6 views

Uploaded by mzai2003

- Functional or Non-functional
- Certification for the Reliability Engr
- 34324
- MTBF_M2
- VDA6.3_engl06-04-04.pdf
- Evaluating Relief Valve Reliability When Extending The Test And Maintenance Interval.pdf
- Frecuencias Aproximadas de Rodamiento
- HYBRID METHOD IN THE RELIABILITY ALLOCATION IN AN INDUSTRY-A REVIEW.
- Process Chart
- SES Power Plant Tubing
- 11. Relibality Nowak
- DFM00 - Introduction TO DFMA
- 00-2 Table of Contents
- OEMS Overview
- AM216_C1
- TRANSFORMADOR INDUTOR 10UH
- broch_samcef_mecano.pdf
- Cost-Effective Design of Self Activating Fire Extinguisher (S.A.F.E)
- ME376 Maintenance Engineering - Copy
- gosje e madhe

You are on page 1of 61

APPLIED

RELIABILITY

Techniques for Reliability

Analysis

with

Applied Reliability Tools (ART)

(an EXCEL Add-In)

and

JMP Software

Santa Clara University

STAT-TECH

Spring 2010

Applied Reliability Page 2

Accelerated Testing

(continued from Class 4 Notes)

Accelerated Test Example (Analysis in JMP)

Degradation Modeling

Sample Sizes for Accelerated Testing

System Models

Series System

Parallel System

Analysis of Complex Systems

Standby Redundancy

Defective Subpopulations

Graphical Analysis

Mortals and Immortals

Models

Case Study

Class Project Example

Modeling the Field Reliability

Evolution of Methods

General Reliability Model

AMD Example

Applied Reliability Page 3

System Models

Series System

series. If the i th component has reliability Ri (t),

the system reliability is the product of the individual

reliabilities, that is,

Rs ( t ) R1 t R2 t ... Rn t

which we denote with the capital pi symbol for

multiplication

n

Rs t Ri t

i 1

Fs t 1 1 Fi t

n

i 1

component failure rates. The system failure rate

is higher than the highest individual failure rate.

Applied Reliability Page 4

System Models

Parallel System

parallel. The system CDF is the product of the

individual CDFs, that is,

n

Fs t Fi t

i 1

Rs t 1 1 Ri t

n

i 1

fact, the system failure rate is smaller than the

smallest individual failure rate), but must be

calculated using basic definitions.

Applied Reliability Page 5

Two Parallel Components

A component has CDF F(t) and a failure rate h(t).

Two components are used in parallel in a system.

Determine the failure rate of the system.

SOLUTION

The CDF for the two components in parallel is F2(t)

and the PDF, by differentiation, is 2F(t)f(t). The

failure rate of the system is

hs t s

f t

1 Fs t

2 F t f t

1 F 2 t

2 F t f t

1 F t 1 F t

2 F t

h t

1 F t

factor 2F/(1+F) times the component failure rate. The

smaller the component CDF, the bigger the

improvement. Redundancy makes a larger difference

in early life, and much less difference later on.

Applied Reliability Page 6

Class Project

System Models

Twenty-five components in series form a

system. Calculate the system reliability.

Three components in parallel form a system.

Calculate the system reliability.

Applied Reliability Page 7

A B

B

Applied Reliability Page 8

Example of Series-Parallel

System: Big Rig

G C A

H D

Trailer Cab

I E

J F B

I G E C

B A

J H F D

Applied Reliability Page 9

Class Project

Complex Systems

For the system to function unit A and either unit B or C

and either D and E together or G and H together must

be working. Draw the reliability block diagram for this

setup.

of the individual component reliabilities, that is, the Ri,

where i = A, B, C, ..., G, H. Hint: Consider the three

subsystems:A alone; B with C; and D,E,G,H.

Applied Reliability Page 10

Redundancy

In contrast to active parallel redundancy, there is

standby redundancy in which the second

component is idle until needed. Assuming perfect

switching and no degradation of the idle

component, standby redundancy results in higher

reliability and less maintenance costs than active

parallel redundancy. An illustration, assuming

exponentially distributed failure times, is shown

below.

System Failure Rates (2 Components)

0.012

0.01

0.008

0.006

Single

Parallel

0.004

Standby

0.002

0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Applied Reliability Page 11

ART

In ART, select System Reliability... Enter necessary

information. Click OK.

Applied Reliability Page 12

Reliability Experiment

Consider . . .

failures by 500 hours, but no more by the end of

test.

populations or just censored data ?

only a few more failures, or will the other 70 fail

with the same life distribution ?

Applied Reliability Page 13

Defect Models

Mortals versus Immortals

all units can fail for a specific mechanism. If a

defective subpopulation exists, only a fraction of

the units containing the defect may be susceptible

to failure. These are called mortals.

called immortals.

immortals becomes :

the defective subpopulation and the mortal fraction.

Applied Reliability Page 14

Example of a Defective

Subpopulation

A Processing Problem

wafers are contaminated with mobile ions due to a

processing error.

assuming equal yield per wafer, only 2/25= 8% of

the components can have the fatal defect that

makes failure possible.

wafers will not fail for this mechanism since they

are defect free; that is, we have a defective

subpopulation.

Applied Reliability Page 15

Spotting a Defective

Subpopulation

Graphical Analysis

Assume that a specified failure mode follows a

lognormal distribution.

following a straight line, the points seem to curve

away from the cumulative percent axis, its a signal

that a defective subpopulation may be present.

asymptotic to cumulative percent line that represents

proportion of defectives in the sample.

Applied Reliability Page 16

Defective Subpopulations

Graphical Analysis

Plot based on total sample (mortals and immortals).

Applied Reliability Page 17

Defect Model

Mortals and Immortals

Fobs(t) = p Fm(t)

where Fm(t) is the CDF of the mortals and p is the

fraction of mortals (units with the fatal defect) in the

total sample size.

population, and the mortal CDF at time t is 40%, then

we would expect to observe about

0.25x0.40 = 0.10

or 10% failures in the total random sample at time t.

Applied Reliability Page 18

Major Computer

Manufacturer Reliability Data

Gate Oxide Fails

Rejects 201 23 1 1 1

Sample Size 58,000 57,392 10,000 2,000 1,999

T50: 1.149E32 hours Sigma: 26.175

Applied Reliability Page 19

What Do These

Numbers Mean?

T50 : 1.149E32 hours Sigma : 26.175

distribution extends from 33 seconds to 1.66E62

years !

but over 412,000 hours (that is, 47 years) to get to

1.00% !

unnecessary.

Applied Reliability Page 20

Modeling with

Defective Subpopulations

occurred by 48 hours, can be modeled by a fraction

defective subpopulation of 227/58,000 = 0.39% and

a lognormal distribution of failure times for the

mortals T50 =10.6 hours and sigma = 0.68.

failures thereafter are probably not related to the

defective subpopulation. For example, handling

induced failures are a possibility.

Applied Reliability Page 21

Defective Subpopulation

Models

If we dont consider mortals vs. immortals, we will

incorrectly assume that all units can fail.

unless we identify the limited defective units.

Applied Reliability Page 22

Statistical Reliability

Analysis and Modeling:

A Case Study

with Failures from a

Defective Subpopulation

Applied Reliability Page 23

Reliability Study

Background

at 168 hours, 125oC :

failures

have escaped to a few customers, we needed to

assess the field impact.

300 devices not burned-in.

Applied Reliability Page 24

Reliability Study

Design

179 Units : 125oC ambient

90 Units : 150oC ambient

30 Units: Control

116 hours

Applied Reliability Page 25

Purpose of Study

Reliability Modeling

applies

parameters)

factors

bake

- Is 24 hours at 150oC necessary?

- Do devices recover at room temperature?

Applied Reliability Page 26

Modeling Procedure

Statistical Analysis Plan

time, both linear and probability plots.

for significant difference.

lognormal probability graph. Check for linearity

and equality of slopes.

equality of shape factors (sigmas). Estimate

single sigma. Estimate median life T50 for both

cells.

Applied Reliability Page 27

Reliability Study

Bake Recoverable Failures

L i n e a r P l o t o f C u m u l a ti v e F a i l ur e s V e r su s T i m e

80%

70%

60%

Cum ula tive P e r c e nt

50%

40%

30%

20%

1 50oC 1 25oC

10%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

S tre s s Ti m e (P ow e r on H our s )

S am ple S iz e s : 1 5 0 oC = 9 0 ; 1 2 5o C = 1 7 9

Applied Reliability Page 28

Reliability Study

Bake Recoverable Failures

P r o b a b i li t y Pl o t s ( N o A d ju s tm e n t fo r M o r t a ls)

0 .5

0 1 2 3 4 5

S ta ndar d Norm a l V a ri a te : Z

- 0 .5

-1

- 1 .5

150oC 125oC

-2

- 2 .5

Ln (Tim e t o Fa il ure )

S a m pl e S iz e s : 1 5 0 o C = 9 0 ; 1 2 5 o C = 1 7 9

Applied Reliability Page 29

Reliability Study

Bake Recoverable Failures

2.5

1.5

1

S ta n d a rd N o rm a l V a ria te : Z

0.5

0

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

-0.5

150oC 125oC

-1

-1.5

-2

L n (T im e to F a ilu re )

Applied Reliability Page 30

APL PROGRAM FOR MLE

GE NLNEST

CHO OSE CONF. LIMIT FOR BOUND IN PERCENT: 9 0

SPREAD 2 4 8 16 32 48 68 92 11 6

ENTER CORRE SPONDING NUMBERS OF FAILS PER INTERVAL (INCLUDE ZEROS)

34 6 21 2 0 0 0 1 0

ENTER TIMES AL L FAILED UNITS WERE REMO VED FROM TEST (INCLUDING END OF TES T)

116

ENTER CORRE SPONDING NUMBERS REMOVED

0

SPREAD 2 4 8 16 32 48 68 92 11 6

ENTER CORRE SPONDING NUMBERS OF FAILS PER INTERVAL (INCLUDE ZEROS)

5 0 36 8 42 7 3 4 3

ENTER TIMES AL L FAILED UNITS WERE REMO VED FROM TEST (INCLUDING END OF TES T)

16 116

ENTER CORRE SPONDING NUMBERS REMOVED

23

CELL T50 SIGMA MU SIGMA MU MU SIGMA

2 15 .08 1.060 2.714 .0059 .0 104e-3 .266e-5

NUM. NUM.

CELL ON TEST FA IL T50 LOW T50 UP SIGMA LOW SIGMA UP

2 11 3 108 12.74 17.86 .933 1.187

Y

CELLS: 1 2

TYPE 1 FO R EQ UAL SIGMAS , 2 FO R EQ UAL MUS, 3 FOR B OTH THE SAME: 1

THE AS SUMPTION O F QUAL SIGMAS CAN NOT BE REJECTED AT THE 95 PERCE NT LEVEL.

UNDER THIS A SSUMP TION, RESULTS LIK E O BSERVED OCCUR AB OUT 41.9 PERCE NT OF THE TIME.

(THE S MA LLER THIS PE RCENT, THE LESS LIKEL Y THE ASSUMPTION.)

MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATES

CELL T50 SIGMA MU SIGMA MU MU SIGMA

2 15 .08 1.090 1.713 .0051 .0 110e-2 .250e-5

NUM. NUM.

CELL ON TEST FA IL T50 LOW T50 UP SIGMA LOW SIGMA UP

2 11 3 108 12.68 17.54 .972 1.207

N

Applied Reliability Page 31

Reliability Study

Bake Recoverable Failures

M od el Fit to Ac tua l

80%

70%

60%

C um um ative Pe r ce nt Fa ilur e s

50%

40%

30%

1 50oC

1 25oC

20%

M LE F it: 1 50oC

M LE F it: 1 25oC

10%

0%

0 20 40 60 80 1 00 1 20 1 40

Tim e (P o w er o n Ho ur s)

Applied Reliability Page 32

Acceleration Statistics

stress cells : AF = 15.08 / 2.02 = 7.465

35oC above ambient: EA = 1.375 eV

: field T50 = 18,288 hours

distribution:

-project fallout and failure rates for

various mortal fractions

-use customer field data to determine

which mortal fraction applies

Applied Reliability Page 33

Bake Recoverable Fails

P r o je ct e d F ie ld F a llo u t w it h V a rio u s M o rt a l

P e r c en t a g es

2 0%

1 8%

5%

1 6%

1 0%

1 4% 2 0%

C u m u lat iv e P e r ce n t

3 0%

1 2%

4 0%

1 0% 5 0%

6 6%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

0 2 4 6 8 10

T im e i n F ie ld ( K H o u r s )

Applied Reliability Page 34

A Note of Caution

Analysis When Mortals Are Present

presence of a defective subpopulation, parameter

estimates were accurate. The two customers,

notified of the affected lots, used analysis for

decisions on how to treat remaining product in field.

low incidence of mortals, the T50s and sigmas for a

lognormal distribution may become very large and

inaccurate.

Applied Reliability Page 35

A Side Benefit

Screening a Wearout Mechanism

failure mechanism if only a subpopulation of the

units are mortal for that mechanism and sufficient

acceleration is obtainable.

Mechanism? Reliability Models of Defective

Subpopulations - A Case Study in 29th Annual

Proceedings of Reliability Physics Symposium (1991)

Applied Reliability Page 36

Class Project

Defect Models

50 components are put on stress. Readouts are at

10, 25, 50, 100, 200, 500, and 1,000 hours. The

failure counts at the respective readouts are 2, 2,

4, 5, 4, 3, and 0.

below with n = 50.

CDF Est

Cum # All Units

Time Fails (%)

10 2

25 4

50 8

100 13

200 17

500 20

1000 20

the next page.

Weibull distribution or does a defect model seem

possible?

Applied Reliability Page 37

Applied Reliability Page 38

Note: Percent Failure scale on Weibull Probability paper is faint. Values are 99.9, 98.0, 90.0,

70.0, 50.0, 30.0, 20.0, 10.0, 5.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.5, 0.2, 0.1, etc.

Applied Reliability Page 39

Class Project

Defect Model Estimates

Shape Parameter (m) __________

t / cm

F (t ) 1 e

How could we confirm that the Weibull model for

the mortal population fits the data? We estimate

the CDF at three times and compare to

observations.

Mortal

CDF Model Empirical

(Weibull Mortal CDF for CDF All

Time Model) Fraction All Units Units

25 0.221 0.4

100 0.632 0.4

1000 1.000 0.4

Applied Reliability Page 40

Defective Subpopulations in

ART

Enter failure information (readout times, cumulative

failures) into columns. Under ART, select Defective

Subpopulations Enter required information. Click OK.

Applied Reliability Page 41

System Models

Field Reliability of

Integrated Circuits

of Field Failure Rates

Applied Reliability Page 42

Primitive Method

Assumptions

Constant failure rate

Single overall activation

energy

Ambient temperatures

No separation of failure modes

Applied Reliability Page 43

Primitive Method

Problems with Calculations

Example

Assume no self heating. One unit fails at 10 hours for

mechanism with EA of 1.0 eV. Second unit fails at 500

hours for failure mechanism with EA of 0.5 eV.

Acceleration Factor (125oC to 55oC): AF = 106

IFR (constant) at 55oC :

Applied Reliability Page 44

Primitive Method

Comparative Calculation

IFR (constant) at 55oC:

[1E9/(10+500+98x1000)]/AF = 20 FITS

IFR (constant) at 55oC:

[1E9/(10+500+98x1000)]/AF = 461 FITS

Applied Reliability Page 45

Later Improved Method

specific to failure mechanisms

temperatures

Applied Reliability Page 46

Later Method

Problems

modeled

modeled with constant failure rate

often not treated

because of constant failure rate

Applied Reliability Page 47

An Alternative Model

Test Escapes

Defective Subpopulations

Competing Failure Mechanisms

Dead

Defective

Deficient

Applied Reliability Page 48

Quality issue

or damaged after testing prior to

customer receipt

called mistakenly reliability failures

Applied Reliability Page 49

Defective Subpopulations

of failure. Defective units are called mortals. The

ones without the defect are called immortals.

with processing problems.

subpopulations should exist.

traditional approach) that any observed failure type

will eventually affect all other devices.

Applied Reliability Page 50

Competing Risks

units.

because several different types may exist and any

one can cause the unit to fail.

design, processing, or material problems.

distributions

Applied Reliability Page 51

FT Fe Fd 1 FN

where

FN = 1 - R1R2. . . RN

mechanisms.

mechanisms are included.

Applied Reliability Page 52

Use at AMD

AMD Reliability Brochure 1994 Data

Applied Reliability Page 53

Applied Reliability Page 54

Appendix

Applied Reliability Page 55

Class Project

System Models

Twenty-five components in series form a

system. Calculate the system reliability.

Three components in parallel form a system.

Calculate the system reliability.

Applied Reliability Page 56

Class Project

Complex Systems

For the system to function unit A and either unit B or C

and either D and E together or G and H together must

be working. Draw the reliability block diagram for this

setup.

D E

B

C

G H

terms of the individual component reliabilities, that is,

the Ri, where i = A, B, C, ..., G, H. Hint: Consider the

three subsystems:A alone; B with C; and D,E,G,H.

1) RA

2) RBC=1- (1- RB )(1- RC )

3) RDEGH = 1- (1- RDE )(1- RGH )

= 1- (1- RDRE )(1- RGRH )

The system CDF is

FS = 1 - RS = 1 - RA RBC RDEGH

Applied Reliability Page 57

Class Project

Defect Models

1. Estimate the proportion defective p and the

number of mortals in the sample. Fill in the mortal

CDF column in the table below.

Cum # CDF Est All CDF Est

Time Fails Units (%) Mortals (%)

10 2 2/50 = 4%

25 4 4/50 = 8%

50 8 8/50 = 16%

100 13 13/50 = 26%

200 17 17/50 = 34%

500 20 20/50 = 40%

1000 20 20/50 = 40%

the same sheet of paper. Does the fit look

reasonable?

percentile.

line perpendicular to the best fit by eye line

through the estimation point on the Weibull paper

and reading the beta estimation scale.

Applied Reliability Page 58

Class Project

Defect Model Example

n = 50

Cum # CDF Est All CDF Est

Time Fails Units (%) Mortals (%)

10 2 2/50 = 4% 2/20 = 10%

25 4 4/50 = 8% 4/20 = 20%

50 8 8/50 = 16% 8/20 = 40%

100 13 13/50 = 26% 13/20 = 65%

200 17 17/50 = 34% 17/20 = 85%

500 20 20/50 = 40% 20/20 = 100%

1000 20 20/50 = 40% 20/20 = 100%

CDF estimate for mortals is based on

sample size of defective subpopulation.

Applied Reliability Page 59

Applied Reliability Page 60

Class Project

Defect Model Example

Model Check

Shape Parameter (m) ___ 1.0 ______

t / cm

F (t ) 1 e

Mortal

CDF Model Empirical

(Weibull Mortal CDF for CDF All

Time Model) Fraction All Units Units

25 0.221 0.4 0.088 0.08

100 0.632 0.4 0.253 0.26

1000 1.000 0.4 0.400 0.40

Applied Reliability Page 61

Class Project

Defect Model

p x Weibull CDF Plot

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

CDF

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Times (Hrs)

- Functional or Non-functionalUploaded bySaloo
- Certification for the Reliability EngrUploaded byAli Hassan
- 34324Uploaded byRoss Zhou
- MTBF_M2Uploaded bysleepanon4362
- VDA6.3_engl06-04-04.pdfUploaded byjpenjerry
- Evaluating Relief Valve Reliability When Extending The Test And Maintenance Interval.pdfUploaded byhappale2002
- Frecuencias Aproximadas de RodamientoUploaded byJoako Torres
- HYBRID METHOD IN THE RELIABILITY ALLOCATION IN AN INDUSTRY-A REVIEW.Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- Process ChartUploaded byEngr Irfan Akhtar
- SES Power Plant TubingUploaded bySES_Cincinnati
- 11. Relibality NowakUploaded byMuchtar Sufaat
- DFM00 - Introduction TO DFMAUploaded byAnonymous Acwwqe
- 00-2 Table of ContentsUploaded byHamza_yakan967
- OEMS OverviewUploaded byEn Ndy
- AM216_C1Uploaded bymzai2003
- TRANSFORMADOR INDUTOR 10UHUploaded byGabriel Moreira
- broch_samcef_mecano.pdfUploaded byRicky Dao
- Cost-Effective Design of Self Activating Fire Extinguisher (S.A.F.E)Uploaded byIJSRP ORG
- ME376 Maintenance Engineering - CopyUploaded bynandan144
- gosje e madheUploaded byadmircela
- 4. EEE-IJEEER-Computational Methods for - C v MohanUploaded byTJPRC Publications
- 2SC2712_datasheet_en_20140301Uploaded bySilvestrePalaciosLópez
- LRFD1Uploaded byAbel Godoy
- As 5104-2005 General Principles on Reliability for StructuresUploaded bySAI Global - APAC
- Presentation on Reliability Basis of Current standardsUploaded byKenneth Mensah
- Pertemuan 1 Pengantar ReliabilityUploaded bypurdianta yo
- STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT WITH STOCHASTIC PARAMETERSUploaded byIJAET Journal
- GS_EP_PLR_109_EN Design, fabrication and testing of submarine unbonded flexible pipes and risersUploaded byVicoPatate_603129838
- UNIT 8Uploaded byDeepa Shree
- VU - Software Testing March 21Uploaded bySrikanth Marepalli

- Visual Presentation of Supplier ScoresUploaded bymzai2003
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@W02_C09Uploaded bymzai2003
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@W02_C03Uploaded bymzai2003
- Project SchedulingUploaded bymzai2003
- Excel Gantt Chart Template TeamGantt FINALUploaded byMuhammad Khairul Hafizi
- Excel Gantt Chart Template TeamGantt FINALUploaded byMuhammad Khairul Hafizi
- Excel Gantt Chart Template TeamGantt FINALUploaded byMuhammad Khairul Hafizi
- IC-Vendor-Scorecard-Template.xlsxUploaded byMichael Fadjar
- Full IssueUploaded byAbdelmutalab Ibrahim Abdelrasul
- Full IssueUploaded byAbdelmutalab Ibrahim Abdelrasul
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@W02_C11Uploaded bymzai2003
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@W02_C12Uploaded bymzai2003
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@W02_C04Uploaded bymzai2003
- ZebraUploaded bymzai2003
- asset-v1_IIMBx+ST101x+1T2018+type@asset+block@ST101x_W05_C01Uploaded bymzai2003
- Reliability MaturityUploaded bymzai2003
- Strengths (1)Uploaded bycoachmark285
- Excel 2013 Programming by Example with VBA, XML, and ASPUploaded byLiviuTud
- NextUploaded bymzai2003
- How to Work With Someone Who Isn’t a Team PlayerUploaded bymzai2003
- Ask Better QuestionsUploaded bymzai2003
- OperatUploaded bymzai2003
- AI-Transformation-Playbook.pdfUploaded byDouglasAkassaka
- Different Types of Prototyping_invention StepsUploaded bymzai2003
- TeamSTEPPS_strategies performance and patient safety (1).pdfUploaded byAnonymous 8hXABzGhQ
- 40 20 Paper Roll Hardness TesterUploaded bymzai2003
- reliabUploaded bymzai2003
- AI Transformation Playbook v8Uploaded bymzai2003
- Not Only Failure CostsUploaded bymzai2003
- AM216_C1Uploaded bymzai2003

- Optimization of the structure of diesel-generator units of ship power system.pdfUploaded byYao Wei
- STATA Technical NotesUploaded byauxsoleil
- PERNYATAAN SKALA LIKERTUploaded byPriska Paramita
- QEMU Syborg Workshop September 2009Uploaded bySymbian
- U (5)Uploaded byrudra_mazumdar
- Data_ONTAP_DSM_4.0_for_Windows_MPIO.pdfUploaded bySunil Gentyala
- Module 5 SlidesUploaded byEdda Castillo
- 7010-0944 - SokkiaSSF_rm.pdfUploaded bying_alulema_topcon
- Bea - Understanding Macondo Well Failures-BB_DHSG-Jan 2011Uploaded byDr K Gallowglaich
- 10 learning plan overviewUploaded byapi-258643060
- Barquat PQUploaded byDonatas Bertasius
- Software Defined Radio (SDR) and Low Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) -A ReviewUploaded byEditor IJTSRD
- Golden Software Releases Surfer with 3D Viewer, Point Cloud Layer for LiDAR Data Processing, and Base Map SymbologyUploaded byPR.com
- Autodesk Robot Structural Analysis Professional 2015 What is NewUploaded byRangel Sonaglio
- Fauna Diversity in Tropical RainforestUploaded byfrawat
- Jan 09 2014 Enemy Combatants in U.S.A. - Witness StatementUploaded byIan MacPherson
- BibliographyUploaded byhs
- Chapter08 ConvolutionUploaded bySam Keays
- RP_VP_WV500_DTUploaded byapi-3736776
- Australian Steel Detailers Handbook PDF - Google SearchUploaded bylexgen
- Powered ExoskeletonUploaded bySarfaras Ali K
- Strategy Builder User Guide MT4Uploaded byRosângela Santos
- sdn.sap .com pp gurus material.docUploaded byAnonymous 7qRTLDVy
- unwind analysis essayUploaded byapi-251842097
- Analisis Jurnal Pico GeaUploaded byMuhammad Robi Al Banjari
- Britool TORQUE WRENCH.pdfUploaded byShruthi Madhu
- ECONOMICS 155 Syllabus Fall 2016 Rev 3-1Uploaded byPatrick Winnett
- 4.0 Trait Approach to Leadership MZ 04 (1)Uploaded byAnonymous xMXvFt
- Apollo 11 - Mission Operations Report.pdfUploaded bychez ez
- Bassett-Jones-2005-Creativity_and_Innovation_Management.pdfUploaded byFunyIstrate