Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.

Poor manufacturing and non-compliance to specifications leads to quality issues and it can usually be detected during or right after production. The typical consequence is the disposal of or rework of some/all products.

Poor design and poor choice of materials lead to reliability issues, and they usually appear once the product is being used, often 3 to 12 months after shipment. Depending on the product application and warranty terms, this can lead to major customer dissatisfaction, poor reputation, extremely high costs and/or a recall, a class-action lawsuit, and/or injury or death of some users.

Outside of medical/pharma/auto/aerospace applications, we have observed that only the top 0.5% of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indian manufacturers ensure product reliability without their customers requesting it.

There are two main reasons for this:

First, they might have never been exposed to it, and they don’t suffer from after-market complaints directly.

Second, showing that the design has weaknesses slows them down on the road to mass production (which is where they make money), so they prefer to skip all sorts of validations.

Then, the buyer may be surprised by customers complaining about partial or total failure. The buyer also may not be able to make the difference between quality and reliability issues.

Typically, well-experienced development teams conduct highly accelerated testing on prototypes, all the way to failure.

The objective of this kind of reliability testing is to discover the weaknesses of the design and to make improvements (which are then confirmed by a new round of testing).

There are also a lot of good practices to “design for reliability”, as we explained in this video.

Pre-production reliability testing such as components and suppliers testing, testing to failures (design limit test), drop testing, thermal testing, and vibration testing, usually happens on parts off tooling (if tooling is involved), and, if possible, on products put together in the same conditions as mass production.

The objective is to validate that the final pre-production samples meet the ‘useful lifetime under expected usage and conditions’. It is a big milestone, usually taking place in parallel with compliance testing and/or certifications.

Once these hurdles have been cleared, it is a green light for proceeding with mass production. A lot of money is at stake and it is important to validate the product and the process design before that.

Many companies do ORT (ongoing reliability testing) on every batch, in a systematic manner.

It helps confirm that the reliability of the product didn’t change as a result of manufacturing. (From one batch to the next and even from one production shift to the next, little variations in materials or processing parameters, and sometimes changes in product or process design, can hurt the products’ reliability.)

For most product categories, there is no such thing as a ‘standard’ reliability testing plan. It takes an experienced reliability engineer and an understanding of the expected usage type & usage conditions of your product to create a relevant plan.

When it comes to packaging, there are widely-used standards (such as ISTA 1A), but they are probably far from replicating the stresses endured by your products throughout your supply chain.

We are happy to quote for preparing a reliability and durability testing plan that is customized to your product and its intended usage, and for the testing work itself.

There are 7 logical steps when investigating the causes of product failure:

1. Obtain those samples
2. Document any information about the failure (get user feedback and batch number)
3. First analysis (categorize the products as follows: no longer functional / mostly functional / only an aesthetic issue / known or common issue / no issue found)
4. Deeper analysis (explore what triggered the problem, discussion with product engineers may help, especially examining their design FMEA if possible)
5. Is there a need for immediate containment? (If a user safety issue is found proceed to alert the users of the batch and action a recall if needed)
6. Planning for corrective action(s) (you know the cause of the issue/s, if serious enough time to prevent them from returning, new prototypes and testing may need to be done to confirm the fix is beneficial)
7. Implementing corrective action(s) and following up (if required action the fix on future products and follow up to assure this doesn’t trigger new problems)

If one of your products is experiencing failures, we are happy to quote based on a description of those failures.