R
Re: Basic FMEA Questions
Dear Jim,
Concerning your qoute, I agree to you, I just want to add that Severity, is one of the key points to address in the PFMEA regardless RPN and independent of if the process is whether costed or not, because Severity might be reffered to a dangerous situation just for people, process and/or customers; and also I would like to add that if we change product or process design in the way that those might cause that Failure mode but this generate an lower impact compared with the primarily specific Severity figure, then Severity for that Design/Product/Process may of course be lowered.
Kindest Regards.
Ricardo Salinas.
All process steps that have the potential to affect product quality should be included in PFMEAs, regardless of whether or not they're "costed in." The point could be made that incoming inspection should be eliminated wherever possible, but that's not the question here.
One point of confusion I've seen regarding inspection processes has to do with the AIAG PFMEA manual requirement for each step in the process to assume that the material coming into that step is conforming, and to focus on the potential failure modes for that process alone. This does not apply to inspection, for obvious reasons, and it's unfortunate that the manual doesn't address the distinction. Inspection processes, incoming or otherwise, have their own set of potential failure modes. For example, it's possible to approve nonconforming material, or reject conforming material. It's also possible to mislabel the inspection status of the material. There are other possibilities, but you get the idea.
Again, if the process has the potential to affect product quality, it should be included.
One point of confusion I've seen regarding inspection processes has to do with the AIAG PFMEA manual requirement for each step in the process to assume that the material coming into that step is conforming, and to focus on the potential failure modes for that process alone. This does not apply to inspection, for obvious reasons, and it's unfortunate that the manual doesn't address the distinction. Inspection processes, incoming or otherwise, have their own set of potential failure modes. For example, it's possible to approve nonconforming material, or reject conforming material. It's also possible to mislabel the inspection status of the material. There are other possibilities, but you get the idea.
Again, if the process has the potential to affect product quality, it should be included.
Concerning your qoute, I agree to you, I just want to add that Severity, is one of the key points to address in the PFMEA regardless RPN and independent of if the process is whether costed or not, because Severity might be reffered to a dangerous situation just for people, process and/or customers; and also I would like to add that if we change product or process design in the way that those might cause that Failure mode but this generate an lower impact compared with the primarily specific Severity figure, then Severity for that Design/Product/Process may of course be lowered.
Kindest Regards.
Ricardo Salinas.