ABOUT THIS EPISODE
What if passing the test is not enough?
In reliability engineering, we often place a great deal of confidence in laboratory validation. We test, measure, analyze, and document. And when the product passes, we naturally assume it is ready for the field.
But what happens when a product passes the lab test and still fails in the hands of the customer?
Today, we are going to explore the gap between laboratory reliability testing and actual field performance.
It is a gap that can be costly, frustrating, and sometimes difficult to explain.
Products can perform well under controlled test conditions, yet still experience unexpected failures when exposed to real users, real environments, real service conditions, and real-world variability. Mike Konrad's guest is Dr. Nishith Kumar Reddy Gorla of CORE ITS LLC. Dr. Gorla’s work focuses on system-level reliability testing, field reliability alignment, reliability growth, and test-to-field correlation for complex products.
His recent paper, “System-Level Test Case Design for Field Reliability Alignment in Complex Products,” looks at why traditional reliability test methods may miss important field failure modes. More importantly, it proposes a broader approach to test case design that considers not just the product design, but also actual use conditions, field failure data, end-user behavior, service procedures, manufacturing variation, consumables, and product interfaces.
This is an important conversation because reliability is not simply about passing a test. It is about understanding how a product behaves in the real world, where variables interact, users behave unpredictably, environments change, and failure mechanisms may not appear until the system is challenged in realistic ways.
If you design, build, test, specify, or depend on complex products, this discussion should be especially relevant.
Today, we will talk about why products sometimes pass in the lab but fail in the field, how better system-level test cases can improve field correlation, and what reliability professionals can do to create test methods that more accurately reflect real-world performance.
In reliability engineering, we often place a great deal of confidence in laboratory validation. We test, measure, analyze, and document. And when the product passes, we naturally assume it is ready for the field.
But what happens when a product passes the lab test and still fails in the hands of the customer?
Today, we are going to explore the gap between laboratory reliability testing and actual field performance.
It is a gap that can be costly, frustrating, and sometimes difficult to explain.
Products can perform well under controlled test conditions, yet still experience unexpected failures when exposed to real users, real environments, real service conditions, and real-world variability. Mike Konrad's guest is Dr. Nishith Kumar Reddy Gorla of CORE ITS LLC. Dr. Gorla’s work focuses on system-level reliability testing, field reliability alignment, reliability growth, and test-to-field correlation for complex products.
His recent paper, “System-Level Test Case Design for Field Reliability Alignment in Complex Products,” looks at why traditional reliability test methods may miss important field failure modes. More importantly, it proposes a broader approach to test case design that considers not just the product design, but also actual use conditions, field failure data, end-user behavior, service procedures, manufacturing variation, consumables, and product interfaces.
This is an important conversation because reliability is not simply about passing a test. It is about understanding how a product behaves in the real world, where variables interact, users behave unpredictably, environments change, and failure mechanisms may not appear until the system is challenged in realistic ways.
If you design, build, test, specify, or depend on complex products, this discussion should be especially relevant.
Today, we will talk about why products sometimes pass in the lab but fail in the field, how better system-level test cases can improve field correlation, and what reliability professionals can do to create test methods that more accurately reflect real-world performance.
English
United States
TRANSCRIPT 🔗
Are you the producer of this podcast?
Add a podcast transcript
Need Audio-to-Text?
Transcribe with Listen411 in Just 60 Seconds
OTHER EPISODES IN THIS PODCAST
For decades, cleaning circuit assemblies after soldering was not optional. It was standard practice across the electronics manufacturing industry. Then, almost overnight, that changed.
In this episode of Reliability Matters, Mike Konrad takes you back to the origins of that shift. From the widespr…
This is part two of a two-part series.
In Part One, we explored how the electronics industry transitioned from a clean-everything approach to one where cleaning became optional. But what happens when the assumptions behind “no-clean” collide with modern electronics design?
In this episode of Reli…
Today, we’re going to explore a topic that seems to be touching nearly every industry, every workplace, and increasingly every part of our daily lives: artificial intelligence.
But this conversation is not just about what AI can do. It’s about what AI assumes, what it values, what it misses, and w…
Tomachie has quite a few tricks up its sleeve. Its eponymous platform provides AI-assisted analysis of PCB schematic data. It optimizes DfT and identifies the ideal locations for physical test point insertion. And it generates a 0-100 layout-readiness score, providing design teams with an objective…
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from PCEA, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.
EDIT
Thank you for helping to keep the podcast database up to date.
