Scribd
Upload
2K views4 pages

SOD: Table SOD: Table: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

This document provides rankings and definitions for severity, occurrence, and detection ratings used in a Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). For severity, it ranks effects from 10 (failure to meet safety/regulatory requirements) to 1 (no discernible effect). Occurrence is ranked from 10 (very high likelihood of failure) to 1 (very low likelihood). Detection is ranked from 10 (no detection opportunity) to 1 (error prevention through design).

Uploaded by

Gaurav Nagpal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2K views4 pages

SOD: Table SOD: Table: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

This document provides rankings and definitions for severity, occurrence, and detection ratings used in a Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). For severity, it ranks effects from 10 (failure to meet safety/regulatory requirements) to 1 (no discernible effect). Occurrence is ranked from 10 (very high likelihood of failure) to 1 (very low likelihood). Detection is ranked from 10 (no detection opportunity) to 1 (error prevention through design).

Uploaded by

Gaurav Nagpal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Based on AIAG V4
SOD : Table
Process FMEA Severity Rating (AIAG – V04)
Rank Effect Severity of Effect on Product

10 Failure to meet Safety Affect safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without warning.
and/or Regulatory
9 requirements Affect safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

8 Loss of primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not affect safe vehicle operation).
Loss or degradation of
Primary function
7 Degradation of primary function (vehicle operable but at reduced level of performance).

6 Loss of secondary function (vehicle operabel, but comfort / convenience functions in operabel).
Loss or degradation of
Secondary function
5 Degradation of secondary function (vehicle operabel, but comfort / convenience functions at reduced level of performance).

4 Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, items does not conform and noticed by most customers (>75%)

3 Annoyance Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, items does not conform and noticed by many customers (50%)

2 Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, items does not conform and noticed by discriminating customers (<25%)

1 No effect No discernible effect.


Process FMEA Occurrence Rating (AIAG – V04)
Occurrence of Cause
Rank Likehood of Failure
(Incident per items/vehicles)
> 100 per thousand
10 Very High
> 1 in 10
50 per thousand
9
1 in 20
20 per thousand
8 High
1 in 50
10 per thousand
7
1 in 100
2 per thousand
6
1 in 500
0.5 per thousand
5 Moderate
1 in 2000
0.1 per thousand
4
1 in 10000
0.01 per thousand
3
1 in 100000
Low
< 0.001 per thousand
2
1 in 100000
1 Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventive control
Process FMEA Detection Rating (AIAG – V04)
Rank Likehood of Failure Likelihood of Detection by process control
No detection opportunity
10 No current process control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed.
(Almost impossible)
Not likely to detect at any stage
9 Failure mode and/or error (Cause) is not easily detected (e.g. random audits)
(Very remote)
Problem detection post processing
8 Failure mode detection post - processing by operator through visual/ audible means.
(Remote)
Problem detection at source Failure mode detection in-station by operator through visual / audible means or post processing through use of
7
(Very low) attribute gauging.
Problem detection post processing Failure mode detection post-processing by operator through use of variable gauging or in-station by operator
6
(Low) through use of attribute gauging.

Problem detection at source Error detection in-station by operator thorugh use of variable gauging or by automated controls in-station that
5
(Moderate) will detect discrepant part and notify operator (light, buzzer etc)

Problem detection post processing Failure mode detection post-processing by automated controls that will detect discrepant part and lock part to
4
(Moderately high) prevent further processing.
Problem detection at source Failure mode detection in-station by automated controls that will detect discrepant part and lock part to
3
(High) prevent further processing.
Error detection and/or problem prevention Error detection in-station by automated controls that will detect error and prevent discrepant part from being
2
(Very high) made.
Detection not applicable; Error prevention Error prevention as a result of fixture design, machine design or part design. Discrepant parts can not be
1
(Almost certain) process/product design.

You might also like