When to take action if an FMEA RPN number is high?

malasuerte

Involved In Discussions
#21
Not all industries are required to follow the AIAG criteria. FMEA's are broad based and can be applied to many different processes.

Also regarding the actions taken on Severity of 9 & 10. Since the severity is the one ranking that can't be reduced without a design change, any actions will only have the effect of reducing the occurance or detection. If those are already at very low rankings, than realistically there is probably little more that can be done.
?? Design Change is the ONLY way? Sorry, don't agree.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

SQ_Joe

Involved In Discussions
#23
1) Severity can only be lowered by a design change.
Reason - Requirements are driven by the design choices of the team. Failure modes are anti-functions of the requirements. Potential Effects of the Failure Mode(s) drive Severity.
Therefore, if there is no change in the requirement, there can not be a reduction in severity. Period.
2) Actions MUST be taken to reduce Requirements of 9 or 10, unless the Occurrence is a 1 (Never occurs) or a 2 with management signoff.
Detection must be capable of measuring an Occurrence of a 1 or 2.
3) RPN is a useless number. See the many articles by Dr. Donald Wheeler.
AIAG teams want to drop RPN as a risk indicator, but because of history, they are reluctant to pull the plug.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#24
3) RPN is a useless number. See the many articles by Dr. Donald Wheeler.
you can also read my paper on the RPN number. It exposes all of the weaknesses of the rating system and it's invalid math as well as the consequences of blindly using any single statistic or mathematically calculated number...it also references Wheeler's article with a direct link
 

Attachments

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#25
The (automotive supplier) industry has two severe addictions:
  • Risk Priority Numbers (RPN)
  • Capability Analysis (Cp-Cpk and Pp-Ppk)
Both should be removed.

Focus on robust Process Controls and Continuous Improvement.
 

Ajit Basrur

Staff member
Admin
#26
you can also read my paper on the RPN number. It exposes all of the weaknesses of the rating system and it's invalid math as well as the consequences of blindly using any single statistic or mathematically calculated number...it also references Wheeler's article with a direct link
Thanks Bev
 

SQ_Joe

Involved In Discussions
#27
Stijloor, Many industries use RPN and Cp-Cpk and Pp-Ppk values. They are easy for SQE's to report and for competitive -"benchmarking" comparisons.
Why engage your brains, when a computer can spit out a number.
 

dhakadmilind

Starting to get Involved
#28
Some of the customer are added some other criteria like multiplication of severity and occurrence ,Severity and detection should not be more than 36 else it is necessary to take a action . But as FMEA is live document so instead on considering some figure for action ,it is better to always decide actions to reduce the RPN . IN our PFMEA CFT, we follow the same rule.
 

SQ_Joe

Involved In Discussions
#29
Hi Bev D,

I have a slightly different perception of Severity rankings. In your paper you have the following:

Recommendations:
Severity Scales: Keep it simple
Create a simple scale that everyone uses. Experience has shown that a 1-5 scale is usually sufficient. 1-3 scales can be perceived as lacking in resolution and often leads to distress as teams struggle with large categories. 1-10 scales tend to have too fine a resolution and teams struggle with the small differences. 1-5 seems to be ‘just right’.

I have facilitated hundreds and hundreds of D & P FMEA’s, and never have I had a problem with a FMEA Team not comprehending nor constructing a 1 – 10 ranking method for their industry or service organization. In rare cases, some industries desire more resolution. The simplification of categories comes by defining regions on the S x O, Criticality Matrix.

On the Criticality Matrix as little as 3 categories/classifications, to a more appropriate selection of 5 categories/classifications can be defined. Industries, customers, or companies can define the definition/selection of the S x O intersections as part of the FMEA pre-work. It is these definitions which lead to the categories of:
“5) Critical”,
“4) Critical with Failure eliminated through preventive control” (if desired),
“3) Significant”,
“2) Annoyance” (if desired), and
“1) Characteristics with Appropriate Actions / Controls Already in Place”.

“5) Critical”, “3) Significant”, and “2) Annoyance (if defined)” Classifications always require Recommended Actions.
The “4) Critical with Failure eliminated through preventive control” Classification requires a special Recommended Action note, such as, “None at this time based on low Occurrence and Detection rankings.” or “Based upon historic data, no action is required at this time.” Have your company’s lawyer(s) to advise your company and teams for specific language.
The “1) Characteristics with Appropriate Actions / Controls Already in Place” Classification should have the Recommended Action of “None” as suggested in the AIAG FMEA Reference Manual.

The Criticality Matrix, a pre-FMEA planning activity, takes all of the guess-work out of defining Product/Process Characteristics and one dimension of when and type of Recommended Actions are required. Other pre-FMEA planning activities make FMEA development quite an easy task after a company or team creates them. These become business game changing strategies.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Staff member
Super Moderator
#30
I am not all that passionate about how many categories go into a severity rating. Certainly there isn't a single perfect or optimal number that fits everyone's needs. for me it's not whether or not it's easy to use 10 different categories, it's more about the value that more categories will give us. does it actually help us get to preventing and mitigating Problems? Will a 9 drive a different action than a 10?

Unlike Severity I am passionate about the whole occurrence rating. SXO is still bad math...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Requiring action on factors alone of RPN in FMEA APQP and PPAP 7
C How to handle Action Results in a new FMEA Review once we have a new RPN? FMEA and Control Plans 1
E FMEA Action Plan Threshold (RPN) - Auditor says Action Plan for an RPN > 84 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 21
T RPN of Action Results per the AIAG FMEA manual FMEA and Control Plans 5
J FMEA RPN Number and When to Recommend to Take Action FMEA and Control Plans 3
S Process FMEA (PFMEA) RPN Corrective Action Plan FMEA and Control Plans 6
S FMEA RPN Corrective Action Plan QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
Ashok sunder Is it possible to reduce FMEA Occurrence and Detection Ranking after corrective action taken for customer complaints? FMEA and Control Plans 6
M FMEA Corrective Action target date changed ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 1
P FMEA Risk Analysis Recommended Action Priority FMEA and Control Plans 2
V Linking the FMEA Causes & Action Plan with DOE Experiments or Experimentation Design FMEA and Control Plans 1
H Corrective Action: When to update the Process FMEA (PFMEA) FMEA and Control Plans 15
T Recommended Action(s) Column - Process FMEA FMEA and Control Plans 17
R Updated Process FMEA: How much detail? Closure of an External Corrective Action FMEA and Control Plans 3
A Corrective Action vs. FMEA Occurance, Detection, Severance Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
Raffy Preventive Action - Does generating an FMEA help future containment? Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 2
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
R Evaluating the need for preventive action Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
B Stakeholder Initiated Corrective and Preventive Action Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 5
B Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) A Key Process of the Quality Management System Dec 17... Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 0
I When exactly can a corrective action be closed? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
M Informational TGA – Australian regulatory action on breast implants and breast tissue expanders Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational Medical Device Safety Action Plan: Protecting Patients, Promoting Public Health Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
Juby Tan Action on Customer Replacement (Nonconforming Product - ISO 9001) Customer Complaints 2
Q Add new action plans in CA, while waiting effectiveness - Same problem reappears ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
M Informational The FDA Takes Action to Protect Patients from Risk of Certain Textured Breast Implants; Requests Allergan Voluntarily Recall Certain Breast Implants a Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
L What to do if a Corrective Action requires several extensions Nonconformance and Corrective Action 7
Q Best criteria to measure Corrective Action effectiveness - Poor Maintenance ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
Ashok sunder Is it possible to reduce Risk likelihood and impact Post control Ranking after corrective action taken for risk? FMEA and Control Plans 1
E CAR (Corrective Action Report) with questionable Root Cause ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
B How to reply NCR on ineffectiveness of corrective action during IATF external audit? This is repeated issue whereby some mistake was done. IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
C Detection Action for Failure Effects - AIAG 4th Edition Layout FMEA and Control Plans 5
I AS9100D Non-conformance for 10.2.1 b 2 and 10.2.1. b 3 e and f - Corrective Action AS9100, IAQG 9100, Nadcap and related Aerospace Standards and Requirements 10
R Linking the Processes of Continual Improvement, Change Management, Risk Management, Action Planning, etc? Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 5
M Informational TGA – Action Plan for Medical Devices Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
M Informational EC – Guide for referencing standards in public procurement in Europe (JIS Action 11) Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
I Corrective Action Tracking for Product and Process in the same system? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
S Health Canada's Action Plan on Medical Devices - 2019 milestones Canada Medical Device Regulations 0
G When preventative action is prohibited by cost in 8D problem solving Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 1
M Medical Device News Joint Action On Market Surveillance Of Medical Devices (JAMS) Releases Progress Update EU Medical Device Regulations 0
G When preventative action is prohibited by cost in 8D problem solving Problem Solving, Root Cause Fault and Failure Analysis 8
R CIP (Corrective Action) requirements - ISO 9001 clause 10.2 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
E CAR (Corrective Action Request) Due Dates ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
C ISO 7010 m002 mandatory action - Color requirements on Packaging IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
E Corrective Action or Customer Complaint ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 16
Similar threads


















































Top Bottom