PacerX
09-03-2003, 10:09 AM
... will be posted via a link here shortly and forwarded on to Red.
The format will be as follows:
Problem #
Part/System Name
Description of Failure
Potential Effect
Severity
Occurance
Detection
RPN
Recommended Action
Lemme 'splain these Lucy...
Problem #, Part/System Name, Description of Failure - Self explanatory.
Potential Effect - Description of what happens if the failure occurs - closely related to "Severity" below.
Severity - Rated from 1 to 10. 1 = a very minor annoyance, 10 = a Safety CAMPAIGN (which is a nice way of saying that NHTSA has a search warrant and they're at the front door - a safety recall because folks are getting killed... think Explorer tires here... or exploding Pintos... or Honda seatbelt latches failing and people flying through windshields... capiche?).
Occurance - Again rated from 1 to 10. A meausre of how many of the cars displayed a given problem. 1 = VERY RARE, 10 = every one we built.
Detection - Once again, rated 1 to 10. 1 means that it's very easy to catch in design or manufacturing, 10 means you have no way of knowing it is going to happen and can't contain it. Most of the stuff we have is going to have a fairly low detection number - except for something like piston slap, which occurs a few thousand miles AFTER the car is sold.
RPN - Severity*Occurance*Detection. This helps prioritize. A 1 means you probably don't have to worry about it, a 1000 means cars are spontaneously exploding in the parking lot right in front of your eyes and the flying parts are killing little old ladies and children right and left.
Recommended Action - That's why I made all of you contribute a solution. Anybody can be critical. It takes some thought to solve a perceived problem.
Yes, this looks stunningly similar to a DFMEA (Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) - because that's really what it is.
There's probably some form out there that covers a Thing Gone Right/Things Gone Wrong listing, but a DFMEA can do the same thing and isn't quite so "hindsight" oriented - doing this now saves a step and stops a quality engineer from parading around YET ANOTHER layer of paperwork (which is a good thing...). The idea is still to drive these ideas UPFRONT into the heads of the marketing and engineering people who are now planning out a Camaro for us - and this saves the step of having the product engineer having to interpret YET ANOTHER form.
Upfront like this I personally consider EVERY failure a design failure. Later on, when manufacturing starts screwing things up we can call some things PROCESS failures. But right now, they're DESIGN failures because we could most likely DESIGN our way out of them.
BTW - Quality Engineers didn't invent this form. Product engineers did. How can you tell? This one and the DVP&R (Design Verification Plan and Report) are actually useful.
The format will be as follows:
Problem #
Part/System Name
Description of Failure
Potential Effect
Severity
Occurance
Detection
RPN
Recommended Action
Lemme 'splain these Lucy...
Problem #, Part/System Name, Description of Failure - Self explanatory.
Potential Effect - Description of what happens if the failure occurs - closely related to "Severity" below.
Severity - Rated from 1 to 10. 1 = a very minor annoyance, 10 = a Safety CAMPAIGN (which is a nice way of saying that NHTSA has a search warrant and they're at the front door - a safety recall because folks are getting killed... think Explorer tires here... or exploding Pintos... or Honda seatbelt latches failing and people flying through windshields... capiche?).
Occurance - Again rated from 1 to 10. A meausre of how many of the cars displayed a given problem. 1 = VERY RARE, 10 = every one we built.
Detection - Once again, rated 1 to 10. 1 means that it's very easy to catch in design or manufacturing, 10 means you have no way of knowing it is going to happen and can't contain it. Most of the stuff we have is going to have a fairly low detection number - except for something like piston slap, which occurs a few thousand miles AFTER the car is sold.
RPN - Severity*Occurance*Detection. This helps prioritize. A 1 means you probably don't have to worry about it, a 1000 means cars are spontaneously exploding in the parking lot right in front of your eyes and the flying parts are killing little old ladies and children right and left.
Recommended Action - That's why I made all of you contribute a solution. Anybody can be critical. It takes some thought to solve a perceived problem.
Yes, this looks stunningly similar to a DFMEA (Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) - because that's really what it is.
There's probably some form out there that covers a Thing Gone Right/Things Gone Wrong listing, but a DFMEA can do the same thing and isn't quite so "hindsight" oriented - doing this now saves a step and stops a quality engineer from parading around YET ANOTHER layer of paperwork (which is a good thing...). The idea is still to drive these ideas UPFRONT into the heads of the marketing and engineering people who are now planning out a Camaro for us - and this saves the step of having the product engineer having to interpret YET ANOTHER form.
Upfront like this I personally consider EVERY failure a design failure. Later on, when manufacturing starts screwing things up we can call some things PROCESS failures. But right now, they're DESIGN failures because we could most likely DESIGN our way out of them.
BTW - Quality Engineers didn't invent this form. Product engineers did. How can you tell? This one and the DVP&R (Design Verification Plan and Report) are actually useful.