Re: MMC cap bank

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Gerry Reynolds by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <gerryreynolds-at-earthlink-dot-net>

Matt,

If you are testing a design in its normal operating state,  you are right
that one sucess has little statitical meaning.  However, very useful
information can be determined from a test to failure with a fewer number of
samples.  This info can be used both quanitatively (to help determine design
margins)and qualitatively (to compare venders or types).  The significance
of test to failure techniques, I hope will not be underestimated.

Gerry


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
To: <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>
Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 5:20 AM
Subject: Re: MMC cap bank


 > Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>"
<Mddeming-at-aol-dot-com>
 >
 > In a message dated 7/4/03 4:54:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
 > tesla-at-pupman-dot-com writes:
 >
 >
 > >One has to be careful since it may
 > >burn one's house down if they flame out when your not there and there is
a
 > >big electrical hazard and all that.  But that test would pretty well
define
 > >the lifetime.  It is interesting to note that at first they will just
 > >self-heal.  But eventually, they will obviously go "bad"
 >
 >
 > Actually, it would take dozens (or hundreds) of such tests with identical
 > MMC configuration to come up with a useable "mortality table" to determine
 > a "well-defined" lifespan. Statistics 101: "A single observation
 > establishes almost nothing. As a best guess, you can say that the
 > observation is probably between the 20th and 80th percentile."
 >
 > Matt D.
 >
 >