Talk:Failure mode and effects analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The article orginally stated that "D" is the ability to detect. That implies to me that 10 is a high ability. This does not make sense.

I have updated this to state inability, which makes more sense to me.

--David n m bond 00:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] add a table

usefull in the overview can be a typical schematic FMEA which is used in industrie:

Part |Function|Potential Failure Mode|Potential effects of failure| SEVERITY|Potential causes of..


name |function| something | bang | point 1-10 | smoke...


..failure|OCCURRENCE|How will the potential failure be detected?|DETECTION|RPN|Actions|


          | point1-10  |   smell    |                           | point 1-10  |S*O*D| do this|


this is the key FMEA of a system, this has to be performed on all parts... 130.161.165.66 13:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FMEA and fault tree

With experience from several products for the aviation industry: I would object to the statement that FMEA is a fault tree method, which is the first sentence in this article. FMEA is usually tables, and does not neccessarily completely cover a system to component and lowest level function level -while a fault tree (at least in e.g. ARP4761) usually does. A tree is a tree, a table is a table and system blocks are more typical in the tables -while lower-level stuff are more typical in trees. Any other opinions? Nordby73 20:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Another source to back up my statements above is NUREG-0492. -And yes, I also have a little experience with FMEA and ISO9000. Nordby73 21:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
As there was no commendts to this, I made a change to see if it sticks. Nordby73 21:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is there a load of text in what appears to be Bulgarian at the bottom of this page? Nfmccourt 20:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I've removed the following external links per WP:EL. If these links were used as sources for text in this article, please see Wikipedia:Footnotes to find out how to reference these sources for WP:VERIFY. --SueHay 03:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Cited External Link Address Changed / Source Incorrectly Identified

As my company's webmaster, I was looking at a Google report of incoming links to our website and I noticed that this article had a link to one of our pages ("History of FMEA"). Our website was recently redesigned from the ground up and as a result many of the page or directory names have changed. The incoming link from this article referred to an old page on our site and had become a dead link (http://www.quality-one.com/services/fmeahistory.cfm). I changed the address of the link on the FMEA wiki article to the new address (http://www.quality-one.com/services/fmea.php). The information from our website that is cited in this wiki article is still on the new page so the inclusion of this citation should still be relevant. Also, the name of our company was incorrectly cited. The author(s) had identified us as the Quality Associate Institute when really our name is Quality Associates International, so I fixed this as well.

I would also like to say hello to everybody as this is my very first Wikipedia edit! I have been a loyal reader from the start but never considered editing an article until I saw these two items and decided to take the plunge. Hi all!!!
-- Jdvernier 13:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Failure Modes

I'm puzzled by the weird addition made recently to the introductory paragraph, suggesting that mode is a "reference to the alert which signals the failure.This is similar to an Andon. An example for a mode would include playing particular theme music for a specific failure to stimulate required correction."

At best this looks like a total misunderstanding of FMEA, and at worst, possibly vandalism as an excuse to promote the Andon article.

A failure "mode" is essentially the mechanism by which the failure is initiated, nothing to do with playing theme music.

Comments anyone? LyallDNZ 09:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW the Wikipedia entry for "Failure Mode" is really: "Failure modes are characterizations of the ways a product or process can fail." LyallDNZ 10:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


I made that addition. I'll provide the citation tonight. If your version is correct then FMEA is nothing more than Fishbone diagrams with weighted branches.

Updated the primary use of the phrase Failure Mode with the official definition within Logistics: Principles and Applications, J. W. Langford, McGraw Hill, 1995, pp 48.

I currently hold a Masters degree in Industrial Engineering with a focus on Logistics. Although the current business culture is applying FMEA this is a logistical topic and should be handled as such. Please do not delete any edits to WIKI without discussion. Much work can go into the process and to walk into a page, delete what someone has written is beyond reproach. We can discuss the definition of "Manner".


To confront the topic I have to initiate a discussion to decipher the following found within the citation. I would ask that everyone interested help to clarify and distinguish the following so that the topic of FMEA can progress.

Failure detection method. "A description of the methods by which occurence of the failure mode is detected by the operator should be recorded. The failure detection means, such as visual or audible warning devices, sensing instrumentation, other indications, or none, should be identified."

Failure mode. "The manner by which a failure is observed; it generally describes the way the failure occurs and its impact on equipment operation."

Now, these are both direct quotes. I believe the distinguishing words include:

  1. manner
  2. method
  3. means

If these are clarified I think the page will progress more smoothly. My personnal belief is that the manner consists of a method which requires a means. I'm open for interpretation and expert input.

This is I think the only way to resolve the conflict. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CWDURAND (talkcontribs) 02:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

In its most general form a failure mode is essentially the mechanism by which a failure is initiated. The ways in which failure modes are observed may be of interest, but how it's observed does not necessarily characterise the mechanism (e.g. corrosion, etc). It was in that context I was not supportive of the addition of the "Andon" references, which didn't help the understanding of this article. LyallDNZ 12:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting to agree with that determination. I have meditated on it for some time now. The how is method I think. And I would, at this point, assign to the means devices or signals. It is still subtle in all three and I hope to establish that the mode is some sort of word phrase recognized by personnel. Thanks for the input. CWDURAND. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.89.254.242 (talk) 18:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Failure Detection Method

This is an academic discussion of the 3 distinct terms employed and described by FMEA. In particular how possibly could one identify the Failure detection methods may help to distinguish the term?

Consider an Ishikawa (cause and effect) diagram. It contains about 5-6 branches, one of which is a Method, and all of which possibly contribute to the Effect. This means that there is a list of methods all tied to a particular effect. In addition there is a list of personnel or manpower associated with the Effect. Since we are trying to describe how these methods detect a failure we can then take the set of methods and fully detail how (if at all) they identify the failure. It will most likely follow that there is a series of Effects having similar methods on the Methods branch. I assert now that the how is the Failure detection means, to which Langford refers. CWDURAND

[edit] Failure Mode

The mode is the culprit here. According to the definition it describes the way and the impact on equipment. So what can we use for a Failure mode? Perhaps a phrase such as "Containment Failure on number 2 compactor from corrosion". Isn't this just a combination of cause and effect from the fishbone diagram? And so every mode requires a method of detection and a means of displaying. For example how to we know that "Containment Failure on number 2 compactor from corrosion" --->the Failure mode occurred? Well {{we use a pressure gauge -->method} that turns on a {flashing light-->means} on our monitor} --> Failure detection method.

I would like to think of other modes in this light but inevitably I am confounded by the subtle distinctions between the 3 terms. At some point they are all the same and at another they are all interweaved like the parts of a leg. It is unlikely that Langley was confused on the matter and made effort to maintain the distinction in his work. CWDURAND



[edit] Likelihood and probability

They are two different things. Please clarify the respective bullet point. --Sigmundur 21:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


I also had these as 2 different things with a link to both. It is apparent that the Wiki article has been hijacked by 1 person with 1 persons view of the method.

CWDurand —Preceding unsigned comment added by CWDURAND (talkcontribs) 13:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)



[edit] History

I'm interested in this history. It seems like it's related to the modern Damage Control and the Damage Control Information Display System (DCIDS) used by the Navy. To see the relation look up the term Interfaces. I would love to see a link here that shows a pure link in the history. If anyone is into historical contexts and progression please chime in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.12.170.28 (talk) 02:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added a link

Hi fellow Wikipedians,

Our company (Quality Associates International) is cited in this article under the "History of FMEA" section and a link to our webpage appears in the "notes" section.

We recently developed a short, free web based training course that describes what an FMEA is and what the individual columns are used for in the FMEA form. I added a link to this presentation in the "references" section of the FMEA article.

I did not add this link as an ad for our company or for Google purposes, but because we were already cited in the original article and I feel that our free presentation adds to the discussion that begins in this article.

John —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdvernier (talkcontribs) 14:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)