You are on page 1of 25

Introduction

Welcome to the FMEA Worksheet
This spreadsheet can be used to
1. Identify potential failure modes and their impact on product reliability.
2. Rank the potential defects to establish priority - The highest RPN value items deserve the most attention.
3. Capture owners, action plans, and status on high RPN items.
Note, FMEA's are living documents and this may be updated periodically.

Organization of Spreadsheet:
Descriptions - explains the spreadsheet cells
FMEA - the actual sheet used to enter data
Severity/Likelihood/Detectability - guidelines for the 1-10 rankins in these categories
Example - a partial example of an FMEA document

Sheet Protection:
Some sheets are protected. There is no password. 31-Jul-98

Introduction

most attention.

then. Burst. production 8/1/96 Coolant fill. validation 1 64 Test included in J. rate the Severity of each RPN 0 = Sev X Occ X Det 0 failure (10= most severe). 0 0 0 0 Likelihood . Severity. 0 0 0 0 Risk Priority Number . Eglin Hose connection. System Potential FMEA Number Subsystem Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Prepared By Component (Design FMEA) FMEA Date Design Lead Key Date Revision Date Core Team Page of Action Results Potential P New RPN New Occ New Sev New Det S D R Responsibility & Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) Cause(s)/ r Current Design Recommended Item / Function e e P Target Completion Actions Taken Mode(s) of Failure Mechanism(s) of o Controls Action(s) v t N Date Failure b 0 0 Coolant Crack/break. 0 0 Write down each failure mode 0 Response Plans and Tracking 0 and potential consequence(s) 0 0 of that failure. Likelihood sheet.Write down the Detectability -0Examine the current 0 potential cause(s). See Severity sheet. 0 0 0 0 Page 3 .On a scale of 1. Leak 8 Over pressure 8 Burst. rate the the Detectability of each failure 0 0 Likelihood of each failure (10 = least detectable). M Poor hose rete validation testing. Side wall pressure cycle. Bad seal. Aguire 0 containment. flex. See Detectability sheet.The combined weighting of Severity . 10. on 0 a scale of 1-10. Descriptions Description of FMEA Worksheet Protection:The spreadsheets are not protected or locked. and on a design. See 0 0 (10= most likely). rate 0 scale of 1-10. and Detectability. Likelihood.P. prototype and 11/1/95 E.

Descriptions Page 4 .

System Potential FMEA Number Subsystem Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Prepared By Component (Design FMEA) FMEA Date Design Lead Key Date Revision Date Core Team Page of Action Results P New RPN New Occ New Sev New Det S Potential Cause(s)/ D R Responsibility & Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) r Current Design Recommended Item / Function e Mechanism(s) of e P Target Completion Actions Taken Mode(s) of Failure o Controls Action(s) v Failure t N Date b 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 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 0 0 0 0 Page 5 .

Severity Effect SEVERITY of Effect Ranking Hazardous without Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode 10 warning affects safe system operation without warning Hazardous with Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode 9 warning affects safe system operation with warning Very High System inoperable with destructive failure without 8 compromising safety High System inoperable with equipment damage 7 Moderate System inoperable with minor damage 6 Low System inoperable without damage 5 Very Low System operable with significant degradation of performance 4 Minor System operable with some degradation of performance 3 Very Minor System operable with minimal interference 2 None No effect 1 Page 6 .

Severity Page 7 .

Severity Page 8 .

Severity Page 9 .

Severity Page 10 .

Severity Page 11 .

33 3 1 in 150.50 2 Remote: Failure is unlikely ≤ 2 in 10.000 ≥ 1.00 5 1 in 2.00.51 8 1 in 20 ≥ 0.000 ≥ 1. Probability PROBABILITY of Failure Failure Prob CpK Ranking Very High: Failure is almost inevitable >1 in 2 < 0.67 7 Moderate: Occasional failures 1 in 80 ≥ 0.000 ≥ 1.83 6 1 in 400 ≥ 1.000 ≥ 1.33 10 1 in 3 ≥ 0.67 1 Page 12 .33 9 High: Repeated failures 1 in 8 ≥ 0.17 4 Low: Relatively few failures 1 in 15.

Probability Page 13 .

Probability Page 14 .

Probability Page 15 .

Probability Page 16 .

Probability Page 17 .

Detectability Detection Likelihood of DETECTION by Design Control Ranking Absolute Design control cannot detect potential cause/mechanism and 10 Uncertainty subsequent failure mode Very Remote Very remote chance the design control will detect potential 9 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Remote Remote chance the design control will detect potential 8 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Very Low Very low chance the design control will detect potential 7 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Low Low chance the design control will detect potential 6 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Moderate Moderate chance the design control will detect potential 5 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Moderately High Moderately High chance the design control will detect 4 potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode High High chance the design control will detect potential 3 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Very High Very high chance the design control will detect potential 2 cause/mechanism and subsequent failure mode Almost Certain Design control will detect potential cause/mechanism and 1 subsequent failure mode Page 18 .

Detectability Page 19 .

Detectability Page 20 .

Detectability Page 21 .

Detectability Page 22 .

Detectability Page 23 .

Detectability Page 24 .

Detectability Page 25 .