You are on page 1of 19

FMEA Objective, scope and goal(s

):

Process ID

FMEA Type: Process
FMEA Number:
Prepared By:
FMEA Date:
Revision Date:

Process Lead
Core Team Members:

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

New DET

Actions Taken

New RPN

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Owner

Completion
Date

New SEV

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Recommended
Action(s)

New OCC

DET

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Current Process Controls

RPN

Potential Failure Mode(s)

Potential Cause(s)/
Mechanism(s) of Failure

OCC

Process Step

SEV

Action Results
Potential Effect(s)
of Failure

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Process FMEA 1 1 Column C 1 1 RPN Value 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Process Step 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .

cal logs 0 0 2 12 None --- None 2 3 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 8. variable pressure. operator skill. PM. humidity. time Winding capacitance. oil quality. IR scrap 9 overheated dielectric. verification procedure. oil quality. corona rework 3 fixtures. Process Engineering Manager 9 operator error. dimension. tooling. damaged. chassis/cover dimension not specified. contamination Impregnation corona rework 5 machine (time. Design Engineering. humidity/temp/time 2 48 Process capability analysis PE/QE Complete 3 3 2 18 2 operator error. DF. electrical test 2 80 Process capability analysis Review operator certification requirements PE/QE/Line Spv Complete 5 2 1 10 3 gas test. cap variation. material type. elongation. corona. water test. fixtures. measure capacitance. material Swaging hi-pot. dimensions New OCC Terminal brazing (cover and cap_) Assembly Current Process Controls RPN Potential Cause(s)/ Mechanism(s) of Failure OCC Potential Effect(s) of Failure Potential Failure Mode(s) SEV Action Results Process Step 8. low temp seal. dimensions. tooling. hi-pot failure. operator Impregnation DF. fixtures. QC dimension 0 0 . Welding line operator. operator Welding leaks. ATP seat test. pressure/load cell. chassis/cover dimension not specified. contamination Curing dimensions. PM. operator skill.FMEA Objective. soft.5 Helium leak test. toolling error 3 visual inspection 2 12 None --- None 2 3 2 12 retest 2 operator error. Impregration line operator. workmanship. fixturing. operator quallification. dimensions. Line Supervisor. incoming and at-station inspection. mat'l requirements 2 162 Process capability analysis Review operator certification requirements Owner Completion Date Actions Taken 2 136 Process capability analysis Review operator certification requirements 6S station review PE/QE/Line Spv IE Complete 8 1 2 16 8 gas test. Process Engineering. material (thickness.5 Helium leak test. swage dimensions Welding leaks. dimension scrap Testing Pads damage to part Testing false failure 10 Helium leak test. bubble test. electrical test DET PE/QE Complete 9 1 2 18 PE/QE/Line Spv PE/QE/Line Spv Complete 9 2 1 18 Complete 9 1.5 315 DOE to optimize parameter settings for robustness 5 180 Review operator certification requirements. Quality Engineering. temp. DF scrap or rework 3 variable compression time. oil quality). PM. scope and goal(s): Review capacitor assy/test process for potential failure modes and control/risk mitigation strategy Process ID Fictional Capacitor Assembly/Test FMEA Type: Process FMEA Number: XXXX1 Prepared By: Anybody FMEA Date: 9/18/2006 Process Lead Process Engineering Manager Revision Date: A Core Team Members: Swage line operator. water test. bubble test. thermal shock 4 can size 9 visual inspection. oil quality). temp. QC dimension New DET 9 time and temperature scrap New RPN scrap low capacitance New SEV leaks. dinemsions. low temp seal. test fixture error 3 software error flag. hi-pot. low capacitance scrap 9 machine (time. feel. curls) 8 FAV.5 1 14 Recommended Action(s) 3. temp. winding machine. corona scrap 8 fixtures. electrical test 2 54 Process capability analysis Review operator certification requirements PE/QE/Line Spv Complete 9 1 2 18 2 51 Process capability analysis Review operator certification requirements PE/QE/Line Spv Complete 3 3 2 18 8 cap measurement. set-up adjustment 2 32 Process capability analysis PE/QE Complete 2 3 2 12 scrap 2 operator error. material type. hi-pot. operator skill.

Process FMEA 350 300 Fictional Capacitor Assembly/Test 250 200 RPN Value 150 100 50 0 Process Step .

Production stopped. Minor disruption to production line. loss of primary function. Could pose major disruption to production line. 100% of product may require repair or may be scrapped. Minor System Degradation Assembly functional. System Failure Item inoperable. but some non-critical function operating at reduced performance. Minor Cosmetic Minor cosmetic non-conformance. Obvious Cosmetic Significant cosmetic non-conformance. or end user. Defect detected by very discriminate observation. but with one or more non-critical functions degraded. No effect. Very Minor None Very minor cosmetic defect. Minor disruption to production line. Product may have to be sorted and a portion (less than 100%) scrapped. Minor disruption to production line. Rework may be required on 100% of product. The product will require sorting and a portion (less that 100%) will require general cosmetic rework. Minor disruption to production line. Major disruption to production line.Product Design Severity Ranking Guidelines Effect Severity of Effect Hazardous . A portion (less than 100%) of the product may have to be scrapped (no sorting). Production stopped. Failure will occur without warning.without warning Failure mode affects safety and may endanger machine. Failure will occur with warning. or end user. A small portion (less than 50%) of the product may require rework. Significant System Degradation Assembly functional. assembly operator. General Severity Ranking Guidelines Effect Severity of Internal/External Effect Liability Failure will affect safety or compliance to law Moderate to major reliability failures End user recalls Premature end-of-life (wear out) Increased early life failures Intermittent functionality Reliability/reputation at risk . assembly operator.with warning Failure mode affects safety and may endanger machine. Moderate System Degradation Assembly functional. Hazardous . system failure. A portion (less than 100%) of the product may require some rework. May lead to degradation over time. but with significant performance degradation.

Customer quality inconveniences Internal yield or special handling required Unnoticed Minor reliability failures Customer line impact / lines down Impacts the yield of customer Wrong package / part / marking Products performing marginally Involved customer's special handling Damaged the customer's equipment Product assembly error Damage to down stream equipment Major yield hit Significant line yield loss Minor yield hit Low line yield loss Special internal handling. effort or annoyance Unnoticed either internally or externally .

nes Ranking 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Ranking 10 9 .

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 .

Failures occur less frequently. Low: Defects related to common variation Very Low: Process is capable and well centered. but not centered. Outlying variation occurs from time to time.000 1 in 3 310. Moderate: Process may generally be capable. Failure occurrence is common.Probability of Failure Extreme: Process is out of control and not capable Uncontrolled: Process is generally not capable. but common and standard variation causes exist and have not been corrected.000 1 in 15 67. Remote: Process is capable. centered. Possible Failure Rates DPMO >=1 in 2 500.000 3 .000 1 in 161 6200 1 in 740 1350 1 in 4250 235 1 in 31.250 32 <=1 in 340.000 1 in 6 158.000 1 in 44 23. and contains excellent design margin.

23 3 >=5.34 9 >=2.34 10 >=2.Sigma Cpk Ranking <2.61 7 >=3.47 8 >=3.50 1 .00 >=0.00 <0.00 >=0.00 >=1.00 >=1.50 >=0.91 5 >=4.50 >=0.33 2 >=6.50 >=1.50 >=1.00 >=0.07 4 >=5.76 6 >=4.

Very Capable Process controls capable of detecting failures. Room for error substantial. Remote Remote likelihood current process controls will detect a failure. Likely Process controls are likely to detect a failure. but leave room for human error. . Highly Capable Process controls are highly capable of detecting failures. Extremely Capable Current process controls will detect the failure nearly without fail. Very Remote Very remote likelihood current process controls will detect a failure. Good SPC program exists with data to back up results. Capable Process controls are capable. SPC program exists with good results or failures are extremely obvious. Poor Likelihood that current process controls will detect a failure is poor. Unable to determine reliability of assembly going to end user. Processes have easy detection capability and good reliability.Detection Criteria: Likelihood that an Existing Defect will be Detected by the Indicated Process Controls Before the Assembly is Delivered to the End User No Capability Detection capability unknown. Low Likelihood Low likelihood current process controls will detect a failure.

Detection Rate (likelihood of finding defect) Ranking <30% 10 >30% 9 >40% 8 >50% 7 >60% 6 >70% 5 >80% 4 >90% 3 >95% 2 >99.5% 1 .

AIAG Compiled Ratings Rating 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Severity of effect Hazardous and without warning Hazardous and with warning Likelihood of Occurrence Very high. occasional failures Low. relatively few failures Remote: failure is unlikely . repeated failures Loss of secondary function Reduced secondary function performance Minor defect noticed by most customers Minor defect noticed by some customers Minor defect noticed by discriminating customers No effect Moderate. failure is almost inevitable Loss of primary function Reduced primary function performance High.

ngs Ability to Detect Cannot detect Very remote chance of detection Remote chance of detection Very low chance of detection Low chance of detection Moderate chance of detection Moderately high chance of detection Almost certain detection .

Potential Team Members 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Process Engineer . Operations .Generally the Team Leader Production Operators Industrial Engineer Design Engineer Quality Engineer Reliability Engineer Tooling Engineer Maintenance Engineer Project Manager Others including Sales. QA/QC.

Step 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .

or are the people doing the work in different ways? Are steps repeated or out of sequence? Are there steps where errors occur frequently? Are there rework loops? Analyze the results and document potential failure modes at each process step . using standard flow chart symbols and connecting the Identify key process characteristics as potential sources of failure Is the process standardized.Process Mapping Overview Description Identify the process to map Ask the people most familiar with the process to help construct the map Agree on the start and end points. defining the scope of the process to be mapped is important. it’s better to start out with less detail. walk the line if necessary Construct the process map either from left to right or from top to bottom. increasing detail only as needed to accomplish your pu Identify the sequence and the steps taken to carry out the process. otherwise the task can becom Agree on the level of detail to use.

Potential Failure Causes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Omitted processing Processing errors Errors setting up work pieces Missing parts Wrong parts Processing wrong work piece Mis-operation Adjustment error Equipment not set up properly Tools and/or fixtures improperly prepared Poor control procedures Improper equipment maintenance Bad recipe Fatigue Lack of Safety Hardware failure Failure to enforce controls Environment Stress connections Poor FMEA(s) .

Potential Process Controls: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Standardized work instructions/procedures Fixtures and jigs Mistake-proofing tooling and/or product design Mechanical interference interfaces Mechanical counters Mechanical sensors Electrical/Electronic sensors Job sheets or Process packages Bar coding with software integration and control Marking Training and related educational safeguards Visual checks Post process inspection/testing Gage studies Statistical Process Control Design of experiments on the process/Robust process design Preventive maintenance Automation & Real Time Control .