Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
FMEA for Aceptance Sampling
- Thread starter Sid89
- Start date
Not sure how you can conflate the two' acceptance sampling is about finding manufacturing defects, while FMEA is usually about determining reliability risks and trying to mitigate them
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
- Thread starter
- #3
My understanding of FMEA is that it looks for individual potential defects, and possibly interactions between defects, and what happens as a result of them; it seems like this effort is more looking at the probability and distribution being shifted by shifting the probability of detecting defects.
FMEA is mostly large sections of "Really Bad", "Not Too Bad", and the desireable "We Can Live With It" for defect outcome classification.
So, you need to understand what defects are coming in and then the probability inspection will fail to catch them and then what the probability those evasive defects will cause a noticeable problem or failure. That part is really no different than any sampled inspection process; even 100% inspection can fail to notice problems.
I will say that typical inspection plans are designed to have a really good chance of detecting defects (they should specify the minimum defect rate they can find.) Going below them is a bad idea without starting to make that evaluation.
FMEA is mostly large sections of "Really Bad", "Not Too Bad", and the desireable "We Can Live With It" for defect outcome classification.
So, you need to understand what defects are coming in and then the probability inspection will fail to catch them and then what the probability those evasive defects will cause a noticeable problem or failure. That part is really no different than any sampled inspection process; even 100% inspection can fail to notice problems.
I will say that typical inspection plans are designed to have a really good chance of detecting defects (they should specify the minimum defect rate they can find.) Going below them is a bad idea without starting to make that evaluation.
EmmanuelTop
Chemical
See if this helps.
There is no such thing as "common sense" - Apollo RCA
There is no such thing as "common sense" - Apollo RCA
This is a two-layer analysis.
Layer two is a process FMEA.
For this item, the Failure Mode is "Sampling inspections not performed according to procedure." The effect of this failure is "An unknown quantity of defective product could be shipped."
There, that's done.
Layer one is your design and validation FMEA.
What product failure modes are mitigated only by the sampling inspection? What are the effects of those failure modes?
Layer two is a process FMEA.
For this item, the Failure Mode is "Sampling inspections not performed according to procedure." The effect of this failure is "An unknown quantity of defective product could be shipped."
There, that's done.
Layer one is your design and validation FMEA.
What product failure modes are mitigated only by the sampling inspection? What are the effects of those failure modes?
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
- Question
