Tablas Fmea

Table 1 Suggested DFMEA Severity Evaluation Criteria
Effect
Hazardous
without
warning
Hazardous
with warning
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Minor
Very Minor
None
Criteria: Severity of Effect
Ranking
Very high severity ranking when a potential failure

mode affects safe vehicle operator and/or involves
noncompliance with government regulation without
warning.
Very high severity ranking when a potential failure
mode affects safe vehicle operator and/or involves
noncompliance with government regulation with
warning.
Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of primary function).
10
Vehicle/Item operable but at a reduced level of

performance. Customer very dissatisfied.
Vehicle/Item operable but Comfort/Convenience
item(s) inoperable. Customer dissatisfied.
Vehicle/Item operable but Comfort/Convenience
item(s) operable at a reduced level of performance.
Customer somewhat dissatisfied.
Fit & finish/Squeak & rattle item does not conform.
Defect noticed by most customers (greater than 75%).
Defect noticed by 50 percent of customers.
Defect noticed by discriminating customers (less than
25 percent).
No discernible effect.
6
5
4
3
2
1
Table 2 Suggested DFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria
Probability of
Failure
Very High:
Persistent failures
High: Frequent
failures
Moderate:
Occasional
failures
Low: Relatively
few failures
Remote: Failure
is unlikely
Likely Failure Rates Over Design Life
Ranking
100 per thousand vehicles/items
10
0.5 per thousand vehicles/items
Table 4 Suggested PFMEA Severity Evaluation Criteria

Effect
Hazardous
without
warning
Hazardous
with warning
Very High
Criteria: Severity of Effect

This ranking results when a potential failure mode results in a final customer and/or a manufacturing/
assembly plant defect. The final customer should always be considered first. If both occur, use the
higher of the two severities.
(Customer effect)
Very high severity ranking when a potential
failure mode affects safe vehicle operation
and/or involves noncompliance with
government regulation without warning.
Very high severity ranking when a potential
failure mode affects safe vehicle operation
and/or involves noncompliance with
government regulation with warning.
Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of primary
function).
High
Vehicle/Item operable but at a reduced level of

performance. Customer very dissatisfied.
Moderate
Vehicle/Item operable but

Comfort/Convenience item(s) inoperable.
Customer dissatisfied.
Low
Vehicle/Item operable but

Comfort/Convenience item(s) operable at a
reduced level of performance. Customer
somewhat dissatisfied.
Fit & finish/Squeak & rattle item does not
conform. Defect noticed by most customers
(greater than 75%).
Very Low
Ranking
(Manufacturing/ Assembly effect)

Or may endanger operator ( machine or
assembly) without warning.
10
Or may endanger operator (machine or

assembly) with warning.
Or 100% of product may have to be

scrapped, or vehicle/item repaired in repair
department with a repair time greater than
one hour.
Or product may have to be sorted and a
portion (less than 100%) scrapped, or
vehicle/item repaired in repair department
with a repair time between half an hour and
an hour.
Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product
may have to scrapped with no sorting, or
vehicle/item repaired in repair department
with a repair time less than half an hour.
Or 100% of product may have to be
reworked, or vehicle/item repaired off-line
but does not go to repair department.
Or the product may have to be sorted, with

no scrap, and a portion (less than 100%)
reworked.
Minor
Very Minor
None

conform. Defect noticed by 50 percent of
customers.
conform. Defect noticed by discriminating
customers (less than 25 percent).
No discernible effect.

may have to be reworked, with no scrap, online but out-of-station.

may have to be reworked, with no scrap, online but in-station.
Or slight inconvenience to operation or

operator, or no effect.
Table 5 Suggested PFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria
Probability of
Failure
Very High:
Persistent failures
High: Frequent
failures
Moderate:
Occasional
failures
Low: Relatively
few failures
Remote: Failure
is unlikely
Likely Failure Rates
Ranking
100 per thousand pieces
10
0.5 per thousand pieces
Table 6 Proposed PFMEA Detection Evaluation Criteria

Inspection Types:
Criteria
Suggested Range of Detection Methods
Ranking
Detecti
o
n
Almost
Impossible
Very
Remote
Remote
Low
Absolute certainty of nondetection.

Controls will probably not
detect.
Controls have poor chance of
detection.
Controls have poor chance of
detection.
Controls may detect.
Moderate
Controls may detect.
Moderately
High
Controls have a good chance

to detect.
High
Controls have a good chance

to detect.
Very High
Controls almost certain to

detect.
Very High
Controls certain to detect.
Very Low
Inspection Types:
1. Error Proofed
2. Gauging
3. Manual Inspection
Cannot detect or is not checked.
10
Control is achieved with indirect or random checks only.
Control is achieved with visual inspection only.
Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.
Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC

{Statistical Process Control}.
Control is based on variable gauging after parts have left
the station, OR Go/No Go gauging performed on 100% of
the parts after parts have left the station.
Error detection in subsequent operations, OR gauging
performed on setup and first-piece check.
Error detection in-station, OR error detection in
subsequent operations by multiple layers of acceptance:
supply, select, install, verify. Can not accept discrepant
part.
Error detection in-station (automatic gauging with
automatic stop feature). Can not pass discrepant part.
Discrepant parts can not be made because item has
been error proofed by process/product design.
6
5
4
3
2
1

Tablas Fmea

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tablas Fmea

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tablas Fmea

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Table 1 Suggested DFMEA Severity Evaluation Criteria

Criteria: Severity of Effect

Very high severity ranking when a potential failure

Vehicle/Item operable but at a reduced level of

Table 2 Suggested DFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria

Likely Failure Rates Over Design Life

100 per thousand vehicles/items

50 per thousand vehicles/items

20 per thousand vehicles/items

10 per thousand vehicles/items

5 per thousand vehicles/items

2 per thousand vehicles/items

1 per thousand vehicles/items

0.5 per thousand vehicles/items

0.1 per thousand vehicles/items

0.01 per thousand vehicles/items

Table 4 Suggested PFMEA Severity Evaluation Criteria

Criteria: Severity of Effect

Vehicle/Item operable but at a reduced level of

Vehicle/Item operable but

Vehicle/Item operable but

(Manufacturing/ Assembly effect)

Or may endanger operator (machine or

Or 100% of product may have to be

Or the product may have to be sorted, with

Fit & finish/Squeak & rattle item does not

Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product

Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product

Or slight inconvenience to operation or

Table 5 Suggested PFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria

Likely Failure Rates

100 per thousand pieces

50 per thousand pieces

20 per thousand pieces

10 per thousand pieces

5 per thousand pieces

2 per thousand pieces

1 per thousand pieces

0.5 per thousand pieces

0.1 per thousand pieces

0.01 per thousand pieces

Table 6 Proposed PFMEA Detection Evaluation Criteria

Suggested Range of Detection Methods

Absolute certainty of nondetection.

Controls may detect.

Controls have a good chance

Controls have a good chance

Controls almost certain to

Controls certain to detect.

Cannot detect or is not checked.

Control is achieved with indirect or random checks only.

Control is achieved with visual inspection only.

Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.

Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.