1996
DOI: 10.1108/02656719610118115
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Building‐in reliability ‐ implementation and benefits

Abstract: Argues that in the coming years the present methods of demonstrating reliability will no longer be feasible and alternative methods must be found. Deals with building‐in reliability (BIR) and the necessity to change from the standard end‐of‐line‐measurement technique of life test to a more proactive in‐line approach, where reliability can be measured by process parameters and reaction time is immediate, resulting in a continuous flow of reliable product to the end user. This approach will not eliminate the use… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The assurance of quality through a systems approach to reliability is also a theme of discussion (e.g. McLachlan (1995), Prendergast et al (1996) and Tennant (1995)).…”
Section: Research Journalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The assurance of quality through a systems approach to reliability is also a theme of discussion (e.g. McLachlan (1995), Prendergast et al (1996) and Tennant (1995)).…”
Section: Research Journalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, up to 33% of this cost is spent unnecessarily [5]. This wastage shows that effective maintenance and equipment reliability can help companies to reduce waste and improve productivity without investing in costly equipment and systems [6]. Waste is accrued in maintenance costs because of failures in maintenance activities, such as using the wrong maintenance techniques, assigning underskilled workers to such tasks, and using fake spare parts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%