The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  FMEA and Control Plans
  D and O relation in DFMEA

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   D and O relation in DFMEA
MSAFAI
Forum Contributor

Posts: 24
From:Tehran - IRAN
Registered: May 2001

posted 13 May 2001 07:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for MSAFAI   Click Here to Email MSAFAI     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi everybody,

The following question has kept me awake to this hour (it is now about 4 o'clock AM where I live):

In the DFMEA example given in the QS9000 FMEA manual, in more than one occasion you come across a reduction of both D and O WITHOUT any design changes. It seems as if reducing D will reduce O. Whereas, the manual states "the only way to bring a reduction in the occurence number is to change the design".

Can anyone explain this apparant contradiction between the manual's text and the manual's example?

Thanks in advance
MSAFAI

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 14 May 2001 06:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
MSAFAI:


How did you deduce that there was no design change?

ASD...

IP: Logged

MSAFAI
Forum Contributor

Posts: 24
From:Tehran - IRAN
Registered: May 2001

posted 15 May 2001 12:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for MSAFAI   Click Here to Email MSAFAI     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Al Dyer:
MSAFAI:


How did you deduce that there was no design change?

ASD...


Dear Al,

Please have a look at the DFMEA example given in the QS9000 FMEA manual. I quote from the manual two cases, column 'Actions Taken':

" Test results (test no 1481) show specified thickness is adequate ... "

or another case:

" evaluation showed adequate access"

Regards,
MSAFAI

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 15 May 2001 05:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by MSAFAI:
Dear Al,

Please have a look at the DFMEA example given in the QS9000 FMEA manual. I quote from the manual two cases, column 'Actions Taken':

" Test results (test no 1481) show specified thickness is adequate ... "

or another case:

" evaluation showed adequate access"

Regards,
MSAFAI



I'm looking at the same page you are. This is a design FMEA. Wouldn't a change under actions taken be a design change?

ASD...

IP: Logged

MSAFAI
Forum Contributor

Posts: 24
From:Tehran - IRAN
Registered: May 2001

posted 17 May 2001 02:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for MSAFAI   Click Here to Email MSAFAI     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Dear Al,

Do you mean there has been a 'design change' or there has not?

The sentences I quoted from the FMEA manual seem to sugges there has been no design change. Do you agree?

Regards,
MSAFAI

IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 622
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 17 May 2001 06:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
MSAFAI:

Under the actions taken (page 12 AIAG FMEA) I look at the statement that says "based on test, 3 additional vent holes provided in affected areas."

I would consider that a change in design.

I work mainly with process FMEA's but the thought process is the same.

ASD...

IP: Logged

MSAFAI
Forum Contributor

Posts: 24
From:Tehran - IRAN
Registered: May 2001

posted 19 May 2001 07:01 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for MSAFAI   Click Here to Email MSAFAI     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Al Dyer:
MSAFAI:

Under the actions taken (page 12 AIAG FMEA) I look at the statement that says "based on test, 3 additional vent holes provided in affected areas."

I would consider that a change in design.

I work mainly with process FMEA's but the thought process is the same.

ASD...


Dear Al,

That ia a design change, you are right. But how about other cases in the same page where there is no desing change?

Regards,
MSAFAI

P.S. I think we have to give up. Since, there are no comments from other forum members.


Regards

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!