|M.Sc Student||Turjeman-Gets Iris|
|Subject||FMEA (Failure Mode Effect Analysis) at the|
Transition from Development to Production
|Department||Department of Quality Assurance and Reliability||Supervisor||DR. Pavel Grabov|
|Full Thesis text - in Hebrew|
This thesis deals with the application of the FMEA technique (Failure Mode Effect Analysis) as part of the risk management process in a textile company.
The literature considers the FMEA technique as a presentation of the failures analysis in development stages (DFMEA) and the production process (PFMEA). The innovation in this work is the application of the technique at the transition from development to production.
The risk management process consisted of a number of stages:
1. Mapping the transition stage
2. Building a team which includes representatives from every department
3. Setting FMEA table, which presents an analysis of the major failures
4. Obtaining the risk value (RPN - Risk Priority Number) for each failure by multiplying the severity, occurrence and detectability.
5. Calculating the Total Risk Estimate (TRE.)
6. Defining the improvement operations and the purpose for each failure.
To identify the critical failures we needed to focus on, it was needed to set the RPN values from the lowest to the highest, by means of a tool called “Scree Plot”.
The RPN values and the TRE were recalculated after improving the critical failures. Based on these data, we calculated the effectiveness of applying FMEA.
At this stage, the team decided to examine another method of identification the critical failures, i.e. the effectiveness method. Inherent in this method is the definition of the cost of each improvement operation. We defined for each failure the Risk Reduction Cost (RRC), and examined the difference between the initial RPN value for each operation and the final RPN value after the improvement, and calculated the Risk Reduction Leverage (RRL). The higher the RRL value is, the more effective it is to improve the failure. Thus we graded the operations from the more effective to the less effective and compared it with the Scree Plot results.
Both tools were not completely different; there was a difference in only one operation.
The team choosed the Scree Plot findings based on considerations of the cost of the lost that might be caused by not making the improvements according to the Scree Plot.
Accordingly, the working theory was refuted.
With respect to another product or process the results obtained and the data in the FMEA table might possibly be different.
Proposals for further activities:
1. Defining an improved procedure for the economic examination
2. Examining the effectiveness of the risk management process in production.