Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

PFMEA review from client

Discussion in 'FMEA - Failure Modes and Effects Analysis' started by Miki_Spaga, Dec 12, 2018.

  1. Miki_Spaga

    Miki_Spaga New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hello all,

    First topic started so be kind :D

    I have joined a company a couple of months back.
    Our main client is not automotive.

    We have had a switch in the way we are "judged". From what I understand from my older collegues we have always been judged in accordance to ISO9001. Now our supplier link to the customer (SQA) decided that all we send over for the PPAP in regards to the FMEA's are not ok.

    We have found that the client imposes use to use new IATF 16949 guidelines. PFMEA are rejected for having a RPN score bigger thatn 100 points. Although there is no official statement of who set this threshold or why it is set to 100..

    Our automotive clients are not as "picky" as the non automotive one. So I am left a bit baffled

    Can anybody shed some light or give some support on this matter?
    I await your advices and opinions
     
  2. Golfman25

    Golfman25 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2015
    Messages:
    710
    Likes Received:
    351
    Trophy Points:
    62
    Get the AIAG FMEA book. Your SQA is 100% wrong. There is no requirement to act at an rpn of 100. The RPN is just a number not necessarily an action trigger. In fact you may want to focus on items with high severity instead.

    Your simple fix is to change you numbers so RPN is 99. :)
     
    John C. Abnet likes this.
  3. _Zeno_

    _Zeno_ Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Don't agree with the customer's logic but it is within their rights to establish that requirement under the generic "CUSTOMER SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS". It's certainly not the worst requirement I've seen.
     

Share This Page