Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 176 views

    Effect Criteria Rank: Typical Rankings of Severity Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Uploaded by

    ain liyana
    The document ranks the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes according to criteria provided by Ford Motor Company. For severity, rankings range from 10 (hazardous without warning) to 1 (no discernible effect). For occurrence, rankings range from 10 (persistent failures of 100 or more per thousand pieces) to 1 (failures of 0.01 or fewer per thousand pieces). For detection, rankings range from 10 (absolute uncertainty of detection) to 1 (design control will almost certainly detect the failure mode).

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Effect Criteria Rank: Typical Rankings of Severity Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Uploaded by

    ain liyana
    176 views4 pages
    The document ranks the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes according to criteria provided by Ford Motor Company. For severity, rankings range from 10 (hazardous without warning) to 1 (no discernible effect). For occurrence, rankings range from 10 (persistent failures of 100 or more per thousand pieces) to 1 (failures of 0.01 or fewer per thousand pieces). For detection, rankings range from 10 (absolute uncertainty of detection) to 1 (design control will almost certainly detect the failure mode).

    Original Description:

    Table

    Original Title

    APPENDIX-FMEA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document ranks the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes according to criteria provided by Ford Motor Company. For severity, rankings range from 10 (hazardous without warning) to 1 (no discernible effect). For occurrence, rankings range from 10 (persistent failures of 100 or more per thousand pieces) to 1 (failures of 0.01 or fewer per thousand pieces). For detection, rankings range from 10 (absolute uncertainty of detection) to 1 (design control will almost certainly detect the failure mode).

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    176 views4 pages

    Effect Criteria Rank: Typical Rankings of Severity Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Uploaded by

    ain liyana
    The document ranks the severity, occurrence, and detection of potential failure modes according to criteria provided by Ford Motor Company. For severity, rankings range from 10 (hazardous without warning) to 1 (no discernible effect). For occurrence, rankings range from 10 (persistent failures of 100 or more per thousand pieces) to 1 (failures of 0.01 or fewer per thousand pieces). For detection, rankings range from 10 (absolute uncertainty of detection) to 1 (design control will almost certainly detect the failure mode).

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    Typical Rankings of Severity Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Effect Criteria Rank


    Hazardous Very high severity ranking when a Or may endanger operator (machine 10
    – without potential failure mode affects safe or assembly) without warning.
    warning vehicle operation and/or involves
    noncompliance with government
    regulation without warning
    Hazardous Very high severity ranking when a Or may endanger operator (machine 9
    with potential failure mode affects safe or assembly) with warning.
    warning vehicle operation and/or involves
    noncompliance with government
    regulation with warning
    Very high Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of Or 100% of product may have to be 8
    primary function) scrapped, or vehicle/item repaired in
    repair department with a repair time
    greater than one hour.
    High Vehicle/item operable but at Or product may have to be sorted and 7
    reduced level of performance. a portion (less than 100%) scrapped,
    Customer very dissatisfied. or vehicle/item repaired in repair
    department with a repair time
    between a half- hour and an hour.
    Moderate Vehicle/item operable, but Or a portion (less than 100%) of the 6
    Comfort/Convenience item (s) product may have to be scrapped
    operable at a reduced level of with no sorting, or vehicle/item
    performance. Customer somewhat repaired in repair department with a
    dissatisfied. repair time less than a half – hour.
    Low Vehicle/item operable, but Or 100% of the product may have to 5
    Comfort/Convenience items(s) reworked, or vehicle/item repaired
    operable at a reduced level of off-line but does not go to repair
    performance. Customer somewhat department.
    dissatisfied.
    Very Low Fit& Finish/Squeak & Rattle item Or the product may have to be sorted, 4
    does not conform. Defect noticed with no scrap, and a portion (less
    by most customers (greater than than 100%) reworked.
    75%)
    Minor Fit & Finish/Squeak & Rattle item Or a portion (less than 100%) of the 3
    does not conform. Defect noticed product may have to be reworked,
    by 50% of customers. with no scrap, on-line but out-of
    station.
    Very Fit & Finish/Squeak & Rattle item Or a portion (less than 100%) of the 2
    minor does not conform. Defect noticed product may have to be reworked,
    by discriminating customer (less with no scrap, on-line but out-of
    than 25%). station.
    None No discernible effect. Or slight inconvenience to operation 1
    or operator, or no effect.

    APPENDIX A2

    151
    Typical Rankings of Occurrence Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Probability Likely Failure Rates Rank


    Very high : Persistent Failures  100 per thousand pieces 10
    50 per thousand pieces 9
    High : Frequent failures 20 per thousand pieces 8
    10 per thousand pieces 7
    Moderate : Occasional failures 5 per thousand pieces 6
    2 per thousand pieces 5
    1 per thousand pieces 4
    Low : Relatively few failures 0.5 per thousand pieces 3
    0.1 per thousand pieces 2
    Remote : Failure is unlikely ≤0.01 per thousand pieces 1

    152
    Typical Rankings of Detection Indices (Ford Motor Company, 2001)

    Effect Criteria : likelihood of Detection by Rank


    Design Control
    Absolute Uncertainty Design Control will not and/or cannot detect a 10
    potential cause/mechanism and subsequent failure
    mode; or there is no Design Control.
    Very Remote Very remote chance the Design Control will 9
    detect a potential cause of failure or subsequent
    failure mode.
    Remote Remote chance the Design Control will detect a 8
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode.
    Very low Very low chance the Design Control will detect a 7
    potential cause of failure or subsequent mode
    Low Low chance the Design Control will detect a 6
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode.
    Moderate Moderate chance the design control will defect a 5
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode
    Moderately High Moderately high chance the Design Control will 4
    detect a potential cause of failure or subsequent
    failure mode.
    High High chance the design control will detect a 3
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode
    Very high Very high chance the design control will detect a 2
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode.
    Almost Certain Design control will almost certainly detect a 1
    potential cause of failure or subsequent failure
    mode

    153
    154

    You might also like