“Failure Mode Effects & Criticality Analysis ”

Dr.M.D. Jaybhaye
Associate Professor
Dept. of Mfg. Engg. & Industrial Management
College of Engineering, Pune
Failure:

According to accepted standards failure is defined as:

“the termination of the ability of an item to perform
a required function.”

The classification of failure as given by Marvin & Knut

is as shown
In Fig.
 Failure

Intermittent Extended
failure failure

Complete Partial
failure failure

Sudden Gradual Sudden Gradual

failure failure failure failure

Catastrophic Degraded failure

failure
Failure Modes:
Failures are often classified into failure modes. According
to British Standard BS 5760, Part 5,
“failure mode is defined as the effect by which a failure is
observed on a failed item”.
A failure mode is a description of a fault and thus denotes
FMEA as fault modes and effects analysis or failure modes
and effects analysis.
 Failure
Cause

Design Manufacturing Use

Design Weakness Manufacturing Ageing Misuse Mishandling

failure failure failure failure failure failure
 FMEA Procedure:

Define the System

Identify Potential Failure Modes & Their Causes

Evaluate the Effects on the System of Each Failure Mode

Identify Failure Detection Methods

Identify Corrective Measures for Failure Modes

Document Analysis/ Prepare FMEA Report

The purposes of a FMEA are :
 To identify potential failure modes
 To identify effects of the failure mode
 To rate the severity of each effect
 To determine the potential causes of the failure starting with
the highest severity rating
 To identify robust designs or controls that will prevent the
failure from occurring
 To identify corrective actions required to prevent, mitigate, or
improve the likelihood of detecting failures early.
 To establish a priority for design improvement actions
 Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis
(FMECA):
The failure mode, effects and criticality analysis
(FMECA) is an essential function in design, from concept
through development.
To be effective, the FMECA must be iterative to
correspond with the nature of the design process itself.
The extent of effort and sophistication of approach used
in the FMECA will be dependent upon the nature and
requirements of the individual program.
This makes it necessary to tailor the requirements for an
FMECA to each individual program.
1. Severity:
Severity is a rating corresponding to the seriousness of the effect(s) of
a potential equipment failure mode in accordance with Table 1.
Severity is comprised of three components: safety considerations to
equipment operator or downstream customer, equipment downtime,
and defective parts. A reduction in Severity Rating index can be
effected only through a design change.
Subsystem functions can be prioritized by rating the severity of the
effect that will result from loss of the subsystem function. Estimate
the Severity of failure of the subsystem function and enter the rating
in the subsystem function worksheet. Rank the functions in
descending order. Begin the analysis with the highest ranked
functions. Generally, these will be the functions that affect safe
equipment operation, government regulations, and customer
specification (downtime, defective parts).
 Table 1 Severity ranking

Rankin
Effect Comment
g

1 None No reason to expect failure to have any effect on safety, health, environment, or mission.

2 Very Low Minor disruption to facility function. Repair to failure can be accomplished during trouble call.

Minor disruption to facility function. Repair to failure may be longer than trouble call but does not delay
3 Low
mission.

Low to Moderate disruption to facility function. Some portion of mission may need to be reworked or process
4
Moderate delayed.

5 Moderate Moderate disruption to facility function. 100% of mission may need to be reworked or process delayed.

Moderate to Moderate disruption to facility function. Some portion of mission is lost. Moderate delay in restoring
6
High function.

7 High High disruption to facility function. Some portion of mission is lost. Significant delay in restoring function.

8 Very High High disruption to facility function. All of mission is lost. Significant delay in restoring function.

9 Hazard Potential safety, health, or environmental issue. Failure will occur with warning.

10 Hazard Potential safety, health, or environmental issue. Failure will occur without warning.
2. Occurrence:
Occurrence is a rating corresponding to the likelihood that a
particular failure mode will occur within a specific time
period. The occurrence of failure can be based upon
historical data, including the service history, warranty data,
and maintenance experience with similar or surrogate parts
If the historical data is not available, a ranking may be
estimated based on experience with similar systems in the
facilities area. The statistical ("Effect") column in Table 2 can
be prepared based on operating hours, day, cycles, or other
unit that provides a consistent measurement approach.
Table 2. Occurrence ranking

Ranking Effect Comment

1 1/10,000 Remote probability of occurrence

Low failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had low
2 1/5,000
failure rates for given volume/loads.

Low failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had low
3 1/2,000
failure rates for given volume/loads.

Occasional failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had
4 1/1,000
similar failure rates for given volume/loads.

Moderate failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had
5 1/500
moderate failure rates for given volume/loads.

Moderate to high failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the
6 1/200
past, had moderate failure rates for given volume/loads.

High failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had high
7 1/100
failure rates that has caused problems.

High failure rate. Similar to past design that has, in the past, had high
8 1/50
failure rates that has caused problems.

9 1/20 Very High failure rate. Almost certain to cause problems.

10 1/10+ Very High failure rate. Almost certain to cause problems.

3. Detection:
Detection is an assessment to detect a potential
cause/mechanism or to detect the potential failure
mode.
The probability of detecting the cause of failure or
failure mode before the product reaches the customer,
is given using a “1 -10” Scale.
It must be assumed that the cause of failure has
happened and then assess the capabilities of all current
controls to detect the failure.
Table 3 Detection ranking

Probability of an
Ranking individual defect Comment
reaching to the end
user
Remote likelihood that the defect will reach the end
user. It would be unreasonable to expect that the
1
0-5% defect would not be detected during inspection,
assembly or test.

2
6 – 15 % Low likelihood that the defect will reach the
customer
3
16 –25 %
4
26 – 35 %
Moderate likelihood that the defect will reach the
5
36 – 45 % end user
6
46 – 55 %
7
56 –65 %
High likelihood that the defect will reach end user.
8
66 - 75 %
9
76 – 85 % Very high likelihood that the defect will reach the
end user
10
86 -100 %
Risk Priority Number (RPN):
The risk of each failure is prioritized on the basis of the risk priority number
(RPN). RPN is a decision factor based on the product of three ratings: Severity,
Occurrence and Detection.[57]
The Risk Priority Number (RPN) is obtained by multiplying the Severity,
Occurrence and Detection ratings.
RPN = Severity x Occurrence x Detection
These rating are scaled with numbers between 1 and 10. Failure modes with high
RPN values are selected. The corresponding current controls (i.e. the solutions)
will be implemented on the basis of the selected failures.
RPN is to be calculated for all causes of failure.
RPN is used to rank the potential cause of failure for any possible corrective
actions.
If RPN > 125, it requires special action to be taken.
Whenever failure mode/cause combinations have Severity ratings of 9 or 10,
Regardless of the value of RPN, design actions must be considered before
engineering release to eliminate a safety concern. For these ratings, the goal is to
reduce criticality below conditions that could adversely affect the safety of the
operator.
Failure Mode Effect & Criticality Analysis of
Spindle Bearing System:
A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis is a standardized
technique for evaluating system during its design phase to
improve safety, reliability and robustness of the system.
The failure mode effects analysis of spindle bearing system is
carried out.
The FMEA tables for four sub-assemblies of the spindle
bearing assembly are prepared and RPN for each unit of these
sub-assemblies is calculated.
The Criticality of component is found out and comments are
given.
Ishikawa diagram is prepared for spindle assembly. The
criticality of sub-assemblies are verified with AHP and Digraph.
Fig . Fishbone Diagram for Failure of Main Spindle Assembly
FMECA of Collet sub-assembly:
FMECA of Collet sub-assembly- Continued…
FMECA of Bearing sub-assembly:
FMECA of Bearing sub-assembly- continued…
FMECA of Bearing sub-assembly- continued…
FMECA of Shaft and Pulley sub-assembly:
FMECA of Shaft and Pulley sub-assembly –
continued…
FMECA of Finger sub-assembly:
The step-by-step analysis to pinpoint the criticality of the
components has been shown in Tables for these four sub-
assemblies, using the RPN (Risk Priority Number) method.
As per RPN ranking, in order of descending values we have:
1) Finger in Finger sub-assembly (RPN 160)
2) (i) Collet Sleeve in Collet sub-assembly ( RPN 144)
(ii) Collet Spring in Collet sub-assembly (RPN 140)
3) Bearings in Bearing sub-assembly ( RPN 63)
4) V- belt in Pulley sub-assembly ( RPN 48)
THANK YOU !!!