alse ny sel saan cote aie nny eat a anacte Adc safe operation Oe 2 ign [Petlteandiorsaftyrsk [ath andr safety risk forthe | hile andor other 9 [ie fialucemay resultanan-platfinlire mayzesutmanplmt —[uon-complance with fesssoson-complianse rust aon compliance —_eplatons [00% efprodaoa nm Lae stow mae 5 Iatoaraf tetas ave tobe |podton shit stopped [L285 ofrmary veil je mci neces fn Kel Product may have to be sorted [Line shutdown ffom one hour Degradation of primary > [heh Jand a portion have to be |up to full production shift; \vehicle function necessary fered Some 100% fe proton rn ows of secondary vee 6 laay have to reworked offline |e Shutdown up to one hour lrg ctign [portion of proicion rm ese han 100% a oct , [soars Degradation of econdary ‘Te [sy have to be rework for | vehicle function [00 ofpioditioa naamy Defers poder wigan | Very obeounle appear, 4 Jiave to be reworked in line significant reaction plan, |sound, vibration, prion of prodacion nay Decive ro tigers [Model bjcoable 3] fsvetonerewerkedsisityninr reason plan ational appearance, sos, mr at con 7" [Defective product tigers no [Slightly objectionable = oP Fee liens ‘ 1/88 Pwo discerning effect iN. lscemible effect or no |No discernible effectPotential Failure Causes rated according to the criteria below. Consider Prevention Controls when determining the lbest Occurrence estimate, Occurrence is predictive qualitative rating made at the time of evaluation and may not reflect the actual occurrence. The occurrence rating number is relative rating within the scope of FMEA (process being evainated). For Prevention Controls with multiple Occurrence Ratings, use the rating that best reflects the robustness of the contro. Extremely [None INo prevention control 10 High 5 Behavioral [Prevention control will have lite effect in preventing failure cause =| Very ign Mle effect m preventing 7] gyugn [Behavioral or [Prevention contol somewhat effective in preventing fare eause 6 Sh technical ST sroacrate [Prevention control are effective in preventing failure cause r 3 [_Low [Best practices: [Prevention control are highly effective in preventing failure cause [Behavioral or 2 technical [Technical Prevention control are extremely effective in preventing failure cause from , | Extremery loccurring duc to design ( e.g. part geometry) or process (¢.. fixture of tooling Low design. Intent of prevention controls failure mode cannot be physically produced due to the failure cause.[Potential Failure Canses rated according to the criteria below. Consider Prevention Controls when determining the [best Occurrence estimate, Occurrence is predictive qualitative rating made at the time of evaluation and may not reflect the actual occurrence. The occurrence rating number is relative rating within the scope of FMEA (process being evaluated). For Prevention Controls with nmultiple Occurrence Ratings, use the rating that best reflects the ‘robustness of the control. 10 |>=100 per thousands 1 None [No prevention control. 9 [50 per thousands 1 in 20 Behavioral [Prevention control will have little effect in 8_[20 per thousands 1 in 50 [preventing failure cause 7 [10 per 1000 4 in 100 Behavioral or [Prevention control somewhat effective in [2 per thousand_1 in 500 technical preventing failure cause 5_['S per thousand 1 in 2000 [Prevention control are effective in preventing 4 |. per thousand _1 in 10000 failure cause 3 |.01 per thousand _1 im 100000 [Best practices: [Prevention control are highly effective in /<.001 per thousand 1 in 1000000 [Behavioral or preventing failure cause ; technical [Failure is eliminated through Technical Prevention control are extremely effective in Iprevention control preventing failure cause from occurring due to 1 design (e.g. part geometry) or process (€.z. fixture of tooling design). Intent of prevention lcontrols+ failure mode cannot be physically [produced due to the failure cause.[Potential Failure Causes rated according to the criteria below. Consider Prevention Controls when determining the lbest Occurrence estimate, Occurrence is predictive qualitative rating made at the time of evaluation and may not lreflect the actual occurrence. The occurrence rating number is relative rating within the scope of FMEA (process lbeing evaluated), For Prevention Controls with multiple Occurrence Ratings. use the rating that best reflects the lrobustness of the control. 10 None ‘No prevention control. [Prevention control will have little effect in preventing 3 [More than once per shift Behavioral |raiture 7_ |More than once per day [Prevention control somewhat effective in preventing 6 |More than once per week Behavioral or_ [failure 5_|More than once per month technical [Prevention control are effective in preventing failure 4 [More than once per year Jcause 3. |Once per year Bes practices Prevention control are highly effective in preventing 2_ [Less than once per year tecdnical failure 1 [Never Technical | P'eVention control are extremely effective in preventingDetection control rated according to detection method. maturity and opportunity for detection [No testing or inspection 10 |method has been ine faiture mode will not or cannot be detected [established or is known, itis unlikely that the {very Low |The failure mode is not easily detected through random or sporadic ° esting orinspection | lmethod will detect nts [Testing or inspection human inspection (visual, tactile, audible), or use of mannal gauging S| rage fitted tas nor been [atte or variable) dat should detect the ule mae [proven to be effective [\fachine based detection ( automated or semi automated with lnotfication by light. buzzer. ec.) or use of inspection equipment [Text or inspection method human inspection (visual, tactile, audible), or use of manual gauging Inas been proven to be | attsibute or variable) that will detect the failure mode leftective IMachine based detection (semi automated with notification by Hight, buzzer. etc.) or use of inspection equipment [System has been proven fo [Machine based automated detection method that will deteet failuze Ibe effective and reliable mode downstream. prevent further processing Machine based automated detection method that will detect failure High lmode in-station, prevent further processing [Detection method as been} rachine based detection method that will detect the cause and 2 iproven effective and {highty reliable [prevent the failure mode (diserepant part) from being produced [Failure mode cannot be physically produced as design or process or detection method proven to [always detect the failure mode or failure cause [Moderate 1 |Very highAction Priority (AP) for DFMEA and PFMEA lorder to prioritize actions for risk reduction, Prediction of Failure cause | 0 occurring Product or Plant effect} Very High Moderate Ability to Detect Low - Very low ‘Action priority is based on combinations of Severity, Occurrence and Detection ratings in ‘ACTION PRIORITY (Blank until filled lin by user. Comments ‘Moderate 8-10. High Very High Low - Very low ‘Moderate High Very High Low - Very low ‘Moderate High Very High Low - Very low ‘Moderate, High) Very High [_Verytow | 1 | Veryhigh - Very low aAction Priority (AP) for DFMEA and PFMEA [Action priority is based on combinations of Saverty, Occurrence and Detection ratings in order [Blank until filled to prioritize actions for risk reduction. in by user. Prediction of ACTION Effect | S| Fai ° ity to Detect | D | PRIORITY | Comments occurrin; (AP) Tow - Very low | 7-10. 1 Cn ‘Moderate 5-6. H Veryhigh | S10 High 24. H Very High 1 H Low - Very low | 7-10. H , ‘Moderate 6 H High or High H Product or| Very High 1 M Plant effect] 7-8. ‘Low - Very low | 7-10. H High ‘Moderate 5-6. M ® r 5 Moderate | 4: wish > 7 Very High 1 M Tow - Very low | 7-10. M . a ‘Moderate 56 M tow os High 4. L Very High 1 L Very Low 1_| Very high - Very low | 1-10. L[Action priority is based on combinations of Saverty. Occurrence and Deteetion ratings in order] Blank until filled to prioritize actions for risk reduction, in by user. Prediction of ACTION s | Failure cause | © | AbititytoDetect | p | priority | Comments ‘occurring Low- Very low . Moderate 6 Very high | §10. High 4. M Very High 1 M Low - Very low | 7-10, M Moderate M High High M Very High 1 L Tow - Very low | 7-10. M ‘Moderate Medeiate a £ High 24. L Very High 1 L Low Very low | 7-10, L 5 Moderate 5-6. L Tow 25. High 24 L Very High 1 L Very Low T | very high- Very low | 1-10. L[Action prionity is based on combinations of Saverty, Occurrence and Detection ratings in order| ioritize actions for risk reduction. © | Ability to Detect ACTION PRIORITY | Comments [Blank until filled in by user, Tow - Very low sao. Moderate. High Low - Very low Moderate Tow - Very low ‘Moderate. High ‘Very High Low - Very low ‘Moderate High Very High