, how long will 20 items have to be tested to give  a reliability of  0.95 at t=100,000 with 90% confidence?

a. 119.329     b. 160,896    c. 189,744    d. 276,901

Posted in General

# WCQI will not be held in May 2020

ASQ is concerned about the growing spread of COVID-19 (coronavirus). This is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation.

Because the health and safety of our members, customers, instructors, and staff remains of utmost importance, ASQ has made the decision to cancel WCQI.

WCQI will not be held in May 2020.

For those who have registered for the conference, you do not need to take any action to cancel. ASQ will handle the cancellation process and you have the option to have the funds held on your account for use on any other ASQ event or purchase through December 31, 2021 or be refunded.

Posted in General

# ASQ Reliability & Risk Division Best Reliability Paper Award

We are pleased to announce the paper entitled “Comparing methods for assessing reliability uncertainty based on pass/fail data collected over time”, authored by Jeff I. Abes, Michael S. Hamada, and Charles R. Hills, published on Quality Engineering, 30:694–700, 2018, has won the 2018-2019 ASQ RRD Best Reliability Paper Award.

One of the ASQ Reliability & Risk Division’s missions is to encourage the publication of reliability papers that are both technically sound and easy to be understood by reliability professionals. In this paper, the authors compare three statistical methods – logistic regression, Weibull failure time analysis and the RADAR method proposed by Vander Wiel et al. – for analyzing pass/fail data collected over time and use them to assess reliability of weapon systems. It is shown that these three methods may provide quite different uncertainty bounds on reliability.

Quality Engineering is a technical journal of ASQ published by Taylor & Francis. It is directed to professionals in all engineering and management fields interested in quality improvement and reliability. For additional information of ASQ RRD Best Reliability Paper Award, please contact Dr. Rong Pan at rong.pan@asu.edu.

Posted in General

# ASQ RRD Series: Integrating FMEAs, FMEDAs and Fault trees For Functional Safety

Integrating FMEAs, FMEDAs and Fault trees For Functional Safety

Thu, Apr 9, 2020 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM EDT by Omnex, Inc.

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/7236647289468342284

FMEAs traditionally have only incorporated single point faults. In this ground breaking presentation of the Omnex Method, the functional safety FMEA will be shown to include both single and multi-point faults and incorporate safety mechanisms as preventive controls. As the FMEA is filled out, the FMEDA will be populated, providing consistency between the FMEDA and FMEA techniques. The FMEA of the hardware is at the hardware system level, while the FMEDA is at the component level and the failure modes of the FMEDA are component failure modes. If the FMEA is completed using the AIAG-VDA FMEA, where the higher level, focus level, and lower levels are related and there is a cause and effect relationship between the failure modes, then the FTA can also be developed from the FMEA. In this way, the FMEA, FMEDA and FTA are linked documents and the FMEDA and FTA provide the single point fault, multi-point fault, and the “Probabilistic Metric for random Hardware Failures” (PMHF) metrics in a consistent manner. Join us for a presentation of a ground breaking methodology of conducting safety analysis and hardware metrics for functional safety using linked FMEA, FMEDA and FTAs.

Greg Gruska is the Omnex Champion for ISO 26262, and a Fellow of the American Society for Quality (ASQ). He has led multiple ISO 26262 engagements for Omnex for the last several years.  His strength in ISO 26262 is a strong understanding and experience in systems engineering and reliability/safety analysis in both hardware and software development.  Greg managed the Quality Engineering Activity at Chevrolet. This group provided benchmarking, quality engineering and statistical support to all divisional and corporate activities and their suppliers. Besides the application of statistics within the design, manufacturing, and support environments, this group was active in the development of new technologies and training in these areas. Greg additional served as a Divisional and Corporate consultant in Statistical Engineering and Management. He has traveled extensively in assisting engineering, financial, and support staffs and manufacturing plants in the investigation and solution of problems affecting quality, new product development, product failures and customer satisfaction.

Greg was an active/writing member of the MSA, SPC, FMEA, and EFMEA Manual subcommittees of the American Automotive industry’s Supplier Quality Requirements Task Force which is part of the international task force governing IATF 16949. Greg is an adjunct professor at Madonna University. He has advanced degrees in mathematics and engineering from the University of Detroit, Michigan State University and Wayne State University. He was the Deming Memorial Lecturer at the Sheffield Hallam University for the year 2000.

Greg is a charter member of the Greater Detroit Deming Study Group and the W. E. Deming Institute. He is an ASQ certified Quality Engineer, a licensed Professional Engineer (CA – Quality) and a member of the Board of Examiners of and Judge for the Michigan Quality Leadership Award (1994-2011). Greg is a member of the SAE Functional Safety Committee (J2980) and is considered one of the foremost authorities on risk management in the world. He has considerable hardware and software experience in Automotive applications.

Greg has worked extensively in Automotive Software. He teaches ISO 26262 Functional Safety Certification, ISO 26262 Functional Safety Assessor and Auditor, and ASPICE Understanding and Auditing courses. He has conducted assessments in ASPICE and ISO 26262 Part 6 for Software.

Chad Kymal is the CTO of Omnex Inc., an international consulting and training organization headquartered in the United States. After graduating from the General Motors Institute, Chad spent a number of years working at General Motors and KPMG. Over the course of Chad’s successful career, he has served on the Malcolm Baldrige Board of Examiners and has received numerous quality achievement awards, including the Quality Professional of the Year award by the American Society for Quality (ASQ) Automotive Division in 2005. In addition to his bachelor’s degree from GMI, Chad holds both a master’s degree in industrial and operations engineering from the University of Michigan and an MBA Cum Laude from the University of Michigan. He is a member of Tau Beta Pi.

Chad both developed and teaches auditor training for ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and ISO 45001, as well as an Integrated Management Systems Lead Auditor training course where all three standards are combined in a single audit. Chad is the founder of AQSR, a global registrar that routinely provided integrated audits in QMS, EMS, and OHSMS. Chad is also on the ISO/TC 176, ISO/TC 207, PC283 committees for ISO 9001:2015 (Quality Management), ISO 14001:2015 (Environmental Management) and ISO 45001 (Health and Safety Management Systems.

Omnex has been working in the automotive industry for 30 years and Omnex principals been active in writing different automotive standards including QS 9000, ISO/TS 16949, Semiconductor Supplement, APQP, FMEA and Core Tools. Chad conducted the first world-wide witness audit for QS 9000 a predecessor to IATF 16949. He is the author of seven books and more than 100 papers including several on integrated management systems.

Chad has spent over 20 years in system, hardware and software development in various capacities.  He assesses and works in automotive system, hardware and software for Agile, ASPICE, and Functional Safety ISO 26262 – Part 6.

Chad is a certified Lead Auditor for IATF 16949, ISO 14001, ISO 9001, FSSC 22000, HAACP, ISO 45001, AS9100, ISO 13485 and teaches many other courses for Omnex. He is also an INTACS certified assessor for ASPICE.

Posted in General

# ASQ RRD SERIES: Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T)

Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T)

Thu, Mar 12, 2020 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM EDT by Tec-Ease

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/2345643535348010764

This one hour overview will show the quality, cost and delivery benefits of making Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) an integral part of the Product Development/Delivery Process. GD&T is not new, but there is a ‘newness’ about it. Developments in CAD and CMM technology, ISO Standards and Statistical Process Control have brought GD&T once again to the forefront of manufacturing. Participants will see that GD&T is a common language that may be used to improve communication between design, quality, manufacturing, suppliers and customers. When used properly, GD&T will get the right questions asked early in the program, simplify the engineering drawing and directly relate customer requirements to product specifications and process control. Through down-to-earth examples, humor and uncommon sense, an overview of this powerful tool will be presented.

Posted in General

# VIDEO OF THE WEBINAR ASQ RRD SERIES: DESIGN FMEA RATINGS – DEEPENING THE UNDERSTANDING

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 Richard Harpster presented: ” Design FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding”
Below the recorded webinar

Posted in General

# VIDEO OF THE WEBINAR ASQ RRD SERIES: PROCESS FMEA RATINGS – DEEPENING THE UNDERSTANDING

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 Richard Harpster presented: “Process FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding”
Below the recorded webinar

Posted in General

# ASQ RRD Series: Design FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding

Design FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding

Wed, Feb 26, 2020 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM EST By Richard Harpster

https://register.gotowebinar.com/#register/3177712154403413517

On February 6, 2020 the webinar “FMEA Ratings – What They Mean and Why Most People Set Them Incorrectly” was presented by Richard Harpster.  The objective of the webinar was to help people understand the purpose of each of the Design and Process FMEA Ratings and why most people set them incorrectly.  Attendees were taught many important things about Design FMEA ratings including but not limited to:

1. most popular FMEA manuals in publication provide incorrect information on how to set the occurrence ratings in the Design FMEA;
2. the importance of the Class column in the Design FMEA;
3. how to use the Design FMEA to prioritize the design problems identified in the FMEA to work on;
4. how to use the Design FMEA to determine when a design should be released;
5. the fundamentals of the new AIAG VDA Action Priority (AP) Rating for the Design FMEA that is intended to replace RPN rating in the Design FMEA and why it does not work;
6. the new AIAG VDA FMEA ratings systems for the Design FMEA and why if used the effectiveness of your Design FMEAs will be severely degraded.

The webinar was positively received with many people expressing that they learned a lot.  Many people requested the slide pack so they could further study the information provided.

The only negative comment received was that it was too much information for one hour.  Due to the tremendous interest shown, the ASQ Reliability Division and Harpco® Systems has decided to present two separate one-hour seminars for the Design FMEA Ratings and Process FMEA Ratings.  During the “Design FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding” webinar Design FMEA rating key concepts presented in the original webinar will be reviewed.    The additional time will used to present actual Design FMEA examples to demonstrate some of the concepts. We are also asking potential attendees to send questions that they would like to see answered during the presentation to richard.harpster@harpcosystems.com.  Although Richard may not be able to answer them all due to time constraints, he has pledged he will try.

Posted in General

# ASQ RRD Series: Process FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding

Process FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding

Mon, Feb 24, 2020 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM EST By Richard Harpster

https://register.gotowebinar.com/register/2080092786138714637

On February 6, 2020 the webinar “FMEA Ratings – What They Mean and Why Most People Set Them Incorrectly” was presented by Richard Harpster.  The objective of the webinar was to help people understand the purpose of each of the Design and Process FMEA Ratings and why most people set them incorrectly.  Attendees were taught many important things about Process FMEA ratings including but not limited to:

1. most popular FMEA manuals in publication provide incorrect information on how to set the occurrence ratings in the Process FMEA;
2. the importance of the Class column in the Process FMEA;
3. why design engineers should never specify “Special Characteristics” for a Process FMEA;
4. how to use the Process FMEA to prioritize the process problems identified in the FMEA to work on;
5. how to use the Process FMEA to determine when a process should be released for use;
6. the fundamentals of the new AIAG VDA Action Priority (AP) Rating for the Process FMEA that is intended to replace RPN rating in the Process FMEA and why it does not work;
7. the new AIAG VDA FMEA ratings systems for the Process FMEA and why if used the effectiveness of your Process FMEAs will be severely degraded.

The webinar was positively received with many people expressing that they learned a lot.  Many people requested the slide pack so they could further study the information provided.

The only negative comment received was that it was too much information for one hour.  Due to the tremendous interest shown, the ASQ Reliability Division and Harpco® Systems has decided to present two separate one-hour seminars for the Design FMEA Ratings and Process FMEA Ratings.  During the “Process FMEA Ratings – Deepening the Understanding” webinar Process FMEA rating key concepts presented in the original webinar will be reviewed.  The additional time will used to present actual Process FMEA examples to demonstrate some of the concepts. We are also asking potential attendees to send questions that they would like to see answered during the presentation to richard.harpster@harpcosystems.com.  Although Richard may not be able to answer them all due to time constraints, he has pledged he will try.

Posted in General