Xfmea Report Sample - Process FMEA: in Addition To This Summary, This Report Includes The Following Forms

REPORT SUMMARY Date: 9/1/2015
Page 1 of 8
In addition to this summary, this report includes the following forms:

Rating Criteria and Classifications
AIAG Form A
Causes
Actions
Controls
Xfmea Report Sample – Process FMEA

This report was generated with ReliaSoft’s Xfmea software in Microsoft Word. Similar reports can also
be generated in Microsoft Excel. You can easily replace the Xfmea logo graphic with your own company
logo. Within Word and Excel, reports can be edited/annotated, if necessary, and generated in PDF
and/or HTML format for easy distribution.
This report includes:
• A summary of the rating criteria (Severity Scale, Occurrence Scale, Detection Scale) and classifications
that were used in the analysis.
• The Process FMEA (PFMEA) spreadsheet report in the AIAG Form A reporting format.
• A summary list of the potential causes of failure that were identified through the analysis, ranked by
Initial Occurrence rating.
• A summary list of the recommended actions identified during the analysis.
• A summary list of the current controls identified during the analysis.
The report is based on the sample analysis provided in the AIAG FMEA-3 guidelines, on page 36.
Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 9/1/2015 Creator Reliability Engineer Generated by ReliaSoft's Xfmea Software http://www.ReliaSoft.com
RATING CRITERIA AND CLASSIFICATIONS Date: 9/1/2015
Page 2 of 8
Severity Rating Scale Occurrence Rating Scale

# Description Criteria 1 Criteria 2 # Description Criteria Criteria 2
Failure is eliminated through
1 No effect No discernible effect. No discernible effect. 1 Very Low
preventative control.
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle
operable, item does not conform and Slight inconvenience to process, <=0.001 per thousand items/vehicles,
2 Annoyance 2 Low
noticed by discriminating customers operation or operator. 1 in 1,000,000
(<25%).
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle A portion of the production run may

0.01 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in
3 Annoyance operable, item does not conform and have to be reworked in-station before it 3 Low
100,000
noticed by many customers (50%). is processed.
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle 100% of the production run may have
0.1 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in
4 Annoyance operable, item does not conform and to be reworked in-station before it is 4 Moderate
10,000
noticed by most customers (>75%). processed.
Degradation of secondary function

A portion of the production run may
Degradation of Secondary (vehicle operable, but 0.5 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in
5 have to be reworked off line and 5 Moderate
Function comfort/convenience functions at 2,000
accepted.
reduced level of performance).
Loss of secondary function (vehicle
100% of production run may have to 2 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in
6 Loss of Secondary Function operable, but comfort/convenience 6 Moderate
be reworked off line and accepted. 500
functions inoperable).
A portion of the production run may

Degradation of primary function
have to be scrapped. Deviation from 10 per thousand items/vehicles. 1 in
7 Degradation of Primary Function (vehicle operable, but at reduced level 7 High
primary process including decreased 100
of performance).
line speed or added manpower.
Loss of primary function (vehicle 100% of the production run may have
8 Loss of Primary Function inoperable, does not affect safe vehicle to be scrapped. Line shutdown or stop 8 High 20 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in 50
operation). ship.
Potential failure mode affects safe
Failure to Meet Safety and/or vehicle operation and/or involves May endanger operator (machine or
9 9 High 50 per thousand items/vehicles, 1 in 20
Regulatory noncompliance with government assembly) with warning.
regulation with warning.
Potential failure mode affects safe
Failure to Meet Safety and/or vehicle operation and/or involves May endanger operator (machine or => 100 per thousand items/vehicles,
10 10 Very High
Regulatory noncompliance with government assembly) without warning. => 1 in 10
regulation without warning.
Detection Rating Scale Classification Options
# Description Criteria 1 Criteria 2 Abbreviation Description
Error (Cause) prevention as a result of

fixture design, machine design or part
Detection not applicable; error
1 Almost Certain design. Discrepant parts cannot be C Critical
prevention.
made because item has been error-
proofed by process/product design.
Error (Cause) detection in-station by

automated controls that will detect Error detection and/or problem
2 Very High KI Key Intermediate
error and prevent discrepant part from prevention.
being made.

RATING CRITERIA AND CLASSIFICATIONS Date: 9/1/2015
Page 3 of 8
Failure Mode detection in-station by

automated controls that will detect
3 High discrepant part and automatically lock Problem detection at source. KLd Key Leading
part in station to prevent further
processing.
Failure Mode detection post-processing

by automated controls that will detect
4 Moderately High Problem detection post processing. KLg Key Lagging
discrepant part and lock part to prevent
further processing.
Failure Mode or Error (Cause) detection

in-station by operator through use of
variable gauging or by automated
5 Moderate controls in-station that will detect Problem detection at source. S Significant
discrepant part and notify operator.
Gauging performed on setup and first-
piece check (setup-causes only).

by operator through use of variable
gauging or in-station by operator
6 Low Problem detection post processing.
through use of attribute gauging
(go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker
wrench, etc.).
Failure Mode detection in-station by

operator through visual/tactile/audible
7 Very Low means or post-processing through use Problem detection at source.
of attribute gauging (go/no-go, manual
torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).

8 Remote by operator through Problem detection post processing.
visual/tactile/audible means.
Failure Mode and/or Error (Cause) is
9 Very Remote not easily detected (e.g., random Not likely to detect at any stage.
audits).
No current process control; Cannot
10 Almost Impossible No detection opportunity.
detect or is not analyzed.

POTENTIAL
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS FMEA Number 1450
FMEA Type Component Front Door L.H. Page 4 of 8
Item 1.1.1 - Front Door L.H. Process Responsibility Body Engineering Prepared By J. Ford - X6521 - Assy Ops
Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s) 201X/Lion 4dr/Wagon Key Date 7/22/2015 FMEA Date (Orig.) 7/1/2015 (Rev) 7/15/2015
Core Team A. Tate - Body Engrg, J. Smith - OC, R. James - Production, J. Jones - Maintenance
Action Results
Classification
Name / Function
Potential Potential Current Process Current Process Responsibility &
Potential Failure Recommended
RPNi
OCCi
DETi
SEVi
Effect(s) of Cause(s) of Controls Controls Planned Actions Taken &
RPNr
OCCr
DETr
Mode Action(s)
SEVr
Failure Failure (Prevention) (Detection) Completion Date Actual Completion
Requirements Date
Front Door L.H.

Op. 70 Manual Insufficient wax Allows integrity 7 Manually inserted 8 Visual check each 5 280 Add positive depth Mfg. Engrg Stop added, sprayer 7 2 5 70
application of wax coverage over breach of inner spray head not hour - 1/shift for stop to sprayer. - 7/8/2015 checked on line.
inside door/ cover specified surface door panel. inserted far enough film thickness - 7/8/2015
inner door, lower Corroded interior (depth meter) and
surfaces with wax lower door panels. coverage.
to specification Deteriorated life of
Automate spraying. Mfg. Engrg Rejected due to
thickness. door leading to:
- 7/10/2015 complexity of
- Unsatisfactory
different doors on
appearance due to
same line.
rust through paint
- 7/10/2015
over time
- Impaired function Spray head 5 Test spray pattern Visual check each 5 175 Use Design of Mfg. Engrg - Temp and press 1 5 35
of interior door clogged- Viscosity at start-up and hour - 1/shift for Experiments (DOE) 7/13/2015 limits were
hardware too high- after idle periods, film thickness on viscosity vs. determined and limit
Temperature too and preventive (depth meter) and temperature vs. controls have been
low- Pressure too maintenance coverage. pressure. installed - control
low. program to clean charts show process
heads. is in control Cpk =
1.85. - 7/13/2015
Spray head 2 Preventive Visual check each 5 70 2 5 70

deformed due to maintenance hour - 1/shift for
impact program to film thickness
maintain heads. (depth meter) and
coverage.
Spray time 8 Operator 7 392 Install spray timer. Maintenance Automatic spray 1 7 49
insufficient instructions and lot - 7/14/2015 timer installed -
sampling (10 operator starts
doors/shift) to spray, timer controls
check for coverage shut-off - control
of critical areas. charts show process
is in control Cpk =
2.05.
- 7/14/2015

CAUSES Date: 9/1/2015
Page 5 of 8
Potential Cause(s) of % Reduction in Cause Last Updated Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) of
Cause ID Cause # Classification OCCi OCCr DETi DETr RPNi RPNr Last Updated Name Function
Failure RPN By Mode Failure
1 1.1.1.1 Manually inserted spray 8 2 5 5 280 70 75 Reliability 9/1/2015 12:54 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach of
head not inserted far Engineer PM Door Manual coverage over inner door panel.
enough L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower
of wax door panels.
inside door/ Deteriorated life of door
cover inner leading to:
door, lower - Unsatisfactory appearance
surfaces due to rust through paint
with wax to over time
specification - Impaired function of
thickness. interior door hardware
2 1.1.1.2 Spray head clogged 5 1 5 5 175 35 80 Reliability 9/1/2015 12:54 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach of
- Viscosity too high Engineer PM Door Manual coverage over inner door panel.
- Temperature too low L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower
- Pressure too low. of wax door panels.
3 1.1.1.3 Spray head deformed due 2 2 5 5 70 70 0 Reliability 9/1/2015 12:55 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach of
to impact Engineer PM Door Manual coverage over inner door panel.
L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower
of wax door panels.
4 1.1.1.4 Spray time insufficient 8 1 7 7 392 49 87.5 Reliability 9/1/2015 12:55 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach of
Engineer PM Door Manual coverage over inner door panel.
L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower
of wax door panels.

ACTIONS Date: 9/1/2015
Page 6 of 8
Action Action Recommended Planned Actual Actions Last Last Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) of Potential Cause(s) of
Responsibility Name Function RPNi RPNr
ID # Action(s) Completion Date Completion Date Taken Updated By Updated Mode Failure Failure
1 1.1.1.1.1 Add positive depth Mfg. Engrg 7/8/2015 7/8/2015 Stop added, Reliability 9/1/2015 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach Manually inserted spray 280 70
stop to sprayer. sprayer Engineer 12:45 PM Door Manual coverage over of inner door panel. head not inserted far
checked on L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower enough
line. of wax door panels.
door, lower - Unsatisfactory
surfaces appearance due to rust
with wax to through paint over time
2 1.1.1.1.2 Automate spraying. Mfg. Engrg 7/10/2015 7/10/2015 Rejected Reliability 9/1/2015 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach Manually inserted spray 280 70
due to Engineer 12:46 PM Door Manual coverage over of inner door panel. head not inserted far
complexity L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower enough
of different of wax door panels.
doors on inside door/ Deteriorated life of door
same line. cover inner leading to:
door, lower - Unsatisfactory
surfaces appearance due to rust
with wax to through paint over time
3 1.1.1.2.1 Use Design of Mfg. Engrg 7/13/2015 7/13/2015 Temp and Reliability 9/1/2015 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach Spray head clogged 175 35
Experiments (DOE) press limits Engineer 12:47 PM Door Manual coverage over of inner door panel. - Viscosity too high
on viscosity vs. were L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower - Temperature too low
temperature vs. determined of wax door panels. - Pressure too low.
pressure. and limit inside door/ Deteriorated life of door
controls cover inner leading to:
have been door, lower - Unsatisfactory
installed - surfaces appearance due to rust
control with wax to through paint over time
charts show specification - Impaired function of
process is in thickness. interior door hardware
control Cpk
= 1.85.
4 1.1.1.4.1 Install spray timer. Maintenance 7/14/2015 7/14/2015 Automatic Reliability 9/1/2015 Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax Allows integrity breach Spray time insufficient 392 49
spray timer Engineer 12:47 PM Door Manual coverage over of inner door panel.
installed - L.H. application specified surface Corroded interior lower
operator of wax door panels.
starts spray, inside door/ Deteriorated life of door
timer cover inner leading to:
controls door, lower - Unsatisfactory
shut-off - surfaces appearance due to rust
control with wax to through paint over time
charts show specification - Impaired function of
process is in thickness. interior door hardware
control Cpk
= 2.05.

CONTROLS Date: 9/1/2015
Page 7 of 8
Potential Cause(s) of
Control ID Control # Current Process Controls Control Type Last Updated By Last Updated Name Function Potential Failure Mode Potential Effect(s) of Failure RPNi RPNr
Failure
1 1.1.1.1.1 Visual check each hour - Detection Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Manually inserted spray head 280 70
1/shift for film thickness Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel. not inserted far enough
(depth meter) and application Corroded interior lower door
coverage. of wax panels.
inside door/ Deteriorated life of door leading
cover inner to:
surfaces due to rust through paint over
with wax to time
specification - Impaired function of interior
thickness. door hardware
2 1.1.1.2.1 Test spray pattern at start- Prevention Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Spray head clogged 175 35
up and after idle periods, Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel. - Viscosity too high
and preventive maintenance application Corroded interior lower door - Temperature too low
program to clean heads. of wax panels. - Pressure too low.
cover inner to:
with wax to time
1 1.1.1.2.2 Visual check each hour - Detection Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Spray head clogged 175 35
1/shift for film thickness Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel. - Viscosity too high
(depth meter) and application Corroded interior lower door - Temperature too low
coverage. of wax panels. - Pressure too low.
cover inner to:
with wax to time
3 1.1.1.3.1 Preventive maintenance Prevention Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Spray head deformed due to 70 70
program to maintain heads. Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel. impact
application Corroded interior lower door
of wax panels.
cover inner to:
with wax to time

CONTROLS Date: 9/1/2015
Page 8 of 8
1 1.1.1.3.2 Visual check each hour - Detection Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Spray head deformed due to 70 70
1/shift for film thickness Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel. impact
(depth meter) and application Corroded interior lower door
coverage. of wax panels.
cover inner to:
with wax to time
4 1.1.1.4.1 Operator instructions and lot Detection Reliability Engineer 9/1/2015 12:48 PM Front Op. 70 Insufficient wax coverage Allows integrity breach of inner Spray time insufficient 392 49
sampling (10 doors/shift) to Door L.H. Manual over specified surface door panel.
check for coverage of critical application Corroded interior lower door
areas. of wax panels.
cover inner to:
with wax to time


Xfmea Report Sample - Process FMEA: in Addition To This Summary, This Report Includes The Following Forms

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Xfmea Report Sample - Process FMEA: in Addition To This Summary, This Report Includes The Following Forms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT SUMMARY Date: 9/1/2015

In addition to this summary, this report includes the following forms:

Xfmea Report Sample – Process FMEA

This report includes:

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Severity Rating Scale Occurrence Rating Scale

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle A portion of the production run may

Degradation of secondary function

A portion of the production run may

Error (Cause) prevention as a result of

Error (Cause) detection in-station by

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Failure Mode detection in-station by

Failure Mode detection post-processing

Failure Mode or Error (Cause) detection

Failure Mode detection post-processing

Failure Mode detection in-station by

Failure Mode detection post-processing

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Front Door L.H.

Spray head 2 Preventive Visual check each 5 70 2 5 70

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

You might also like