:bigwave:

Hello, and once again I begin by singing my praises for this forum. Thanks to the host, moderators, and all participants for all your help.

Today's question: Any suggestions for an effective method to validate product?

In my example, we supply ruggedized computer equipment to one of the big boys, who then builds it into a suite and presents it to their customer, the military. Sometimes they present the discrete components (workstation, displays, storage) to the military.

Not having access to the end use environment (ships, planes, bunkers), how can we effectively validate? We've used the "we sent you a letter and if we don't hear back from you, it is assumed validated" approach, but the return rate on those letters is as low as you'd expect, and we're not entirely comfortable with the method.

Any and all suggestions appreciated.

Do it the same way manufacturers of a satellite validate their system....simulation.

If you're in San Diego, coming up with boat and ham fisted personnel can't be that hard (I'm a Marine and I know how close " 'Dago is to the water). Take that stuff for some trips up the coast and back to get it banged around and in a sea environment.

Get a Hummer or something and head out across the desert (I lived in Barstow for 18 years and I know the desert isn't that far away) You may need to wait until summer though to really test it good.

Take your equipment up to Parris and Elsinore and see if you can put it on a plane and bang it around their, up and down a few times (Also drive across the mountains to the desert)

Use you imagination..........like drive across the desert and toss it out the back while moving, just like a GI, and see if it still functions.

I agree with Randy, except think about it and list all of the *potential* life cycle aspects. Will it be stored in a quonset hut in the tropics (think temperature, humidity and fungus testing)? If so, for how long? What are all the possible transportation methods - Jet, truck, etc. (think vibration test profiles). Don't forget human factors. When we weren't sure of exactly where a product would be used, transportation methods, etc., we used to do a matrix and note *anticipated* life cycles. We would submit that matrix to the government for contract requirements clarification(s). Think MIL-STD-810, if I remember correctly. All the simulations (such as explosion atmosphere testing, altitude, vibration, thermal shock, etc.) were done in laboratories like Wyle.

I don't know what your specific contract requirements are. Years go we had to write specific test plans and submit them prior to contract approval. I used to write them (like 20 years ago...). We called them Environmental Design Criteria Test Plans.

I don't have formal expertise in Mil validation, but I've been around product work for a long time including Mil projects and combat environments.

Validation of ruggedization other than by retrospective reports of field survival (or not) is a need that's been recognized at least since 1942, to my knowledge. There are a bunch of MIL STDs pertaining to environmental conditions. Rather than arbitrarily creating a nonreproducible ruggedization-test environment, why not apply at least subsets of MIL STDs for the conditions that are appropriate elements of validation, given the design inputs as to intended use?

I'm kind of surprised that the procurement contract didn't include any MIL-STD-based specifications for product performance, coordinated with a validation requirement.