Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site
With the Inside FMEA series of articles, my intention is to bring to life the subject of FMEA, and provide value to readers from all levels of experience.
Whether you are new to FMEA, or an FMEA expert, it is my sincere desire that each and every person who reads Inside FMEA articles will discover new insights about FMEA, and experience improved success in FMEA applications.
The first article, called “Welcome to Inside FMEA”, will introduce the series, and provide a glimpse of what is to come.
Readers are encouraged to contact me with any questions about FMEA, or feedback on Inside FMEA articles. Questions, feedback, and ideas for future articles can be sent to carl.carlson@effectivefmeas.com. I will personally respond to all questions and feedback.
I’m excited to bring this new series to Accendo, and hope you enjoy reading the articles, as much as I enjoy writing them. As I say to readers of my book, "best wishes for effective FMEAs."
Carl S. Carlson
[Last month I mentioned that the next article would be on the subject of the application of models in the FMEA process. I am postponing that important topic, in order to do more research. Stay tuned . . .]
This month, I want to discuss one of the most common problems that FMEA teams face: getting confused about the difference between failure modes, effects and causes.
“Things are not always as they seem; the first appearance deceives many.” Phaedrus
What is the difference between FMEA and FMECA? Are they the same or different? The answer may surprise you. Let’s explore this topic.
Some defense-related applications require a special type of criticality analysis, called Quantitative Criticality Analysis to supplement FMEA applications. This is the “C” in what is called FMECA: Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis. I’ll shorten Criticality Analysis to CA in this article.
What is Quantitative CA? When and why it is used? Can Quantitative Criticality Analysis be used in commercial applications?
Did you know that early FMEA standards did not include recommendations to reduce risk? They limited the analysis to the technical risk, without making specific recommendations. The first time I am aware of that an FMEA standard added a column called “Recommended Actions” was in 1993. Thankfully, it is common practice today to include Recommended Actions in FMEAs.
But what makes for excellent Recommended Actions and what is their role in an FMEA? We’ll begin with the fundamentals.
Every FMEA team needs to prioritize risk as part of the procedure. Why? Because companies or organizations have limited resources that must be focused on highest risk. The question becomes, by what method should we prioritize the risk identified in an FMEA?
One of the more challenging aspects of FMEA is the subject of Occurrence. Part of every FMEA standard or procedure is the assessment of Occurrence based on an agreed-upon scale. Here are some pointers for when and how to use occurrence in an FMEA.
We’ll start with a definition. The Oxford English dictionary defines “occurrence” as “the fact or frequency of something happening.”
I am often asked about the application of detection in FMEAs. When and how to assess for the risk of detection can be confusing. Here are some pointers for when and how to use detection in an FMEA.
As we celebrate the new year, I am republishing an article I wrote last year, titled “The Future of Reliability Engineering,” as part of the Inside FMEA series. This article applies equally well to FMEA, as you will see.
Sometime in 2023, I will write an article titled “The Future of FMEA.” But, first, I want to hear from readers. Please write me with your ideas on what should be included in the future of FMEA. You can reach me at Carl.Carlson@EffectiveFMEAs.com
Wishing everyone on Accendo Reliability a happy and healthy new year, and best wishes for high reliability and effective FMEAs!
“Destiny is no matter of chance. It is a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved.” – William Jennings Bryan
I am often asked for my opinion about the FMEA Handbook that was jointly published by AIAG and VDA in 2019. Here is a summary of my candid views on this handbook, excerpted from a presentation I gave at the 2019 Guangbin Yang Reliability Symposium.
Leading is about learning to be a facilitator – Ashif Shaikh
Ask yourself, when teams work very well together, what are the positive characteristics of the team leader? When teams are dysfunctional, and have poor outcomes, what skills of the leader need to be improved?
Giving proper feedback is a great way to help a colleague improve FMEA facilitation skills. Carefully listening to feedback from a colleague is an important way to improve one’s own FMEA facilitation skills. Both are aided by understanding and using facilitation quality objectives. [Read more…]
“A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.”
Martin Luther King
One of the challenges for any team leader is bringing the team together and agreeing on decisions and actions going forward.
Consensus building is the best practice for all of the FMEA team decisions. This means the FMEA team takes the time to understand all sides of an issue and finds a solution or determines a course of action that is supported by all team members. Facilitating is a consensual activity.
“Once you make a decision, the universe conspires to make it happen.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
There are times when an FMEA facilitator has difficulty arriving at consensus with the FMEA team. This sometimes happens when there are two or more competing ideas or solutions and members of the team feel strongly about their personal idea or solution. One tool that can be used to solve this problem is called Pugh Analysis, a type of decision matrix.
Mediocrity can talk, but it is for genius to observe. – Benjamin Disraeli
The Inside FMEA series has completed the primary facilitation skills. The next few articles will cover special facilitation topics.
This article talks about the pros and cons of using a “scribe” to help with facilitation. [Read more…]
“Most of us spend too much time on what is urgent, and not enough time on what is important.” – Steven Covey
FMEAs take time and cost money. If time is wasted, FMEAs will be unsupported and ineffective.
In this article, I’ll lay out some tips to keep FMEA in-meeting time as short as possible, without reducing the quality of results. Many of these tips are based on lessons learned from doing FMEAs the wrong way. This is not a complete list. I’m sure you have other lessons learned to save time, and would love to hear from you.
“Interdependent people combine their own efforts with the efforts of others to achieve their greatest success.” Stephen Covey
If you’ve been reading the FMEA facilitation series, by now you understand the primary facilitation skills. Studying and applying these skills will help you achieve excellent results in FMEA applications. [Read more…]
