REPORT SUMMARY Date: 11/17/2017

Page 1 of 6

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

Report Summary
Rating Criteria and Classifications
J1739 (2009)
Recommended Actions
Current Controls

Xfmea Report Sample – Design FMEA

This report was generated with ReliaSoft Xfmea by HBM Prenscia 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 Design FMEA (DFMEA) spreadsheet report in the SAE J1739 reporting format.
• 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 SAE J1739 guidelines, on page 37.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com
 RATING CRITERIA AND CLASSIFICATIONS Date: 11/17/2017

Page 2 of 6

Severity Rating Scale Occurrence Rating Scale

# Description Criteria 1 # Description Criteria
1 No Effect No discernible effect. 1 Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventative control.
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item
No observed failures associated with almost identical
2 Annoyance does not conform. Defect noticed by discriminating 2 Low
design or in design simulation and testing.
customers (< 25%).
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item
Only isolated failures associated with almost identical
3 Annoyance does not conform. Defect noticed by many customers 3 Low
design or in design simulation and testing.
(50%).
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item
Isolated failures associated with similar design or in
4 Annoyance does not conform. Defect noticed by most customers (> 4 Moderate
design simulation and testing.
75%).
Degradation of secondary function (vehicle operable, but
Occasional failures associated with similar designs or in
5 Degradation of Secondary Function comfort / convenience functions at reduced level of 5 Moderate
design simulation and testing.
performance).
Loss of secondary function (vehicle operable, but Frequent failures associated with similar designs or in
6 Loss of Secondary Function 6 Moderate
comfort / convenience functions inoperable). design simulation and testing.
Degradation of primary function (vehicle operable, but at Failure is uncertain with new design, new application, or
7 Degradation of Primary Function 7 High
reduced level of performance). change in duty cycle/operating conditions.
Loss of primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not Failure is likely with new design, new application, or
8 Loss of Primary Function 8 High
affect safe vehicle operation). change in duty cycle/operating conditions.
Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation
Failure is inevitable with new design, new application, or
9 Safety and/or Regulatory Compliance and/or involves noncompliance with government 9 High
change in duty cycle/operating conditions.
regulation with warning.
Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation
10 Safety and/or Regulatory Compliance and/or involves noncompliance with government 10 Very High New technology/new design with no history.
regulation without warning.
Detection Rating Scale Classification Options
# Description Criteria 1 Abbreviation Description
Failure cause or failure mode cannot occur because it is
Detection Not Applicable - Failure
1 fully prevented through design solutions (e.g. Proven C Critical
Prevention
design standard/best practice or common material, etc.).
Design analysis/detection controls have a strong
detection capability. Virtual Analysis (e.g. CAE, FEA, etc.)
2 Virtual Analysis - Correlated KI Key Intermediate
is highly correlated with actual and/or expected
operating conditions prior to design freeze.
Product validation (reliability testing, development or
3 Prior to Design Freeze validation tests) prior to design freeze using degradation KLd Key Leading
testing (e.g. data trends, before/after values, etc.).
Product validation (reliability testing, development or
4 Prior to Design Freeze validation tests) prior to design freeze using test to KLg Key Lagging
failure (e.g. until leaks, yields, cracks, etc.).
Product validation (reliability testing, development or
validation tests) prior to design freeze using pass/fail
5 Prior to Design Freeze S Significant
testing (e.g. acceptance criteria for performance,
function checks, etc.).
Product verification/validation after design freeze and
6 Post Design Freeze and Prior to Launch prior to launch with degradation testing (Sub-system or KPC Key Product Characteristic
system testing after durability test e.g. Function check).

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com
 RATING CRITERIA AND CLASSIFICATIONS Date: 11/17/2017

Page 3 of 6

Product verification/validation after design freeze and

prior to launch with test to failure testing (Sub-system or
7 Post Design Freeze and Prior to Launch KCC Key Control Characteristic
system testing until failure occurs, testing of system
interactions, etc.).
Product verification/validation after design freeze and
prior to launch with pass/fail testing (Sub-system or
8 Post Design Freeze and Prior to Launch
system testing with acceptance criteria e.g. Ride &
handling, shipping evaluation, etc.).
Design analysis/detection controls have a weak detection
9 Difficult to Detect capability; Virtual Analysis (e.g. CAE, FEA, etc.) is not
correlated to expected actual operating conditions.
No current design control; Cannot detect or is not
10 Absolute Uncertainty
analyzed.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com
 FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
Front Door L.H
Item 1.1.1 - Front Door L.H DFMEA Number 1234
Model Year/Program(s) 201X/Lion 3dr/Wagon Key Date 7/3/2017
DFMEA Owner (Design Resp.) Body Engineering Prepared By 7/3/2017
T. Fender - Car Product Dev., C. Childers - Manufacturing, J. Ford -
6/29/2017
Core Team / Facilitator Assy Ops (Dalton, Fraser, Henley Assembly Plants) Original Completion Date
Support Team

Action Results

Classification
Potential Potential Current Design Current Design
Potential Failure Recommended Responsibility & Planned

RPNi
OCCi

DETi
SEVi
Name / Function Effect(s) of Cause(s) of Controls Controls Actions Taken &

RPNr
OCCr

DETr
Mode Actions Completion Date

SEVr
Failure Failure (Prevention) (Detection) Actual Completion
Date

Front Door L.H

- Ingress to and Corroded interior Deteriorated life of 7 Upper edge of 6 Vehicle general 7 294 Add laboratory A. Tate Body 6/29/2015 Based on test results 7 2 2 28
egress from low door panels door leading to: protective wax durability test veh. accelerated Engrg (Test No. 1481)
vehicle. - Unsatisfactory application T-118 corrosion testing upper edge spec
- Occupant appearance due to specified for inner T-109 raised 125mm.
protection from rust through paint door panels is too T-301 - 6/29/2015
weather, noise, over time. low.
and side impact. - Impaired function
Insufficient wax 4 Vehicle general 7 196 Add laboratory A. Tate Body 6/30/2015 Test results (Test 2 2 28
- Support of interior door
thickness specified durability testing - accelerated Engrg No. 1481) show
anchorage for door hardware.
as above. corrosion testing. specified thickness is
hardware including
adequate. -
mirror, hinges,
6/29/2015
latch and window
regulator.
- Provide proper Conduct Design of A. Tate Body 7/1/2015 DOE shows 25%
surface for Experiments (DOE) Engrg variation in specified
appearance items - on wax thickness. thickness is
paint and soft trim. acceptable.
- 7/1/2015

Inappropriate wax 2 Physical and Chem 2 28 2 2 28

formulation Lab test - Report
specified. No. 1265.
Entrapped air 5 Design aid 8 280 Add team evaluation Body Engrg & 7/2/2015 Based on test, 1 3 21
prevents wax from investigation with using production Assy Ops additional vent holes
entering nonfunctioning spray equipment will be provided in
corner/edge spray head. and specified wax. affected areas.
access. - 7/2/2015

Wax application 3 Laboratory test 1 21 3 1 21

plugs door drain using "worst case"
holes wax application
and hole size.

Insufficient room 4 Drawing evaluation 4 112 Add team evaluation Body Engrg & 7/2/2015 Evaluation showed 1 1 7
between panels for of spray head using design aid Assy Ops adequate access.
spray head access. access. buck and spray - 7/2/2015
head.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com
 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Date: 11/17/2017

Page 5 of 6

Action # Recommended Actions Planned Completion Date Responsibility Actions Taken Name Name (Cause) Priority

1.1.1.1.1 Add laboratory accelerated corrosion testing 6/29/2015 A. Tate Body Engrg Based on test results (Test Front Door L.H Upper edge of protective wax Medium
No. 1481) upper edge spec application specif...
raised 125mm.

1.1.1.2.1 Add laboratory accelerated corrosion testing. 6/30/2015 A. Tate Body Engrg Test results (Test No. 1481) Front Door L.H Insufficient wax thickness Medium
show specified thickness is specified
adequate.

1.1.1.2.2 Conduct Design of Experiments (DOE) on 7/1/2015 A. Tate Body Engrg DOE shows 25% variation in Front Door L.H Insufficient wax thickness Medium
wax thickness. specified thickness is specified
acceptable.

1.1.1.4.1 Add team evaluation using production spray 7/2/2015 Body Engrg & Assy Ops Based on test, additional Front Door L.H Entrapped air prevents wax Medium
equipment and specified wax. vent holes will be provided in from entering corner...
affected areas.

1.1.1.6.1 Add team evaluation using design aid buck 7/2/2015 Body Engrg & Assy Ops Evaluation showed adequate Front Door L.H Insufficient room between Medium
and spray head. access. panels for spray head...

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com
 CURRENT CONTROLS Date: 11/17/2017

Page 6 of 6

Line # Current Design Controls Control Type Name Name (Function) Potential Failure Mode Potential Effect(s) of Failure Potential Cause(s) of Failure

1 Vehicle general durability test veh. Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Upper edge of protective wax application
T-118 L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust specified for inner door panels is too low.
T-109 through paint over time.
T-301 - Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

2 Vehicle general durability testing - as Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Insufficient wax thickness specified
above. L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust
through paint over time.
- Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

3 Physical and Chem Lab test - Report Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Inappropriate wax formulation specified.
No. 1265. L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust
through paint over time.
- Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

4 Design aid investigation with Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Entrapped air prevents wax from entering
nonfunctioning spray head. L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust corner/edge access.
through paint over time.
- Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

5 Laboratory test using "worst case" Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Wax application plugs door drain holes
wax application and hole size. L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust
through paint over time.
- Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

6 Drawing evaluation of spray head Detection Front Door - Ingress to and egress Corroded interior low door panels Deteriorated life of door leading to: Insufficient room between panels for spray
access. L.H from vehicle.-- Occupan... - Unsatisfactory appearance due to rust head access.
through paint over time.
- Impaired function of interior door
hardware.

Non-proprietary and non-confidential information.

Date Created: 11/17/2017 Creator: HBM Prenscia Generated by ReliaSoft Xfmea http://www.reliasoft.com