Re: AIAG's FMEA 4th Edition
I have got some points:
1) why for a standard there isn't any "public hearing"? EPA do it, Aiag not. is AIAG clever?
2) Why to pay? knowledge should be free. For non-automotive parts I keep on using the current edition and for automotive I will wait for my customer updating (normally they have their own taylored FMEA therefore...)
3) ISO TS suggests the use of FMEA, not AIAG one and AIAG states it is a reference documents, so we are free in the choice until a customer will required it
4) RPN if it is not a trigger, what else if not an objective way of decision?
one could modified saying all RPN >125 must have an action or whenever RPN times a "achieaveble" index (doesn't cost 10, a immense effort 1) is > 400 e.g.
5) the use of FMEA by customer. One of the biggest european industry provides a reference manual for
PFMEA and their auditor check how You apply it. It states occurence must be > 2 (because nothing is impossible), every out of tollerance has got severity 9, a 100% manual inspection can not have Detection better then 7 so RPN=2*7*9=126. Production can not start if RPN is >125! The only solution for the (poor) supplier should be to buy at his own expence a 100% full automatic inspection machine for all the drawing dimensions. It sounds like a joke but it is the truth
6) why we focus our attention on FMEA etc and not on product specifications and drawings? Both are the base for all the rest
sorry for have given vent for my anger