I worked for a contract manufacturer building extremely sensitive sensors for a large customer on a build-to-print order. These sensors had a finite life, and they were replaceable in the field. We had received several production orders and were well into delivering them when we started to see field returns coming back. The reported defect was "erratic behavior in service."
In service, the sensors were mostly in stable environments with no inputs. The output, therefore, was supposed to be constant. When a sensor’s output was not constant, it was flagged as "erratic" in the field, removed from the system, and returned to us for evaluation and repair. A spare was then installed.
When we received a field return, it was inspected for visual damage and then put into a storage oven. Sensors were always stored at operating temperature so they could be tested more quickly. There was a long stabilization period if stored at room temperature. Engineering would review the reason for the return, look at the field history, and then prepare a test plan to confirm the reported condition (or not).
As time went by, we received more field returns. A pattern emerged -- we were able to confirm the failure in very few cases. Mostly, the sensors worked as specified during the evaluation testing, so they were then routed to receive a full final acceptance test and were reshipped. There were a few confirmed failures that did not have an obvious cause, so we did the simplest repair, replacing the external electronics, and retested to confirm that it was fixed.
Since we kept receiving sensors back, we looked more carefully at their field history. We discovered that in every case the failures occurred in sensors that were installed in "Gen 2" systems. By and large, they became erratic weeks or months after being put into service, but they never failed in "original design" systems.
The Gen 2 change was to be both a cost reduction and a reliability improvement -- point-to-point wiring was replaced with cable harnesses, which eliminated many hours of hand wiring and soldering, as well as eliminating human errors in wire-routing. But how would that cause sensors to fail? A good number of engineers -- both at the customer and at our plant -- were trying to figure this out.
It is interesting naperlou, and something I am always trying to get across. Often times folks don't think twice about changing something material or mechanical and don't expect it to have an impact on the electronics. This story certainly proves otherwise...
Somebody needs to forward this to cochlear implant maker Advanced Bionics, which has been struggling to seal their implanted electronics for over a decade, causing losses of upwards a half-billion dollars.
It appears that on many occasions "epoxy" material is not suited for many kinds of electrical applications. I am aware of some antennas that don't work right when they are insulated with epoxy material, although one would think that they should. Moisture leaching out salts to short circuit a connector is a long way to go, though. It took good troubleshooting skills to find that problem.
The moisture absorption of polyamide is often overlooked in design. We manufacture a polyamide product that is used on average two years before discard. Consumers that were keeping the product over the two year mark complained of premature breakage of the product (non-safety related). Investigation showed that the PA absorbed enough moisture to push out the plasitcizer on the product making it brittle. As there was no other material available, we opted to put use by dates on the product to guide the consumer to when the products life was ending.
Thanks for your insightful comment Charles. In this case the change was made for the right reasons (reliability; cost was a secondary benefit) by the system engineering folks, but it had an impact on a sub-system (the sensor) - an unintended consequence. Lesson learned - evaluate everything that might be affected by a change, not just how it affects "your own stuff."
The interesting aspect of this is that the change was made, not just for cost reduction reasons, but for reliability purposes, as well. It makes me wonder if the original PTFE insulation had a problem, too. Was this a case of replacing something that wasn't working well with something that was even worse? Or was it a case of, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it?"
This story provides a good example of how a secondary effect (insulation change) caused a tertiary effect (shorted contacts). New engineers must keep these types of problems in mind when they look for the root cause of a defect. That cause isn't always obvious. Nice work.
Yes, Naperlou, this is a good example of attention to detail. Something as simple as wire insulation made difference between sensors that worked and sensors that failed. This is excellent Sherlock sleuthing.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This radio show will show what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
12 
