Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
    • Reliability Engineering Management DRAFT
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Carl Carlson Leave a Comment

Understanding FMEA Recommended Actions – Part 2

Understanding FMEA Recommended Actions – Part 2

Problems and Solutions

Consider the recommended action “Review results of XYZ test to confirm requirements are  achieved.” Is this a good FMEA recommended action to address a high-risk issue? Is it sufficient? Challenge your FMEA knowledge by solving this problem and other problems presented in this article.

If you haven’t yet read “Understanding FMEA Recommended Actions – Part 1“, this would be a good time, as it presents fundamental information about design and process recommended actions in an FMEA.

Beginner’s Problem

Which of the following are characteristics of well-written FMEA recommended actions? (Select all that apply)

  1. The name of the person on the FMEA team who recommended the action.
  2. The name of the person who is responsible for execution of the recommended action.
  3. A brief description (no longer than three or four words in length) of what action is to be done.
  4. The date the recommended action was first established.
  5. The date the recommended action needs to be completed.

Beginner’s Solution

Which of the following are characteristics of well-written FMEA recommended actions? (Select all that apply)

  1. The name of the person on the FMEA team who recommended the action. (False. This information is not needed, as the FMEA recommended actions are team approved.)
  2. The name of the person who is responsible for execution of the recommended action. (True)
  3. A brief description (no longer than three or four words in length) of what action is to be done. (False. FMEA recommended actions should be described in sufficient detail to be fully understood even by someone who is not part of the FMEA team.)
  4. The date the recommended action was first established. ((False. This information is not needed. The important date is when the action needs to be completed.)
  5. The date the recommended action needs to be completed. (True)

Intermediate Problem

An FMEA team is considering how to address a high severity and high occurrence issue. Some of the team members want to reduce the severity risk with action strategies such as fail-safe and early warning. Other team members want to significantly reduce the occurrence risk using a robust design strategy. What is the best approach for this team?

Intermediate Solution

It is always a good idea to reduce risk due to high severity, if possible. In addition, risk due to high occurrence should be addressed. The best approach is both of these strategies.

Advanced Problem

Click on the link to view a one-line excerpt from a power steering pump FMEA.

Consider the recommended action “Review results of function test to confirm successful pressure and flow rates achieved.” Is this a good action to address the risk? Is it sufficient? What comments or critiques do you have?

Advanced Solution

The action “Review results of function test to confirm successful pressure and flow rates achieved” is inadequate to address the risk identified in this excerpt for three reasons. First, it is late in the product development process. FMEAs should be completed during the window of opportunity to best impact the design before design freeze date. Second, there is no action to improve the design. The FMEA team identified the cause as “Pressure relief incorrectly identified on the drawing”, with severity 8 and RPN 280. This is relatively high risk and action should have been recommended to specify pressure relief correctly. Third, for high-risk issues there usually needs to be more than one action recommended. In this case, there could be an action to address the incorrect specification, and another action to improve the ability of the bench rig test to detect this problem.

Next Article

A reader is having difficulty seeing the difference between a detection control and a recommended action, and sees them as interchangeable. This has repercussions for the linkage between the Design FMEA and Design Verification Plan, and is the subject of the next FMEA Q and A article.

Filed Under: Articles, Inside FMEA, on Tools & Techniques

« Life Cycle Costs
Recall of the 1993 Toyota Camry »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Articles by Carl Carlson
in the Inside FMEA series

Information about FMEA Icon

Inside FMEA can be visually represented by a large tree, with roots, a solid trunk, branches, and leaves.

– The roots of the tree represent the philosophy and guiding principles for effective FMEAs.
– The solid trunk of the tree represents the fundamentals for all FMEAs.
– The branches represent the various FMEA applications.
– The leaves represent the valuable outcomes of FMEAs.
– This is intended to convey that each of the various FMEA applications have the same fundamentals and philosophical roots.

 

For example, the roots of the tree can represent following philosophy and guiding principles for effective FMEAs, such as:

1. Correct procedure         2. Lessons learned
3. Trained team                 4. Focus on prevention
5. Integrated with DFR    6. Skilled facilitation
7. Management support

The tree trunk represents the fundamentals of FMEA. All types of FMEA share common fundamentals, and these are essential to successful FMEA applications.

The tree branches can include the different types of FMEAs, including:

1. System FMEA         2. Design FMEA
3. Process FMEA        4. DRBFM
5. Hazard Analysis     6. RCM or Maintenance FMEA
7. Software FMEA      8. Other types of FMEA

The leaves of the tree branches represent individual FMEA projects, with a wide variety of FMEA scopes and results.

Join Accendo

Receive information and updates about articles and many other resources offered by Accendo Reliability by becoming a member.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Join Today

Recent Posts

  • How Reliability Engineers Can Improve Their Communication in Information Sessions
  • FMEA Detection Risk: Insights and Advices
  • How to Structure Your ERM System
  • Rate of Occurrence of Failure
  • What is Six Sigma and How is it Used in Quality Engineering?

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.