arrabil
Veteran Member
If you graph 100% of the parts, the resulting CURVE will have two long "tentacles" on both sides. That does not put the anomalous parts outside the curve. Its puts them outside the BIG part of the curve.
4310 Ehydro doesn't move...checked for wires ??
- Thread starter RjPilot
- Start date
- Views: 15466
No it puts them outside the bell and we dismiss them as anomalies. You can't see .001% on a bell curve. By the time its get down to .001% there's nothing to see. Find me a bell curve with .001% shown on it. You're beyond a bell curves usefulness.
arrabil
Veteran Member
If you don't understand the usefulness of the first leg of a bell curve graph that shows the anomalies (and time to normal failure modes) then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
But those anomalies that you've dismissed are still the relevant part of THIS discussion on what may have happened to the HST controller.
But those anomalies that you've dismissed are still the relevant part of THIS discussion on what may have happened to the HST controller.
You didn't show me a bell curve with a .001% anomaly. I'm still waiting, it has nothing to do with understanding.
We don't know what happened, it could have been a wire that fell off for all we know and not a part failure. The mechanic could have changed the box for nothing. The only way we know for sure if it was a part failure is if the mechanic trouble shot the board down to the component level. Do you think he had the expertice to do that? I don't.
We don't know what happened, it could have been a wire that fell off for all we know and not a part failure. The mechanic could have changed the box for nothing. The only way we know for sure if it was a part failure is if the mechanic trouble shot the board down to the component level. Do you think he had the expertice to do that? I don't.
arrabil
Veteran Member
In a graph showing parts failure for a million units with the majority falling into an 85% bell, there will be no specific marks for 0.0001% or 0.1%. And yet, somehow, the first part must have failed before any of the rest! That one will be the 0.xxxxx1%. Won't it? And while it may not concern a designer of your obvious caliber, it may be the part that was in Rjpilot's tractor. But you're right, while we do not know what happened exactly, you have proved beyond any doubt that it could not have been electronic in nature because you've convinced me that electronics are in a different stratosphere of their ability to withstand failure in comparison to those things designed by mechanical engineers. In fact, I will go reevaluate my failed instrument cluster from that standpoint immediately!
mjncad
Super Member
After too much current going through an electrical/electronic device; their biggest enemies are heat and vibration, and static electricity on electronics.
Did you do any welding on your tractor? If so, did you disconnect both battery terminals? Did you place the welder's ground clamp as close as practical to the parts being welded?
Did you do any welding on your tractor? If so, did you disconnect both battery terminals? Did you place the welder's ground clamp as close as practical to the parts being welded?
We don't know either way in this case, get it?
But given the two, mechanical failure is much higher than electronic failure. The average car has several microcontrollers, what fails most, microcontrollers? No, velocity joints, wheel bearings, brake calipers, mechanical injectors, etc. That's why VCRs, typewriters and record players are anachronisms. Industry works to remove, as much as possible, the mechanical aspect out of designs. That's why computer hard drives are working towards solid state. Mechanical hard drives crash, because of electronics? No, because of bearings and mechanical parameters that wear and go out of spec.
Geeze, let it go you're beating a dead horse!
arrabil
Veteran Member
Yes I get it. I've gotten it from the beginning. You're the one who insists on pointing out that it could not have been the electronics because its the mechanics that are more likely to fail. And then repeating how we don't know. The royal WE that doesn't know, includes YOU. Yet you insist on berating my point that its possible the electronics went bad from a manufacturing defect.
I just totally forgot how you shouldn't argue with a person who gave you their credentials first....
Last edited:
