Requiring action on factors alone of RPN in FMEA

M

mukmetalman

#1
I understand requiring action on a high Severity requirement, has anyone run into resistance based on a high Occurrence or Detection? As in a blanket "If Severity, Occurrence, or Detection is greater than _ , corrective action is required"?

I Keep thinking of the hit by meteor failure mode. S 10, O 1, D 1. We're not going to make this part meteor proof.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
in my organization we take action based on severity only.
However, we don't allow meteors, snow-apolcalypses, tornados, revolutions or zombies as 'failure' modes. I tell the engineers that if we - or our Custoemrs or suppliers get hit by a meteor we all have other things to worry about besides how our product wil function.

We do use these as part of our business continuity process. When I worked at Honda we had robust busines continuity processes regarding supplier events - and I saw it put successfully into play when one of our single source suppliers had a catastrophic fire. My current business offers generous help to Vet practices in teh event of hurricanes, floods, etc. and we have processes for weather events that disrupt deliveries...and this is the approapriate place for such events.

The issue with blind application of required action for high occurrence or detection is that it ignores severity. a 1 or 2 severity which may not be noticed and typically have no tangible effect on the Customer hardly 'deserves' a fool proof detection method. This misguided approach is even more wasteful and diversionary if the occurence rate of a failure mode which has a trivial effect will rarely occur. Logic must be applied at some point.

the real issue with blind application of RPN calculations is that it is trying to replace human logic with a simple (and flawed) mathematical calculation. When did it become popular to promote lack of critical thinking?
 

Englishman Abroad

Involved In Discussions
#3
I agree with Bev,

FMEA is a tool used by people, to think about the product / process risks and to analyse them.

If you look in the FMEA manual p103, it is explained that a RPN threshold rule "
if RPN > X then action needed" is not advised.

Because, FMEA is not a scientific process, different teams will rate something higher or lower than others.

Also if you have a threshold imposed then most probably everything will be rated just under the threshold, and the team will not improve the product design or process.

The FMEA should be used to rank/prioritise. Different FMEA teams will have similar failure mode priority lists, even if the absolute values of RPN, or SxO values are different.

In my company we rank actions firstly based on severity, then SxO, then RPN. Action stops when the residual risk is at an acceptable level (it is not worth the resource needed to resolve it).
 

Johnson

Involved In Discussions
#4
If the Severity is high ( 10) , but Occurrence is 1 and Detection is 1, action is not needed any more, because The production capability is so high that no problem will hapen (O=1 or 2 or even 3), the measuring reliability is so high (D=1, 2....that all the problem can be detected and no problem will escape.
On the other hand, if the Serverity is very low (S=1 for example), that means the problem is so small that it is not a problem at all, why we need action =money, time !
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#5
If the Severity is high ( 10) , but Occurrence is 1 and Detection is 1, action is not needed any more, because The production capability is so high that no problem will hapen (O=1 or 2 or even 3),
One caution: if your occurrence is based on capability then you must recognize that assignable causes can and will happen that you may not be able to detect or control in which case you have created a high severity defect. Also how is the capability assessed? With a weak Cpk study over a short period of time or is only opinion based? Or was it from a long term stable performance data?

IF you have the highest level detection that is actually mistake proofed you 'may' have a feeling of comfort. but I always question these as too often the rating is opinion and not fact based. was the detection system actually tested to ensure that it was in fact impossible to miss even a low defect rate?
 
M

mukmetalman

#6
Thanks all, just have a customer asking for a corrective action on any of the factors of the RPN being 7/10 or greater. Seems like a waste of resources on strictly high Detection and Occurrence scores. Which is the whole reason we examine RPN in the first place. I understand the compounding effect of S X O and would understand this policy, but I would imagine a lot of "6" scores when I tell the cross-functional team about our imposed requirements. Which skews the FMEA. Argh.
 
A

AeQuitas

#7
That type of customer youre talking about has not understand the tool FMEA but is destroying the method.

We once had a similar customer with a nice looking RPN rule.

Everything it did was getting all suppliers to rate exactly so they just produced the paper without any value adding content in it...
 
#8
I look at FMEAs more generally. They are an improvement tool. Of course high severity items need to be looked at, but if you have a severity of 1 and an occurrence of 10, you might still want to perform action as a continual improvement. Don't limit yourself to items you are "required" to take action on. Take action on items that might not be required, but make sense.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J Supplier Corrective Action: Are you requiring suppliers to follow a defined process? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 5
Stoic Manual soldering processes - 100% verifiable, or always requiring validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 15
J Which OEM or customers are now requiring the new AIAG/VDA FMEA format? FMEA and Control Plans 0
M Is there a published List of AIAG members requiring IATF certification ? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
K ISO 9001:2015 AVL - New Chinese standards requiring all testing of materials be done in China ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 0
M Medical Device News FDA Guidance - UDI: Policy Regarding Compliance Dates for Class I and Unclassified Devices and Certain Devices Requiring Direct Marking Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
pittmatj Comprehensive list of countries requiring Registration & Market Authorization Holders Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
M Education - Jobs Requiring a College Degree Career and Occupation Discussions 2
C AS9100 Customer requiring PPAP APQP and PPAP 3
D Can anyone share a Customer Complaint procedure not requiring logging complaints ? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
T Deviation/Waiver Requiring a Nonconformance? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16
D Requiring a "bad" part for attribute MSA studies Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
W MSA on a Hardness Tester to satisfy a Customer who is requiring Hardness Cpk Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 17
O Documenting Processes requiring Customer Notification Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
B Issue of Certificate requiring Supplemental Notice General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
B Is a temperature gauge needed for adhesive requiring storage in a cold environment? Manufacturing and Related Processes 8
B Customer is requiring an "Inspection Point Program" Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 6
O Outsourcing part of Design & Dev Process- Still requiring D&D ver & val-7.3.5, 7.3.6? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
Mr.Happy PPAP including FAI Parts - Customer is requiring 5000 measurements APQP and PPAP 15
M .125-40 UNC-2B Thread requiring Inspection to Thread Gage "Method A" Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
ScottK Customer requiring that we "rubber stamp" our C of C's for them... Records and Data - Quality, Legal and Other Evidence 10
D Separating Customers not requiring AS9100 - Sheet metal and machine job shop AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
V Templates (Forms) requiring Control - Document Control Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
K Inquiry on kinds of document a customer is requiring us to submit? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 2
M Any News about the FAA 14CFR Part 121 / 145 Requiring Accredited Calibration? Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standards and Requirements 3
F What is a usual RPN level for requiring actions? FMEA and Control Plans 4
M Registrar requiring sub-supplier management Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 12
C Customers requiring C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partership Against Terrorism) Certification Customer and Company Specific Requirements 6
S Qs-600? A new customer is requiring it! QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 3
B FDA vs. Materials requiring Refrigeration - Dental adhesives 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 18
E TS 16949 Clause 7.4.1.2 - Customers not requiring TS 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
B ISO 13485 Calibration Requirements - Requiring a Documented Procedure for control? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
Claes Gefvenberg Customer Requiring Environmental and Health and Safety Efforts Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 20
M We have to have a written request from an automotive customer requiring us to certify IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
B Can formal document control requiring QM signoff live with continuous improvement? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 21
A ISO 9001:2000 - Documents Requiring Control - Documents of External Origin Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 27
Marc KPMG is requiring permission to link their website Registrars and Notified Bodies 0
S Will NASDAQ be requiring ISO 9000? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 11
H Scope of TL 9000 - Telcos contracts now requiring registration TL 9000 Telecommunications Standard and QuEST 10
D Minor nonconformance - Not requiring Certificates of Compliance on our supplier PO's Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 7
D Corrective Action Timing - IATF CB Deadline IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
R AS 9100D - Containment and Corrective action AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
P Customer Corrective Action Requests in OASIS? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
C Corrective action for failure in documents control ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
nadhar2 Classification of Action Items Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 3
C If it doesn't prevent a non-conformance, is it a preventive action? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
G Assignable cause/corrective action list for SPC Software Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
Q Tips for Action Requests on Communication and Leadership ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
S Can we provide training plan as corrective action for IATF 16949 Non conformity? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
P Corrective Action Response for Missed bumps on brake press Manufacturing and Related Processes 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom