1. Hello and Welcome to The Quality Forum Online...Continuing in the spirit of People Helping People !
    Dismiss Notice
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.

What is difference between Review & Reverse PFMEA?

Discussion in 'FMEA - Failure Modes and Effects Analysis' started by Lam Vu, Sep 5, 2018.

  1. Lam Vu

    Lam Vu New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2018
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Hi everyone.
    I'm a staff in a tier2 company. My customer request us operating Review & Reverse PFMEA. They'd explained about that but I think they actually don't understand it completely so I still get confuse and don't know how to make it work.
    Can anyone tell me what is difference between Review & Reverse PFMEA? I mean which is key of them? Thank you so much!!
     
  2. Serious Man

    Serious Man Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2017
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    7
    There have to be a reason to review PFMEA.
    E.g. we review PFMEA in case of customer's claim, to confirm that concern reported by customer, was already determined by us as process failure.

    Regarding to reverse PFMEA, please take a look on following material starting from slide 261.
    This is kind of PFMEA review including some "out-of-office exercise".
     
    judegu and Lam Vu like this.
  3. Lam Vu

    Lam Vu New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2018
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    I've already read it, thank you Serious Man, and I think reverse PFMEA is a kind of Internal audit right? Small company with many production models and process may be will get trouble with this kind of audit, because we don't have much manpower. Anyway, thank you again ^^
     
  4. Serious Man

    Serious Man Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2017
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    7
    I am not an expert, but I see there two steps.
    First step is focused on verification on work station, that all planned failures prevention and detection methods are in place.
    Second part is considering new risks to include in PFMEA.
    Witnessing real process condition is a very good opportunity to determine new risks, before customer would face quality concern related to undetermined process failures.

    In IATF there are two, in my opinion, related requirements - 9.1.1.1 and 10.2.4.
    First one says:
    It is considered as foundation of manufacturing process audits. During reverse PFMEA, team can see how it really looks like and maybe they would decide to change rank to worse one, because some of new error-proofing methods were not implemented as planed, or already implemented at the moment of PFMEA creation were altered with negative impact on their effectiveness or removed at all.

    Second one says:
    PFMEA team has vision of error proofing method, e.g. poka-yoke and based on this vision they rank detection. During reverse PFMEA, team can see how it really looks like and maybe they would decide to change rank to worse one, because implemented method doesn't meet their vision. So maybe error proofing description they've recorded in PFMEA was not detailed enough, to ensure it would be implemented according to their intentions.
     

Share This Page