Capturing temporary actions in PFMEA in terms of manpower, lessons learned

H

Hipolit

#1
Dear All,
Does any one have experience in capturing temporary actions in process FMEA?
Thanks in advance for your help.
 
D

Duke Okes

#3
Dear All,
Does any one have experience in capturing temporary actions in process FMEA?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Not sure what you're looking for but lessons learned would only show up in an FMEA if the product/process were changed as a result of that learning. The change would simply be reflected as reduced S, O or D, with associated change description.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#4
Not sure what you're looking for but lessons learned would only show up in an FMEA if the product/process were changed as a result of that learning. The change would simply be reflected as reduced S, O or D, with associated change description.
Lessons learned might not "show up" explicitly at all. I can use what I learned in process "A" (or something I learned 20 years ago) to inform the S-O-D ratings in a new PFMEA for process "B."
 
H

Hipolit

#5
First of all I would like to know your opinion if it’s worth to put Temporary Actions in the PFMEA. Secondly if you did placed it into PFMEA, how much time, manpower it took?
I my case a Temporary Action is an extra operation (not mentioned in standard Work Instruction) performed on the workstation after quality problem or customer complaint. Time frame for Temporary Action is 3 months, after that process change has to be implemented or action is stopped without process change.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#6
First of all I would like to know your opinion if it’s worth to put Temporary Actions in the PFMEA. Secondly if you did placed it into PFMEA, how much time, manpower it took?
I my case a Temporary Action is an extra operation (not mentioned in standard Work Instruction) performed on the workstation after quality problem or customer complaint. Time frame for Temporary Action is 3 months, after that process change has to be implemented or action is stopped without process change.
If the operation is going to go on for 90 days, it should be addressed in the control plan, and if it's addressed in the control plan you should do the PFMEA first.
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
#7
If the operation is going to go on for 90 days, it should be addressed in the control plan, and if it's addressed in the control plan you should do the PFMEA first.
I think if it is only for 90 days, perhaps a Quality Alert might suffice. It would not get the PPAP process involved. It may depend on what your customer wants, and perhaps on the significance of the action.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#8
I think if it is only for 90 days, perhaps a Quality Alert might suffice. It would not get the PPAP process involved. It may depend on what your customer wants, and perhaps on the significance of the action.
If a process other than the one that's been approved (via PPAP) is being used, the customer will have to be notified in any case. It'll be the customer's call as to whether PPAP is required or not. You can't circumvent the system by calling a change in the process a "quality alert."
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
#9
If a process other than the one that's been approved (via PPAP) is being used, the customer will have to be notified in any case. It'll be the customer's call as to whether PPAP is required or not. You can't circumvent the system by calling a change in the process a "quality alert."
But Quality Alerts are frequently and routinely used for short term, temporary process changes. In many cases, it would take more than 90 days to get a PPAP change approved. Isn't this a common practice in your circles? I do agree that the customer shoould be notified, and concur. But, I am not sure I would expect a PPAP or control plan change in this example.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#10
But Quality Alerts are frequently and routinely used for short term, temporary process changes.
In many cases, it would take more than 90 days to get a PPAP change approved. Isn't this a common practice in your circles?
My own circle knows nothing about this sort of thing, but I'm speaking from a customer perspective, and a customer that doesn't take 90 days to approve PPAPs, especially when a supplier is under the gun. I suppose this could be common practice with the B3, but it sounds very tacky to me.

I do agree that the customer shoould be notified, and concur. But, I am not sure I would expect a PPAP or control plan change in this example.
If you notify the customer, which is required, and they want a PPAP submission, they should be informed that if there's undue delay, there will be undue delay in getting parts to them. It's possible, and maybe even likely, that the customer will assent to the temporary change without a lot of paperwork flying around, but it's their choice.
 

Top Bottom