Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Determining PFMEA Severity for Armored Parts

C

cavrdave

#1
It's a pFMEA for the packing of armored and non-armored parts. Some of the armor parts cover a portion of another armored part.

If the armored parts are missing what would the "severity" ranking be?

The customer wants it to be high (10, they could die w/o warning). My argument is you wouldn't be able to build the product without the missing part right? Therefore the ranking would be for the manufacturing side of ranking the score is what I'm thinking.
 
S

SvanRaay

#2
Maybe this is a bit simplistic, but if you counter the severity rating with the opposite for detectability you should be able to move on. Basically it would be a catastrophic failure without the part, but since you cant make the assembly without it, the detectability would be high.

im sure i must have missed something though.
 
C

cavrdave

#3
It's a part that covers a seam where two parts come together. So yes they could put the two parts on and the cover piece. The cover piece is held in place using the holes of the piece underneath it. I'm thinking if they weighed the box after packaging that would catch if any parts were missing.
 

GRP

Involved In Discussions
#4
It's a part that covers a seam where two parts come together. So yes they could put the two parts on and the cover piece. The cover piece is held in place using the holes of the piece underneath it. I'm thinking if they weighed the box after packaging that would catch if any parts were missing.
Years later, aye, but for the sake of good discussions.

No. Severity is independent of occurrence and detection. At least in the automotive industry, as per SAE standard and other guidelines.

If you cannot produce the part, the severity remains 10, but the occurrence will be 1, and detection might be also 1.

If you want to reduce the severity this should be tackled by a design change.
 
#5
Cavrdave is correct - the severity of the POTENTIAL failure is not related to the occurrence and detection. Missing armour would (in my opinion) definitely be a 10.

As for being unable to assemble without it, I have seen some pretty weird assemblies over the years - people find a work-around for almost anything.
 

Mikey324

Involved In Discussions
#6
Agree with all the statements above. Just because something is unlikely (occurrence) it doesn't mean it wouldn't be catastrophic if it actually were to happen.

Is it possible to build your item without it? If so, how easy is it to detect? How would you detect it, visual inspection only? From my experience, it's the things that happen very, very, rarely that are so easy to missed with visual inspection. We get so used to it being there, we can overlook it. So long story short, if severity is high (and in this case i would agree it is), and you rely on visual inspection, maybe a process improvement is worth looking into. Even if just looking at feasibility. Just my 2 cents!
 
Top Bottom