Method for performing failure mode and effects analysis

• US 20050154561A1
• Filed: 01/12/2004
• Published: 07/14/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 01/12/2004
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Daimler Chrysler Corporation (Mercedes-Benz Group AG)
• Original Assignee: Daimler Chrysler Corporation (Mercedes-Benz Group AG)
• Inventors: Legault, Susan, Gasparovich, Charlene
• Application Number:
  US10/755,798
• Publication Number:
  US 20050154561A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 702/183
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 11/008 Reliability or availability analysis

Abstract

A method for performing failure mode and effects analysis of an intended process includes gathering data related to failures and deficiencies occurring in a similar process. Then, potential failures and deficiences are identified in the intended process by a first entity based on the gathered data. Finally, a failure mode and effects analysis is performed on the intended process by a second entity based on the potential failures identified by the first entity.

Claims

1. A method for performing a failure mode and effects analysis of an intended process, comprising:

gathering data related to failures occurring in a similar process;

identifying potential failures in the intended process by a first entity based on the gathered data; and

performing a failure mode and effects analysis on the intended process by a second entity based on the potential failures identified by the first entity.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of gathering data further comprises collecting the data at a location where the similar process is being performed.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the step of collecting the data at the location where the similar process is being performed further comprises interviewing persons associated with the similar process.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of gathering data further comprises steps selected from the group consisting of reviewing previous failure mode effects analyses performed on a similar process, reviewing improved items in a similar process, reviewing safety/quality data in a similar process, and analyzing significant differences in a similar process.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of identifying potential failures further comprises quantifying a severity associated with each potential failure.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises quantifying an occurrence ranking associated with each potential failure.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises quantifying a detection ranking associated with each potential failure.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises calculating a risk priority number from the severity, the occurrence ranking, and the detection ranking, the risk priority number used to rank the order in which the potential failures will be corrected.

9. The method of claim 7, wherein the severity, occurrence ranking, and detection ranking are quantified using scoring guidelines provided by the first entity.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the second entity is larger than the first entity.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the second entity at least partially comprises the first entity.

12. The method of claim 1 further comprising identifying factors associated with each identified potential failure.

13. A method for performing failure mode and effects analysis of a manufacturing process, comprising:

conducting line talks with workers in the manufacturing process related to failures occurring in the manufacturing process;

identifying potential failures in the manufacturing process by a first entity based on the line talks;

ranking the severity of the potential failures by the first entity;

performing a failure mode and effects analysis on the manufacturing process by a second entity based on the potential failures identified by the first entity.

14. The method of claim 13, wherein the step of identifying potential failures further comprises quantifying a severity associated with each potential failure.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises quantifying an occurrence ranking associated with each potential failure.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises quantifying a detection ranking associated with each potential failure.

17. The method of claim 16, wherein the step of performing a failure mode and effects analysis further comprises calculating a risk priority number from the severity, the occurrence ranking, and the detection ranking, the risk priority number used to rank the order in which the potential failures will be corrected.

18. The method of claim 16, wherein the severity, occurrence ranking, and detection ranking are quantified using scoring guidelines provided by the first entity.

19. The method of claim 13, wherein the second entity is larger than the first entity.

20. The method of claim 13, wherein the second entity at least partially comprises the first entity.

21. The method of claim 13 further comprises identifying factors associated with each identified potential failure.