Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 246 views

    FMEA Ranking Table

    Uploaded by

    Shyam Kushana
    The document contains tables for ranking the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes in a product. The severity table ranks effects from 1 to 10 based on their impact, such as safety issues receiving a 10 and minor disruptions a 2. The occurrence table ranks likelihood of a failure mode from 1 to 10, with very high likelihood over 100 per thousand receiving a 10. The detection table ranks opportunities for detecting a failure mode from 1 to 10, with no detection opportunity being a 10 and error prevention through design being a 1.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    FMEA Ranking Table

    Uploaded by

    Shyam Kushana
    246 views4 pages
    The document contains tables for ranking the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes in a product. The severity table ranks effects from 1 to 10 based on their impact, such as safety issues receiving a 10 and minor disruptions a 2. The occurrence table ranks likelihood of a failure mode from 1 to 10, with very high likelihood over 100 per thousand receiving a 10. The detection table ranks opportunities for detecting a failure mode from 1 to 10, with no detection opportunity being a 10 and error prevention through design being a 1.

    Original Title

    FMEA+Ranking+Table

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document contains tables for ranking the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes in a product. The severity table ranks effects from 1 to 10 based on their impact, such as safety issues receiving a 10 and minor disruptions a 2. The occurrence table ranks likelihood of a failure mode from 1 to 10, with very high likelihood over 100 per thousand receiving a 10. The detection table ranks opportunities for detecting a failure mode from 1 to 10, with no detection opportunity being a 10 and error prevention through design being a 1.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
    246 views4 pages

    FMEA Ranking Table

    Uploaded by

    Shyam Kushana
    The document contains tables for ranking the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes in a product. The severity table ranks effects from 1 to 10 based on their impact, such as safety issues receiving a 10 and minor disruptions a 2. The occurrence table ranks likelihood of a failure mode from 1 to 10, with very high likelihood over 100 per thousand receiving a 10. The detection table ranks opportunities for detecting a failure mode from 1 to 10, with no detection opportunity being a 10 and error prevention through design being a 1.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as XLSX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    Table for Severity Ranking

    Effect Criterria : Severity of Effect on Product (Customer Effect ) Rank Effect

    Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves


    10
    noncompliance with government regulation without warning. Failure to meet
    Failure to meet safety
    safety and/or
    and/or Regulatory
    Regulatory
    Requirements
    Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involvs Requirements
    9
    noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

    Loss of primary function(vehicle inoperable does not affect safe


    8 Major Disruption
    vehicle operation)
    Loss or Degradation of
    Primary Function. Degradation of primary function(vehicle operable but at reduced Significant
    7
    level of performance). Disruption.

    Loss of secondary function(vehicle operable,but comfort/convenience


    6
    functions inoperable.)
    Loss or Degradation of Moderate
    Secondary Function. Degradation of secondary function(vehicle operable,but Disruption
    5
    comfort/convenience functions at reduced level of performance)

    Appearance or Audible Noise,vehicle operable,item does not confirm


    4
    and noticed by most customers(> 75%).
    Moderate
    Disruption
    Annoyance Appearance or Audible Noise,vehicle operable,item does not confirm
    3
    and noticed by many customers(50%).

    Appearance or Audible Noise,vehicle operable,item does not confirm


    2 Minor Disruption
    and noticed by discriminating customers (< 25%).
    No effect No discernible effect 1 No effect
    Table for Occurrence Ranking

    Likelihood Criterria : Severity of Effect on Product ( Customer Effect ) Rank

    ≥ 100 per thousand


    Very High 10
    ≥ 1 in 10
    50 per thousand
    9
    1 in 20
    20 per thousand
    High 8
    1 in 50
    10 per thousand
    7
    1 in 100
    2 per thousand
    6
    1 in 500
    0.5 per thousand
    Moderate 5
    1 in 2,000
    0.1 in thousand
    4
    1 in 10,000
    0.01 per thousand
    3
    Low
    1 in 1,00,000
    ≤ 0.001 per thousand
    2
    1 in 1,000,000
    Very Low 1
    Failure is eliminated through preventive control.
    Table for Detection Ranking

    Opportunity for Criterria : Severity of Effect on Product ( Customer Effect ) Rank Likelihood
    Detection
    No detection Almost
    No current process control;Cannot detect or is not analyzed. 10
    opportunity Impossible.
    Not likely to detect at Failure Mode and/or Error(Cause) is not easily detected(e.g.,random
    9 Very Remote
    any stage. audits).
    Problem Detection Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through
    8 Remote
    Post Processing visual/tactile/audible means.

    Failure Mode detection in-station by operator visual/tactile/audible


    Problem Detection at
    means or post-processing through use of attribute gauging (go/no- 7 Very Low
    Source
    go,manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).

    Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through use of


    Problem Detection
    variable gauging or in-station by operator through use of attribute 6 Low
    Post Processing
    gauging (go/no-go,manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).

    Failure Mode or Error(Cause) detection in-station by operator through


    Problem Detection at use of variable gauging or by automated controls in-station that will
    5 Moderate
    Source detect discrepant part and notify operator(light,buzzer,etc.) Gauging
    performed on setup and first-piece check (for set-up causes only).

    Problem Detection Failure Mode detection post-processing by automated controls that


    4 Moderately High
    Post Processing will detect discrepant part and lock part to prevent further processing.

    Failure Mode detection in-station by automated controls that will


    Problem Detection at
    detect discrepant part and automatically lock part in station to 3 High
    Source
    prevent further processing.

    Error Detection and/or Error(Cause) detection in-station by automated controls that will
    2 Very High
    Problem Prevention. detect error and prevent discrepant part from being made.

    Detection not Error(Cause)prevention as a result of fixture design, machine design or


    applicable; Error part design. Discrepant parts cannot be made because item has been 1 Almost Certain
    Prevention. error proofed by process/product design.
    Criterria: Severity of effect on Process
    (Manufacturing/Assembly Effect)

    May endanger operator(machine or assembly)


    without warning.

    May endanger operator(machine or assembly)


    with warning.

    100% of product may have to be scrapped. Line


    shutdown or stop ship.

    A portion of the production run may have to be


    scrapped. Deviation from primary process
    including decreased line speed or added
    manpower.

    100% of production run may have to be


    reworked off line and accepted.

    A portion of the production run may have to be


    reworked off line and accepted.

    100% of production run may have to be


    reworked in-station before it is processed.

    A portion of the production run may have to be


    reworked in-station before it is processed.

    Slight inconvenience to process,operation, or


    operator.
    No discernible effect

    You might also like