From Experience in:
In short - If the product fails, what is the potential risk?
If you really are into it, there was a series that National Geographic did for a while called "Air Crash Investigation". I have probably 100+ episodes recorded. Here is an example:
I haven't flown in quite a few years, but I am still technically a licensed pilot. Thus - My interest. I loved my time in the left seat as PIC.
Plus Factor: Technical detective work / Root Cause Failure Analysis.
Last night I watched an episode in which a thrust reverser deployed in flight on takeoff. Can't remember the aircraft type, but it was a 2 engine short haul jet. Short version: Pilots were not trained on in-flight thrust reversal activation because the "statistics" showed it as a 1:1Billion chance of failure. So - No pilot training and 100+ people die. Of note is there were multiple redundant sytems, including the plane's computer, so I can understand the odds. That is what a DESIGN FMEA is about. Put the process FMEA aside for a minute. The Design FMEA is only an input into the Process FMEA. A Design FMEA is "What if the part fails".
Contrast with a Process FMEA
A Design FMEA is different than a Process FMEA. Design FMEA items are often inputs to a process FMEA. The Process FMEA, which I will write a definition for soon, has to do with specific processes which, for different applications of the same part which go through a nearly identical process(es), typically have different risk levels.
Also see: Typical Automotive Trilogy Development
- Airbag Restraint Systems
- Anti-Lock Brake Systems
- DoD Aerospace High Reliability Electronics
In short - If the product fails, what is the potential risk?
If you really are into it, there was a series that National Geographic did for a while called "Air Crash Investigation". I have probably 100+ episodes recorded. Here is an example:
I haven't flown in quite a few years, but I am still technically a licensed pilot. Thus - My interest. I loved my time in the left seat as PIC.
Plus Factor: Technical detective work / Root Cause Failure Analysis.
Last night I watched an episode in which a thrust reverser deployed in flight on takeoff. Can't remember the aircraft type, but it was a 2 engine short haul jet. Short version: Pilots were not trained on in-flight thrust reversal activation because the "statistics" showed it as a 1:1Billion chance of failure. So - No pilot training and 100+ people die. Of note is there were multiple redundant sytems, including the plane's computer, so I can understand the odds. That is what a DESIGN FMEA is about. Put the process FMEA aside for a minute. The Design FMEA is only an input into the Process FMEA. A Design FMEA is "What if the part fails".
1. Pilot Training on the aircraft to immediately identify in-flight thrust reversal recovery.
2. Add a verbal and "alarm" sound specific to in-flight thrust reversal deployment.
2. Add a verbal and "alarm" sound specific to in-flight thrust reversal deployment.
Contrast with a Process FMEA
A Design FMEA is different than a Process FMEA. Design FMEA items are often inputs to a process FMEA. The Process FMEA, which I will write a definition for soon, has to do with specific processes which, for different applications of the same part which go through a nearly identical process(es), typically have different risk levels.
Also see: Typical Automotive Trilogy Development
Last edited:
