FMEA Base Roof 7779-617
FMEA Base Roof 7779-617
FMEA Base Roof 7779-617
VS TECHNOLOGY INDONESIA
POTENTIAL FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS A
Part Name / Process BASE ROOF CONSOLE Process Responsibility
Injection Molding
Part No 7779-617-A00
Model 578W (1) Prod Trial Target Date 5-Jun-15
Team Members : 1. Sari (ENG) 6. Indra (Maintenance) Pre-Prod Target Date 26-Mar-15
2. Iskandar (QC) Customer Name: PT MINDA ASEAN AUTOMOTIVE
3. Hari (Production)
4. Mr. Wong (Tooling)
5. Nur M. (PPC)
Potential Effects
SEVERITY
OCCUR
Potential Cause / Mechanisms
Process / Station Potential Failure Mode of Failure
of Failure
Missout COC/DO/MSDS/
2. Incoming Inspection NG Color 8 Not checking material 1
checking and wrong labeling
a) MTC malfunction
a) No heating / Over Heating b) Cosmetic, Appearance, Color b) Chiller malfunction
6. Mold Heating / Cooling Insufficient heating c) 4 4
change and Warpage Issues c) Wrong temperature setting
Insufficient Cooling d) Blockage of cooling channels
Mold/tooling have
3. Scractches Appearance NG 6 2
scratch/handling by operator
Potential Effects
SEVERITY
OCCUR
Potential Cause / Mechanisms
Process / Station Potential Failure Mode of Failure
of Failure
9. In-Process Inspection Defects and dimension Re-work / repair and can not 5 Lock of knowledge on job 4
(IPQC) overlooked delivery
Consumable calculation
10. Packing 1. Impra box shortage Packing not standard 4 3
shortage by PPC
Consumable calculation
2. Partition shortage Packing not standard 4 3
shortage by PPC
Non detection of dispancy on Non compliance with Can not recognize the deffect
11. Outgoing Inspection 5 2
quality and quantity of FG customer requirement due to no reference
13. Delivery Wrong Part No. Delay delivery due to sorting 3 Mistake of pull-out from store 2
MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS ( PROCESS FMEA )
Page No. 1 of 2
ection Molding
Prepared by :
Jun-15
-Mar-15 Approved by
T MINDA ASEAN AUTOMOTIVE ( Supplier )
FMEA No. FMEA/15/03/037
FMEA Date 21-Apr-15
Rev . No 0
DETECT
RPN
Recommended Action(s) Target Completion Action taken
SEVERITY
Current Process Controls Current Process Controls Date
Prevention Detection
Using specified area with Use of material directory 7 42 None Material Store (MS)
identification tags
Follow Daily Maintenance Check 4 hourly Machine Inspection SPV Injection &
4 64 None
List Routine Mold Servicing List Maintenance
Doing checking sample every Doing checking by IPQC 84 Done & Continue
6
setting and per shif Molding monitoring
Doing checking sample every Doing checking by IPQC 6 84 Done & Continue
setting and per shif Molding monitoring
Doing checking sample every Doing checking by IPQC 84 Done & Continue Leader Molding &
6
setting and per shif Molding monitoring IPQC Molding
Doing checking sample every Doing checking by IPQC 84 Done & Continue
6
setting and per shif Molding monitoring
Doing checking sample every Doing checking by IPQC 84 Done & Continue
6
setting and per shif Molding monitoring
Re-checking tooling polishing Operator must checking with 48 Check tooling when start
4
periodic & rework methods visual check up & trianing operator
Page No. 2 of 2
DETECT
RPN
Recommended Action(s) Target Completion Action taken
SEVERITY
Current Process Controls Current Process Controls Date
Prevention Detection
On job training, work instruction QA Supervisor / Engineering 80 Done & continue SPV QA &
4
and use limit samples review monitoring Engineering
Re-calculation the packing usage Separate the impra box & 48 Re-calculation & additional
4
by PPC calculation when incoming buffer stock
Re-calculation the packing usage Separate the impra box & 48 Re-calculation & additional
4
by PPC calculation when incoming buffer stock Leader PPC, Leader
Operator must follow to std Molding, Leader
Checking the qty packing & follow packing & inform to leader Store
3 36 None
to Std packing before process
Re-checking & place the box refer Have identification label at line
4 48 None
to standard production
Use of Inspection Instruction and Comparison with the standard SPV QA &
4 40 None
Standard Packaging sample Engineering
Visual check of the transfer slip As per Bean system 7 42 None SPV Store
against actual product received
Proper FG labelling as per Visual check of parts against 5 30 None SPV Store
Standard Packaging DO
OCCUR
DETECT
Result
RPN
OCCUR
DETECT
Result
RPN
Opportunity for Detection Criteria: Likelihood of Detection by Process Control Rank Likelihood of
Detection
No detection opportunity No current process control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed. 10 Almost Impossible
Not likely to detect at any stage Failure Mode and/or Error (Cause) is not easily detected (e.g., random 9 Very Remote
audits).
Problem Detection Post Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through 8 Remote
Processing visual/tactile/audible means.
Problem Detection at Source Failure Mode detection in-station by operator through 7 Very Low
visual/tactile/audible means or post-processing through use of
attribute gauging (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench,
etc.).
Problem Detection Post Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through use of 6 Low
Processing variable gauging or in-station by operator through use of attribute
gauging (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).
Opportunity for Detection Criteria: Likelihood of Detection by Process Control Rank Likelihood of
Detection
Problem Detection at Source Failure Mode or Error (Cause) detection in-station by operator 5 Moderate
through use of variable gauging or by automated controls in-station
that will detect discrepant part and notify operator (light, buzzer, etc.).
Gauging performed on set-up and first-piece check (for set-up causes
only).
Problem Detection Post Failure Mode detection post-processing by automated controls that 4 Moderately High
Processing will detect discrepant part and lock part to prevent further processing.
Problem Detection at Source Failure Mode detection in-station by automated controls that will 3 High
detect discrepant part and automatically lock part in station to prevent
further processing.
Problem Detection at Source Failure Mode detection in-station by automated controls that will 3 High
detect discrepant part and automatically lock part in station to prevent
further processing.
Error Detection and/or Problem Error (Cause) detection in-station by automated controls that will 2 Very High
Prevention detect error and prevent discrepant part from being made.
Detection not applicable; Error Error (Cause) prevention as a result of fixture design, machine design 1 Almost Certain
Prevention or part design. Discrepant parts cannot be made because item has been
error-proofed by process/product design.
Suggested PFMEA Occurrence Evaluation Criteria
Rank Likelihood of Failure Criteria: Occurrence of Cause – PFMEA (incidents per items / vehicles)
Failure to Meet Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or 10 Failure to Meet May endanger operator (machine or assembly) without
Safety and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without Safety and/or warning
Regulatory warning Regulatory
Requirements Requirements
Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or 9 May endanger operator (machine or assembly) with warning
involves noncompliance with government regulation with
warning
Loss or Loss of primary function (Vehicle inoperable, does not 8 Major 100% of product may have to be scrapped, Line shutdown or
Degradation affect safe vehicle operation). Disruption stop ship.
of Primary
Function Degradation of primary function (Vehicle operable, but at 7 Significant A portion of the production run may have to be scrapped.
reduced level of performance. Disruption Deviation from primary process including decreased line
speed or added manpower.
Loss or Loss of secondary function (Vehicle operable, but Comfort/ 6 Moderate 100% of production run may have to reworked off line and
Degradatio Convenience Inoperable) Disruption accepted
n of
Secondary
Function
Annoyance Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does 4 Moderate 100% of production run may have to be reworked in station
not conform and noticed by most customers (< 75%) Disruption before it is processed.
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does 3 A portion of the production run may have to be reworked in-
not conform and noticed by many customers (< 50%) station before it is processed
Annoyance Moderate
Disruption
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does 3 A portion of the production run may have to be reworked in-
not conform and noticed by many customers (< 50%) station before it is processed
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does 2 Minor Slight inconvenience to process, operation, or operator.
not conform and noticed by discriminating customers (< Disruption
25%)
No Effect No discernible effect 1 No effect No discernible effect.
ly Effect)
t on PROCESS
or assembly) without
ay have to be scrapped.
ncluding decreased line
bly Effect)
ct on PROCESS
may have to be reworked off
e to be reworked in station
e to be reworked in-
e to be reworked in-
operation, or operator.