HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Sherlock Ohms

Beware of the Borrowed Design

NO RATINGS
< Previous Page 2 / 3 Next >
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 2/3  >  >>
Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Who has the time to do this?
Rob Spiegel   4/13/2012 10:53:40 AM
NO RATINGS
That makes perfect sense, Didymus7. With the ever increasing time-to-market pressures on design, I would imagaine this is a common problem. Each year (maybe six months), you take your product, add new competitive features, and shove it back out the door.

didymus7
User Rank
Platinum
Who has the time to do this?
didymus7   4/13/2012 10:36:47 AM
NO RATINGS
This was an excellent explanation of the problem and the fix.  And I can tell you exactly why it happened.  The root cause is most probably because the designers were not given enough time to test the design.  The design completion date was not set based on proper design and testing, but more likely set due to a customer PO.

rmeng
User Rank
Iron
Where was QC?
rmeng   4/13/2012 9:54:15 AM
NO RATINGS
I do agree, but if the SOP was followed for developement, there is no excuse for this to happen.  ISO certification works when the employees follow the deveopement paper trail.  Cut and paste should be caught by the ISO plan.  There is something to say about QC Controls....  It sounds like a total QC failure to me, and a slap on the hand for the engineers for not following the QC plan.

Charles Murray
User Rank
Blogger
Human problem
Charles Murray   4/12/2012 6:14:36 PM
NO RATINGS
As several commenters here have pointed out, this could easily be traced to a human (i.e., personnel) problem. I suspect that these kinds of software/hardware glitches are commonplace, largely because companies too often can't manage to hang on to the design engineers who know why a product was designed that way in the first place.

focusembedded
User Rank
Iron
Re: Corporate memory
focusembedded   4/12/2012 5:28:18 PM
NO RATINGS
A big chunk of what happens -- particularly in the modern world where "software guys" and "hardware guys" are rarely one in the same -- is that when somebody goofs up on one side (in this case a hardware guy undersizing a power supply), it's the guy on the other side of the wall who sees it first and diagnoses it through the lens of his own world view.  And to a software guy, a piece of code that crashes repeatably on the same instruction every time smells like a bad tool, not a bad power supply.

At the same time, there seems to be this dividing line between the "analog circuits guy" (who in this case got the design responsibility for the switchmode power supply) and the "digital circuits guy" (who got the job of designing the processor core and attaching its peripherals).  It was those two not talking with each other that produced the problem of "undersized supply" in the first place.

Where it's good to have an "old timer" around is where you encounter those problems that cross boundaries between "hardware" and "software" as well as between "analog" and "digital."  Engineers like that were being minted 30+ years ago.  Now they're not, and the only way they come into being is with the accumulated on-the-job experience of a few decades behind them.  In theory, project managers should have enough visibility into their project's activities that they should also be able to spot cross-functional problems like this.  But in the last few years there's been a trend for engineers who don't like the profession after a few years to go get the MBA and come back to the organization with a "management" hat on.  And when that happens, you're about guaranteed to have projects run by people with neither the breadth or depth to solve thorny problems like this.

The good news in the United States is that at least there are a few engineers who put in the 25 years it takes to get good at the business before taking on project management responsibilities.  There are countries in this world where societal pressure is such that you're perceived a failure if you're still "just an engineer" after 25 years and you haven't moved into management.  And the net result there is that *nobody* in that society puts in the time to get really good.

I logged 25 years as a "pure engineer" myself before founding Focus Embedded.  And the average age of employees here is 54.  But we're something of an anomoly in that regard.  That said, we also get all of the really hard problems that nobody else can solve because nobody has the breadth of experience to see the entire picture when a beast such as "all F's change to all 0's" raises its head.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Corporate memory
Rob Spiegel   4/12/2012 3:53:42 PM
NO RATINGS

Good points, TJ. I believe that inexperienced engineers may be part of the problem. Another is the rapid pace of new product development. So may products get updated on a schedule (think Apple). Engineers are tasked with adding new features with each release. It makes perfect sense that they would keep adding new features to the existing design without revamping the entire product design.

TJ McDermott
User Rank
Blogger
Corporate memory
TJ McDermott   4/12/2012 3:02:06 PM
NO RATINGS
This is the risk companies take when they force out senior engineers for less expensive junior ones.  The loss of corporate knowledge can be critical.  This is not just a case of experienced vs. inexperienced, but that of knowing a product line well and remembering the reasons for design expansions.

Companies end up answering the question "Why is the design this way?" with the answer "Because that's the way we've always done it" and have no basis to support the answer.

naperlou
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Complex Systems Fail in Complex Ways
naperlou   4/12/2012 12:58:31 PM
NO RATINGS
Now I know why my son is always looking for a bigger power supply for the PCs he builds.

Sometimes engineers just don't think about something as basic as power.

Good article and very useful and informative.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Complex Systems Fail in Complex Ways
Rob Spiegel   4/12/2012 12:21:14 PM
NO RATINGS
This error is so understandable. The design works, so it gets passed down again and again. Why not? Why redesign? At a certain point developments in what the design is supposed to do outgrow the basic dependable design. This has got to be happening all the time.

TOP
User Rank
Gold
Re: Complex Systems Fail in Complex Ways
TOP   4/12/2012 11:29:43 AM
NO RATINGS
You have to wonder whether a strategically placed ultra cap would have prevented the sag while allowing the minimalist power supply to remain?

<<  <  Page 2/3  >  >>
Partner Zone
More Blogs from Sherlock Ohms
Sherlock Ohms highlights stories told by engineers who have used their deductive reasoning and technical prowess to troubleshoot and solve the most perplexing engineering mysteries.
Sherlock Ohms highlights stories told by engineers who have used their deductive reasoning and technical prowess to troubleshoot and solve the most perplexing engineering mysteries.
Sherlock Ohms highlights stories told by engineers who have used their deductive reasoning and technical prowess to troubleshoot and solve the most perplexing engineering mysteries.
Sherlock Ohms highlights stories told by engineers who have used their deductive reasoning and technical prowess to troubleshoot and solve the most perplexing engineering mysteries.
Sherlock Ohms highlights stories told by engineers who have used their deductive reasoning and technical prowess to troubleshoot and solve the most perplexing engineering mysteries.
Design News Webinar Series
10/7/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
9/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
9/10/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/23/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Oct 20 - 24, How to Design & Build an Embedded Web Server: An Embedded TCP/IP Tutorial
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: 10/28-10/30 11:00 AM
Sponsored by Stratasys
Next Class: 10/28-10/30 2:00 PM
Sponsored by Gates Corporation
Next Class: 11/11-11/13 2:00 PM
Sponsored by Littelfuse
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service