STANDARD

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

FMECA
(FAILURE MODES THEIR EFFECTS
AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS)
VISA RESPONSABLE(S)
NOM :
SERVICE :
DATE :
SIGNATURE :

Classement prvu : 01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

Responsable du document

Sce

N Tl

F. SCHWARTZ

65810

53133

C. CARUEL

65850

57218

Pilote(s) technique(s)

Date de mise jour :

22/05/00

Normalisation Renault Automobiles

Service 65810
Section Normes et Cahiers des Charges

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

This document is to be considered as a whole, the parts of which must not be separated.
RENAULT 2000.
No duplication permitted without the consent of the issuing department.
No circulation permitted without the consent of RENAULT.

FIRST ISSUE
December 1986

---

REVISIONS
November 2000

- - A Complete revision.
This issue originates from draft NC 1999 0171 / - - B.

REFERENCED DOCUMENTS
Quality Rule

Q00 41 C.

CNOMO Standard

E41.50.530.N.

RENAULT 2000

Page 2/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
CONTENTS

Page
GLOSSARY

1. FIELD OF APPLICATION

2. DEFINITIONS

3. BASIC PRINCIPLE

4. DETAILED PROCEDURE

11

4.1. STEP 1: INITIALIZATION

11

4.1.1. Selecting the subjects to be dealt with

11

4.1.2. Organizing the FMECA study

12

4.2. STEP 2: ANALYSING

13

4.2.1. Preparing the FMECA

13

4.2.2. Identifying potential failures

14

4.3. STEP 3: EVALUATING - DECIDING

17

4.3.1. Evaluation principle

18

4.3.2. Rating degrees

19

4.3.3. Criticality calculation

19

4.3.4. Hierarchy grading

19

4.3.5. Deciding which are the priority corrective actions

20

4.4. STEP 4: FINDING SOLUTIONS

21

4.5. STEP 5: FOLLOW-UP

22

4.6. STEP 6: APPLICATION

23

4.7. STEP 7: VERIFICATION - KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

23

4.7.1. Verification principle

23

4.7.2. Knowledge transfer

25

RENAULT 2000

Page 3/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
CONTENTS (continued)
ANNEX 1 SYNTHESIS SHEET (FORMAT A4)

27

ANNEX 2 CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE PRODUCT FMECA

28

ANNEX 2 (continued) CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE PROCESS
FMECA

29

ANNEX 2 (continued) CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE FLOW
FMECA

30

ANNEX 3 LIST OF BASIC DATA AND FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS TO BE CONDUCTED PER TYPE
OF FMECA

31

ANNEX 4 PRESENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS GRILLE

32

ANNEX 5 RATING SCALES

33

ANNEX 6 RATING SCALES

35

RENAULT 2000

Page 4/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
GLOSSARY

FMECA

Failure Modes, their Effects and Criticality Analysis.

AMPPP3 :
:

Accord de Montage Prototype Produit / Process phase 3.

Product / Process Prototype Assembly Go-Ahead, phase 3

APV

Aprs-Vente.
After-Sales

CdC

Cahier des Charges.

Product Specifications

DDHA

Direction de la Dtection, Hirarchisation et Affectation des incidents clients.

Customer Incident Detection, Hierarchy and Allocation

DLI

Dpartement Logistique Industrielle.

Industrial Logistics Department

DPLI

Direction de la Production et de la Logistique Industrielle.

Industrial Production and Logistics Department

GFE

Groupe Fonction Elmentaire.

Development Team

RPI

Risk Priority Index.

Cases per thousand.

LUQ

Liste Unique Qualit.

Quality Reference List

PDCA

Plan, Do, Check, Act.

PIMOL

Panne Immobilisante.
Off-road Vehicle Breakdown

RO

Ralisation d'Outillage.
Tooling Definition

ROP

Ralisation d'Outillage Programme.

Programme Tooling Definition

SdF

Sret de Fonctionnement.
Operating Dependabiity

Rsultat d'enqute Sofres.

Sofres Survey Result

RENAULT 2000

Page 5/36

RENAULT
1.

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

FIELD OF APPLICATION
Failure Modes, their Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) is a product reliability preventive
analysis method used to determine and correct failures on a system and/or item.
the FMECA is applicable:
-

to the AUTOMOBILE PRODUCT during its development phase at the Engineering Centre,
Production Department and Process Department and whenever the Product or Production
Process is modified.

to the PRODUCTION FACILITIES during the facility design phase.

to physical FLOW and information facilities during the operating mode development phase.

For each stage, Quality rule Q00 41 C: "Vehicle Project Milestones", indicates the intermediary
objectives to be achieved for the various types of FMECA:
-

status of FMECA studies,

results obtained,

knowledge transfer of analyses,

in coherency with the PRODUCT/PROCESS pair development.

In the project context, the FMECA status and the results obtained are determinative items used by the
Quality Department for the purposes of NOTIFICATION and APPROVAL.
It is the responsibility of the Operational Departments and Suppliers to adhere to this standard.

RENAULT 2000

Page 6/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
2.

DEFINITIONS
FMECA
Failure Modes, their Effects and Criticality Analysis is a rigorous and preventive method aimed at
determining, then in evaluating the potential failures on a system and/or item. The investigation
results in the grading of such failures in order to take a decision on what measures should be taken. A
follow-up chart and schedule for the implementation of such corrective actions is defined. Application
of the corrective measures is checked in the field.
Each study is the subject of knowledge transfer to be used as a diagnostic support and for the benefit
of future projects.
PRODUCT FMECA
The object of this analysis is the design and definition of the automobile product, which is examined
during its development stages, prior to Tooling Go-Ahead, to ensure that the technological solution
chosen meets the quantified performance specifications and industrial constraints.
Potential failures have consequences for the motorist and/or his/her environment.
PROCESS FMECA
The object of the analysis is the design of the industrial production process (manufacturing and
control) of the automobile product, which is examined during the various envisaged production
operations: manufacture, control, handling, etc., irrespective of the technology used, in order to
ensure that the industrial process under study will enable the volume production of a product in
accordance with the requirements specified on the drawings.
The improvement may concern the product, the process or both.
Potential failures may have consequences for the motorist and/or his/her environment.
PRODUCTION FACILITY FMECA
The object of the analysis is the production tool, machine, robot, machining assembly, tooling, etc.,
which is examined during its design, to ensure that, during operation, it will satisfy the objectives of
availability, product conformity and safety required in the specifications of the facility.
Potential failures have consequences for the facility user, i.e. the automobile product manufacturer.
NOTE:

The production facility FMECA is conducted in accordance with CNOMO standard

E41.50.530.N. It is not detailed in this standard.

FLOW FMECA
The object of this analysis is the physical flow of the product, its packaging and the flow of information
relative to the operation and utilisation of an installation.
Potential failures have consequences for the Manufacturer and/or Operator and for the Industrial
Logistics Department.

RENAULT 2000

Page 7/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
3.

BASIC PRINCIPLE
1)

THE FMECA CAN BE USED BY ALL TO PROMOTE QUALITY AND RELIABILITY BY

ADOPTING PREVENTIVE MEASURES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
AUTOMOBILE CUSTOMER
In the context of Customer-Supplier relations, we all have a task to accomplish, whether
individually or as a group:
.

To accomplish this task "n", we need to avail of quantified input data emanating from the
Supplier responsible for task "n -1".

As an output, we must supply results conforming to the objective in order to satisfy our
direct Customer, who is then charged with accomplishing task "n+1".

The FMECA is a quality and reliability promotion tool that contributes to the accomplishment of
task "n". By its very implementation, it serves to validate its own designated task or to
optimize such a task before handover to the direct Customer (figure 1).

Added value
F
M
E
C
A

Task n

Task n-1
INPUT

Task n+1
TASK

optimize

Figure 1 - Validating the specific task by working in a preventive manner on potential risks

Each task in this chain of requirements are also examined with a view to satisfying the endCustomer, i.e. the motorist.
FMECA studies are scheduled to ensure they are completed before the key project decision
dates.

RENAULT 2000

Page 8/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
2)

"IMAGINING NEGATIVELY": 3 steps (figure 2)

Step 1:
The design of a product or service is always conducted in a positive manner. A service is
provided to a customer in order to satisfy such customer. This service is then broken down into
technical solutions, components, characteristics to ensure that the whole is operational and
pleasing to the customer.
Step 2:
The FMECA draws on our critical faculties to form the most negative scenario possible: "what
could happen to prevent this service being ensured and to what extent will the Customer be
affected?" We then list the potential causes of failure liable to prevent the service being ensured.
Step 3:
The FMECA procedure is in no way just a simple critical evaluation of the product or process. Its
main advantage is that it focuses on the search for corrective solutions in order to optimize
product and production design in a predictive manner.

Design in positive manner

Imagine failures

Correct potential failures

Positive

Negative

Figure 2
3)

THE EFFICIENCY OF THE FMECA SYSTEM IS BASED ON 3 QUALITIES: COMPETENCE,

CREATIVITY AND RIGOUR
Competence and creativity are cultivated through the exploration of the subject in question
within the framework of a multi-disciplinary working group, the members of which share their
respective experience and skills in order to promote the creativity necessary to determine
potential failures, however unlikely their occurrence.
Rigour is developed by the methodical and full implementation of the whole FMECA procedure
subdivided into 7 steps (see figure 3 below).

RENAULT 2000

Page 9/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

SIGNIFICATION - Scope -

STEPS

Formalise the subject on a synthesis sheet

indicating :

1 - INITIALIZE
- the choice of subject and its limits,
- membership of the group,

- schedule,

WHO

- Coordinator
- Requester
- Decision maker
- Engineering Dept
(RENAULT, Partner or
Supplier)

- result follow-up.

2 - ANALYSE
2
3 -EVALUATE

DECIDE
RESULT
4 - SEARCH
FOR

- Present the FMECA and the functional

analysis of requirement.
- Imagine potential failures and their
consequences for the customer using the
analysis sheet
- Evaluate and grade the potential failures
according to predefined scales.
- Decide to implement action plans for RPIs
that are above the threshold.

Search for corrective solutions. This action is

conducted outside the FMECA group

- Multi-disciplinary group
and coordinator

- Multi-disciplinary group
and coordinator

- Product and/or process

designer

SOLUTIONS

5 - FOLLOW-UPAnalyse and evaluate the corrective solutions

until the RPIs drop below the thresholds

- Multi-disciplinary group
and coordinator

Apply the corrective solutions selected.

This action is conducted outside the FMECA
group on the ground

- Action pilot (GFE,

designer ...) RENAULT
internal or external

Check the efficiency of the measures taken

- Coordinator
- Requester
- Multi-disciplinary group

RESULT
6 -APPLY
6

7 - CHECK
7

Close the FMECA(signature).

KNOWLEDGE
TRANSFER

Transfer knowledge by archiving the study

in a database.

- Coordinator/Requester

RESULT

Figure 3

RENAULT 2000

Page 10/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.

DETAILED PROCEDURE
FMECA implementation consists in methodically following the procedure in 7 steps, an approach
conducive to exhaustively determining what the potential failures are and how they might be
prevented. Each step is described below.
4.1.

STEP 1: INITIALIZATION

Initialization consists in "revealing the problem", then in managing it over time.

This first step is crucial for the ultimate success of the study. It is formalized through the completion
of the synthesis sheet (annex 1).
4.1.1.

Selecting the subjects to be dealt with

Systematic implementation of the FMECA is conducive to validating what has already been
mastered, thereby avoiding unnecessary expenditure for the Company.
On the other hand, wherever there is a hint or certainty of risk, innovations, lack of knowledge or
major stakes for the Company, the FMECA procedure should be deployed and focused on the
priorities.
Exploit and enrich existing FMECAs on similar subjects.
The project manager (vehicle, system, component, production facility, etc.) and the Quality
Manager determine which subjects are at risk once the main general design and production
principles have been defined (figure 4 and annex 2).

Identify all subjects

with potential risks :
recurrent
problem

carryover
item

innovative
item

local
risk

Process feedback
Single Quality List (LUQ)

FMECA according to risk

Operating dependability + FMECA

FMECA

Figure 4 - Subject choice principle

RENAULT 2000

Page 11/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.1.2.

Organizing the FMECA study

The party requesting the study (project manager or task "n" manager), internal or external to
RENAULT and the FMECA coordinator must complete the "synthesis sheet", which serves as a
contract between the requester and the group; it comprises:
-

The type of FMECA (product, process, flow, etc.).

The vehicle, component, scope of the study and key dates: request, tooling definition, quality
milestone, volume production.

The objective (K , S , PIMOL, durability, target non-conformity rate, etc.) and the motive
behind the study (see annex 1).

The name of the requester (subject manager) and of the decision maker (critical choice and
decision maker).

The field of application (product, process references, etc.).

The membership of the group (5 to 6 persons):

.

1 FMECA-trained coordinator.

Participants (Engineering Centre, Process Department, Manufacturing Department, etc.)

skilled on and responsible for the subject (indicate function).

The FMECA schedule in 7 steps according to the project milestone date.

The result indicating the resolution of the potential risks.

The location where the FMECA is archived, while in progress and once completed.

The status of the study according to:

.

the schedule,

the clearance of potential risks (step 5),

the verification of the results (step 7).

It is the responsibility of the requester to manage the FMECA. S/he shall sign the synthesis sheet
in order to close the provisional study.
-

4 key-points: a project-related product and process FMECA is conducted according to the PDCA
cycle. the 4 key-points are scheduled by the FMECA study requester according to the project
milestone dates (figure 5).

RENAULT 2000

Page 12/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
Contract

Tooling

AMPPP3

Volume Production

Figure 5
P

The product and process FMECA subjects are identified (step 1 - initialiser).

Potential failures are analysed and evaluated; RPIs over the threshold are the subject of an
action plan and the curative actions are validated (steps 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6).

The identified risks are cleared for the ROP. The necessary confirmations are performed for
the AMPPP3 (step 7).

A loop is made to bridge the gap between the potential failures cleared during the FMECA
and the proven failures liable to be noticed in after-sales. The objective is to improve the
efficiency of the FMECA process

4.2.

STEP 2: ANALYSING

Analysis consists in investigating the conceivable high-risk points identified as such through
experience. This search is always structured according to a functional analysis.
4.2.1.

Preparing the FMECA

The purpose of this initial phase is to enable the working group to achieve the same level of
knowledge of the subject and to prompt the specialists to discuss the same subject.
The functional analysis comprises (see annex 3):
-

the functional analysis of the requirement in order to list, characterize and grade all service
functions of the system to be studied, together with the life cycle phases. The functional
analysis of the requirement (stated in the functional specifications) is an FMECA prerequisite.
The FMECA group extracts the items necessary for the estimated risk study. These items are
adjoined with the FMECA study.

technical functional analysis used to explain the operational aspect of the envisaged solution,
its organisation for all life cycle phases studied. This analysis is displayed in the form of block
diagrams. The operating conditions, qualified and quantified, are listed. The block diagram is a
product of the design phase or is drawn up by the FMECA group.

the description of the industrial process envisaged for the volume manufacture of the
product. The industrial process is defined in a manufacturing and control plan. The technical
sheets and the description of the operating mode are used as input data. These data are
displayed on a process diagram (or synoptic diagram, or flow chart). The input and output
conditions (Customer-Supplier relation) are established.

The implementation of a functional analysis is mandatory to enable the members of the group to avail
of an identical vision of the subject and reveal the exhaustive list of effects, modes, causes of
potential failures together with the envisaged detection methods.
RENAULT 2000

Page 13/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.2.2.

Identifying potential failures

The purpose of this second phase is to highlight the potential failures, whether conceivable or known,
on the system under study. The failures are indicated in the form of qualitative and quantitative
criteria as follows:
Potential failure mode:
The potential failure mode: this is the manner in which the system stop operating or operate
abnormally.

Potential failure modes are apprehended in the following manner:

-

The operation no longer exists.

The operation no longer stops.

The operation is disturbed (totally, partially over time).

The operation is untimely.

The operation ...

Notes:
the potential failure mode is expressed in physical terms:
-

The potential failure mode is the product of the operating conditions (block diagram included).

The potential failure mode shall be completed, whenever possible, by quantified criteria.

Potential cause of failure:

The potential cause of failure is an initial anomaly liable to prompt the potential failure mode.

Failure mode

Manner in which the system

does not function

RENAULT 2000

Failure CAUSE
initial cause
- causal chain
- ........
- ........

Page 14/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
Notes:
-

during the product FMECA:

.

for each potential failure mode, seek the product characteristic or characteristics at the
source of the potential failure (explore: the material, geometry, dimensioning, etc.).

To imagine the causes, systematically explore all bodies and contacts in the block diagram).

For a potential failure mode, imagine 5 to 7 potential causes.

during the process FMECA:

.

Imagine the product-cause (characteristic of non-conforming product) liable to generate the

potential failure mode. Then search for the causal chain relative to the process causes, i.e.
"which process parameters are liable to prompt the product-cause".

For a product-cause, imagine 5 to 7 process-causes.

Effect of potential failure:

During the product and process FMECA:
The effect of the potential failure is defined by 2 parameters:
-

on the one hand, it is relative to a disturbed service function,

on the other, it represents dissatisfaction of the automobile customer.

It is the potential failure mode that creates the disturbed function.

EFFECT of potential failure

Consequence for the
customer
Dissatisfaction of
automobile customer

RENAULT 2000

Service function disturbed

Potential failure
mode

Service function disturbed: Manner in which the system

does not operate
.
totally
.
partially
.
...

Page 15/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
Notes:
-

Disturbed functions are expressed according to the potential failure mode and the functional
analysis of the requirement.

To exhaust all possibilities, imagine:

there is no service function,

there is a loss of service function,

there is untimely activation of the service function,

the service function is downgraded (with time, mileage, etc.),

the service function is poorly interpreted,

...

For the product and process FMECA, the consequences for the automobile Customer are
expressed according to the table in annex 5.

For the flow FMECA, the Customers are the manufacturer and the central production departments
(DLI) (see annex 6).
Detection:
Detection is the system envisaged to prevent the potential failure cause (and/or potential failure
mode), that has supposedly occurred, from reaching the Customer.
During the product and process, the relevant Customer is Customer (n + 1).
During the flow FMECA, the Customers are the manufacturer and the Industrial Logistics Department.

Potential failure MODE

Manner in which the
system does not operate

Potential failure CAUSE

= Initial cause:
causal chain
.......
.......

DETECTION
What has been envisaged to
prevent the initial failure
cause (and/or potential mode)
from reaching Customer
Client n + 1.

Notes:
-

Under the column "detection", enter the envisaged detections (and not those to be anticipated).

Give priority to "theoretical" detections (calculations, chains of dimensions, digital simulations

and reinstallations, reviews, etc.) as opposed to "physical" detections (prototypes, test benches,
vehicle tests, manufacturing quality control, non-assemblability, etc.).

Indicate, as much as possible, the envisaged detections (qualify and quantify the parameters).

During the product and process FMECA, for economic reasons, the relevant Customer
(Customer n + 1) is the customer who comes immediately after the analysed activity.

RENAULT 2000

Page 16/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
Analysis grille:
This is used to record:
-

the references of the subject, the names of the analysts, the dates of analysis, evaluation and
follow-up.

The aspects of the subject to be dealt with.

The list of potential failures and the detections envisaged.

NOTE:

The grille is on paper format (A3) or electronic format (see annex 4).

Synthesis

Client
satisfait

Design = "Create positively"

Service to
be ensured:
Functions

Technical
solution
Operation

Service
not endured

Solution malfunction

Customer
dissatisfied

Potential failure mode

EFFET potentiel de dfaillance

Components :
Characteristics
(to be specified
to be manufactured
Components :
Characteristics
inadapted
or not in conformity
Potential failure
cause

FMECA = "Imagine negatively"

4.3.

STEP 3: EVALUATING - DECIDING

Evaluation consists in quantifying the potential failures and the envisaged detection in order to assist
the requester, decision maker and those participating in the study, to define the high-priority
corrective actions.
Evaluation is performed once the whole analysis is complete. A scale establishes the limits defining
which risk is acceptable and which is not.

RENAULT 2000

Page 17/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.3.1.

Evaluation principle

The quantification is based on the chain of events leading to the perception of a failure by the
Customer and to the consequences for such customer (see figure 5).
For a potential failure cause to effectively bring about a given potential failure mode at the end
Customer's, 3 conditions must be met:
1.

The potential failure cause is assumed to be present. At this event, a probability P1 may be
assigned.

2.

If the potential failure cause is assumed to be present, it must lead to the potential failure mode
considered. The probability assigned to this event is a conditional probability indicated as P2/1.

3.

If the potential failure cause-mode is assumed to be present, to reach Customer n + 1, it must

pass the envisaged detections. The probability of non-detection is called P3.
If P is the probability of reaching the end Customer, then: P = P1 x P2/1 x P3

P1

CAUSE

P2/1

MODE

DETECTION

P3
EFFECT
(end customer)

CUSTOMER
n+1

Figure 5 - Chain of events

RENAULT 2000

Page 18/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.3.2.

Rating degrees

The rating is based on 3 degrees and on pre-established scales, i.e.

-

Gravity degree G: this is the evaluation of the effect of each potential failure as perceived by
the end-customer.

Frequency degree F: is defined according to a pre-established scale and corresponds to the

product of P1 x P2/1. In assigning the frequency degree, these 2 probabilities should be taken
into account.

Non-detection degree D: is defined according to a pre-established scale and corresponds to

P3.

Scales:
-

product and process FMECA: the rating varies from 1 to 10 (annex 5).

flux FMECA: the rating varies from 1 to 4 for F and D and from 1 to 5 pour G (annex 6).

4.3.3.

Criticality calculation

With each association of "potential failure effect, potential failure mode, potential failure cause and
detection", calculate the product of the 3 degrees: gravity, frequency, non-detection.
The result is the Risk Priority Index, otherwise known as criticality index.
RPI = G x F x D.
The evaluation is estimated by the members of the group according to databases and, by default,
their knowledge and experience.
Probabilities P1, P2/1, P3, the rating degrees and the RPI are recorded and preserved on analysis
sheets.
4.3.4.

Hierarchy grading

To obtain an overall image of the risk on the system studied, the RPIs are illustrated in the form of a
histogram.
This illustration facilitates the monitoring of improvements later on.
Product and process FMECA

Flow FMECA
Gravity G

GRAVITY
G

14

17
8 et 9

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
5

IPR

10
1

10

50

100

1000 RPI

80

THSH THSH THSH

5
Thresh

16
Thresh

Figure 6
RENAULT 2000

Page 19/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.3.5.

Deciding which are the priority corrective actions

The purpose of this decision is to implement all resources in order to:

-

attain the quality - reliability - durability objective (refer to the FMECA initialization sheet),

optimize the quality achievement cost.

Decision in terms of objective:

Corrective actions are undertaken for all RPIs that overstep a previously fixed limit.

FMECA TYPE

CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE UNDERTAKEN

FOR:

Product and process

Flow

RPI > 10

if G = 10

RPI > 50

if G = 8 and 9

RPI 100

if G = 1 to 7

RPI > 5

if G = 5

RPI > 16

if G = 1 to 4

Important:
It is the responsibility of the FMECA requester to define the thresholds for his/her own study by
reference to:
-

the standard,

quality - reliability - durability objectives of the project (without such, the standard is applied).

A reduction in the RPI may be obtained by focusing on the F D product factors.

FMECA

PROBABILITY
DEGREE

product and process

flow

It is not possible act directly on the

It is not possible to act directly on
Customer
the consequences for the automobile
(manufacturer and central production
Customer
department)

FOCUS ON THE FREQUENCY:

F

P1

Reduce failure causes (act on the product definition and/or industrial

process).

P2/1

Reinforce product robustness.

P1 and
P2/1

Combine the 2 actions.

RENAULT 2000

P3

Improve or implement a detection (watch out for cost !).

Page 20/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
Optimizing quality achievement costs:
At this stage of the FMECA, the cost objective is handled in 2 ways:
-

Reduce the costs of excess quality.

Between 2 solutions with the same level of estimated quality, opt for the least costly by taking
into account expenditure and processing.

For all corrective actions decided upon, draw up a formalized plan on the analysis sheet:
-

Enter the measures recommended to reduce the RPI (focus on P1 and/or P2/1 and/or P3).

Enter the name of the action manager (department) and the date of presentation of the proposed
corrective solution.

Important point:
The revaluation of the RPI should not be performed at this stage but at step 5.
Action plan
Recommended measure

4.4.

Manager
Department
Lead-time

STEP 4: FINDING SOLUTIONS

The search for corrective solutions is usually conducted outside the FMECA group.
The corrective solutions should be defined and formalized (modified drawing, manufacturing process
modified, adjoining test result, etc.) before being submitted to the FMECA group at step 5.
NOTE:

The FMECA requester shall authorize and support the search for corrective solutions.

RENAULT 2000

Page 21/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.5.

STEP 5: FOLLOW-UP

Follow-up consists in analysing and evaluation, as above ( 4.2. and 4.3.), the corrective solutions
proposed (figure 6).

Search
for corrective
solutions
step 4

Follow-up date

Present corrective solutions

Analyse potential failures
(complete or review analysis table)

Evaluate new items

Eliminate obsolete probabilities and degrees
and add new degrees and probabilities

Adjust the indicators

RPI

> threshold

< threshold
Step 6
Figure 6 - Procedure
This potential failure correction stage is continued until all RPIs at risk drop below the established
thresholds (figure 7).
RPI
number
>
threshold

calender
initial
status

check 1 check n milestone

date
Figure 7 - Resolution curve

IMPORTANT:
The follow-up of corrective actions is crucial for the success of this analysis tool.
It is the responsibility of the study requester to ensure that the FMECA advances through the progress
schedule and that the risks are cleared.

RENAULT 2000

Page 22/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.6.

STEP 6: APPLICATION

The corrective solutions, validated during follow-up, are implemented.

Examples:
specification of a new technical solution,

implementation of the definition modification,

validation of a calculation result, simulation,

validation of a test result,

modification of a manufacturing plan, procedure, tooling, etc.,

specification of a provisional surveillance plan,

modification of operating and processing modes,

...

C
C

Before
Highlighting
of potential failures

F M E

C A

and after correction

Application of corrective measures
and development of a product
in conformity with expectations
Figure 8

4.7.

STEP 7: VERIFICATION - KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

4.7.1.

Verification principle

Verification serves to achieve the objectives defined upon drawing up the "synthesis sheet".
It is conducted in two stages:
1 - At the milestone date, to ensure that the corrective actions are in place and effective.
2 - During volume production, to estimate the efficiency of the FMECA study with respect to
proven failures during manufacture and in after-sales.

RENAULT 2000

Page 23/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT
4.7.1.1.

Milestone date verification

Depending on the results, a decision is taken on the subsequent measures to be taken on the project
in question (figure 9).

CHECK
step 7

EFFICIENT
SOLUTION

no

RESULT
NOT TRANSMITABLE
TO CUSTOMER n + 1
RESULT
TRANSMITABLE
TO CUSTOMER n + 1

ACTION
PLAN

Projrct continuation

Figure 9 - Decision making

The members of the FMECA group, on the basis of the development file:
-

formally check that the corrective solutions are in place,

confirm by measurement, whenever possible, the hypotheses selected for the predicted
evaluation.

For example: implementation of facility capability test to determine the real P1 level, verification of
the accuracy of a chain of dimensions and related calculations, verification of the throughput time,
work in process, etc.).
NOTE:

The FMECA is the property of the group, each member of which shall respect the
undertakings and each modification to the FMECA file shall be the subject of concerted
consultation.

RENAULT 2000

Page 24/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

The verification is conducted before the project decision milestone date, or, before the date of
transfer of task "n" to the internal Customer(n + 1).
The verification result is co-signed in a result note adjoined to the FMECA file. It constitutes a Quality
Assurance File item.
The study requester decides on the termination of the FMECA by signing the synthesis sheet.
4.7.1.2.
-

Verification during volume production

During manufacture: the FMECA file is used to define part of the process audit reference system.
On the one hand, it is used to check the continuity of corrective actions and, on the other, the
efficiency of the FMECA study by comparing the potential failures with the real failures in the
process.

During after-sales: by comparing the proven failures in after-sales (DDHA list) and the potential
failures as imagined during the FMECA study, it is possible to judge the efficiency of the study.
For a system subject to an FMECA study, during volume production, there should be no failure
beyond the company quality - reliability objectives (as a priority, check that G = 8, 9 and 10).
Otherwise, it is necessary to seek the cause of the FMECA non-efficiency and to remedy such,
for example by:
.

the further training of the coordinator,

optimize the content of the FMECA standard,

make the Quality Assurance acknowledgement indicators more stringent.

4.7.2.

Knowledge transfer

The content of the FMECA is a written memory for the Company:

-

to be used in future projects (as such or as a complement),

during the process audit at the operating phase,

upon changes to the product or process (phase II, production centre demultiplication, etc.),

in the event of a dispute between the Customer and Supplier, or for legal purposes.

RENAULT 2000

Page 25/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

Accordingly, a file shall be compiled and archived in paper or electronic form, comprising:

FMECA

The synthesis sheet.

product

process

flow

The information on the subject under study and the

modifications:
-

specification or its reference,

drawings, diagrams or their references,

manufacturing plan or its reference,

operating and processing modes.

The functional analysis:

-

function investigation,

block diagram,

process chart,

flowchart.

X
X

The analysis, evaluation and corrective action sheets.

The result notes.

RENAULT 2000

Page 26/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 1
SYNTHESIS SHEET (FORMAT A4)
Product FMECA
Process FMECA

FMECA SYNTHESIS SHEET

Other FMECA:
Vehicle:

Date of request:

Component:

Milestone date:
Volume production date:

Scope:
Objectives of the study:

Causes of the study:

REQUESTER: M.

Dept.

DECISION MAKER: M.

Dept

Limits of study:

PARTICIPANTS: Permanent
MM.

Temporary
Dept. and function

MM.

Dept. and function

COORDINATOR: M.
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G

Weeks
Forecast
Finished
Legend

Meeting: R

Follow-up: S

Verification: V

steps 2 and 3

step 5

step 7

Initial
B
I
L
A
N

Dept.

Date:
TOTAL
G = 10,
Nbr
RPI > 10
G = 8 and 9,
of RPI RPI > 50
G de 1 to 7,
RPI 100

Follow-up

Milestone date: J

Nbre d'IPR seuil

dates
initial

suivi

suivi

jalon

Archival location:
Decision at end of study: potential risks have been cleared.

Date:
Signature of requester:

RENAULT 2000

Page 27/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 2
CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE PRODUCT FMECA

Systme system
complexe
: botier papillon
motoris,
-- Complex
: motor-driven
throttle
unit,
sige
mmoire,
memory
seat, ... ...
Multitechnologique
: prtentionneur :
-- Multi-technology:
pretensioner
mcanique
+ lectronnique
+ ...
(mechanical
+electronic + ...)
Complexit
Product
du
produit :
complexity

- Simple system : door closing mechanism, ...

- Simplified technology: plastic injection and metallic
insert, ...
- Mono-technology : stamping, painting, ...

Carryover
known failure.
Different
environment
Reconduit without
sans dfaillance
connue.
Environnement
or
ouoperating
conditionsconditions.
d'utilisation diffrents.
Carryover
greater
than objective
Reconduit with
avecfailures
dfaillances
suprieures
l'objectif
or
unknown.
ou failures
dfaillances
inconnues.
Productou
or
Produit
technical
solution
solution :
technique

New
constraint
Contrainte
or
carryover
nouvelle
ou
reconduite :

Concepteur
Product
dudesigner
produit :

Modified

Operting dependability study

then product FMECA
on functions or subsystems
with serious undesirable
incident

Product FMECA

Product FMECA
on product compatibility with
new data
Use feedback (LUQ)
and/or product FMECA
Product FMECA
relative to modifications

New

Operating dependability
then product FMECA

Innovative (keyless vehicle)

Operating dependability
then product FMECA

Regulations

Product FMECA

Safety

Product FMECA

New supplier or supplier

with partial experience of product

Product FMECA

Multi-disciplinary suppliers

List of proven failures (after-sailes) and or

quality (LUQ)

Operating dependability
then product FMECA
Process feedback

Feedback
Existing product FMECA

RENAULT 2000

To be confirmed or completed
for product carryover

Page 28/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 2 (continued)
CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE PROCESS FMECA

- Multi-technology process : stamping +

bodywork + painting + fitting, ...
Process
complexity
- Process with simplistic technology :
assembly, welding, ...
- Full part development process

Carryover without known failure. Different environment

or operating conditions.
Carryover with failures greater than objective
or unknown failures.
Process or
technical
solution

Process
designer

Modified

RENAULT 2000

Process FMECA

Process FMECA on
product compatibility with
new data
Use feedback (quality)
and/or process FMECA
process FMECA relative
to modifications

New

Operating dependability then

process FMECA

Innovative (laser welding)

Operating dependability then

process FMECA

New supplier or supplier

with partial experience of process
Multi-technology suppliers

Feedback

Operating dependability
then process FMECA on
functions or subsystems subject
to serious undesirable
event

Existing process FMECA

Process FMECA

Operating dependability then

process FMECA

To be confirmed or completed
for carryover processes

Page 29/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 2 (continued)
CHOOSING THE SUBJECTS TO BE DEALT WITH FOR THE FLOW FMECA

CONDITION

F
L
U
X

CONDUCTING A FLOW
PERFORMANCES (volume to
FMECA
be produced, production
sequence,
product conformity)
Decision
Objective
Known and on target

NO

Unknown

YES

Improve the
envisaged operating
or processing mode.

New operating or processing

mode

YES

Validate the
envisaged operating
or processing mode.

Modified mode

YES

Analyse the
modified part.

Mode with risks of a production

blockage

YES

Analyse the potential

risk part.

Carryover of an existing
operating or processing mode
(for a vehicle, future
component or new installation)

RENAULT 2000

Page 30/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 3
LIST OF BASIC DATA AND FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
TO BE CONDUCTED PER TYPE OF FMECA

INPUT DATA

FMECA

TYPE OF ANALYSIS TO BE
USED
PRODUCT

PROCESS

YES

YES

YES

YES

Functional analysis of
requirements (utilisation function,
Performance or
adaptation function, estimation,
functional specifications
constraint function and value
criteria)
Drawings of systems
studied
Plans:
-manufacturing
- control
- ...
with references
Operating and
processing mode

Functional analysis of design

(block diagram)
Process diagram (or
manufacturing and control
flowchart)

Functional analysis of flow

FLOW

YES

YES

and
Use existing flow diagram or if
non-existent plot one

YES

There shall be as many block diagrams as there are different life cycle phases for the subject
studied.
As a rule, one or two block diagrams generally suffice to determine the product operation.

RENAULT 2000

Page 31/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 4
PRESENTATION OF THE ANALYSIS GRILLE
Product FMECA, process FMECA and flow FMECA (format A3)

Failure Modes, their Effects and Criticality Analysis

Component ..........

Vehicle ..........

FMECA

Dates

Potential failure

and/or
process

14
3

References:
Function

Analysts:

Effect
Customer
consequence

Disturbed
function

Action plan

Mode

Cause

(P2/1)

(P1)

10

Detection G F D

I
P RecommR ended

Mngr

measures

Time

(P3)

11

12

13
14

14

Result
Measure
taken

15

16

Legend:
1:

Product designation.

2:

Specify: product, process or flow FMECA.

3:

Name of FMECA participants and coordinator.

4:

Dates of document origin and modifications.

5:

Page No..

6:

No. used as a line marker for each potential

failure cause.

7:

Functions studied (product) or manufacturing

operation descriptions
(process), flow management points.

8:

Disturbed function and consequences for the

customer.

11: Indicate the provisions taken to prevent the

cause (and/or mode) that has supposedly
occurred, to reach customer n+1.
Also indicate in this column, the probability
value P 3.
12: Calculate the level of criticality (RPI) by
reference to the scales:
G: gravity degree according to gravity scale.
F: frequency degree according to scale and
probability product P1 x P2/1.
D: non-detection degree according to
probability degree P3
RPI = G x F x D

13: Indicate the measures envisaged to reduce the

RPI (adjust P1 and/or P2/1 and/or P3).
The potential failure mode indicates the manner
in which the system does not operate.
14: Name of action manager and time to present
Also enter in this column the probability value: P
proposed corrective solution.
2/1.
15: Record the corrective measure presented upon
10: The potential cause of failure relative to the
analysis and evaluation (stage 5).
product is the initial anomaly that generated the
potential failure mode. The causal chain, is the 16: Calculate the new RPI after analysis and
evaluation of the corrective solution proposed.
string of events that preceded the appearance of
the cause-product.
Also enter in this column, the probability value:
P 1.

9:

RENAULT 2000

Page 32/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 5
RATING SCALES

Product and Process FMECA - Gravity degree(G)

Consequences for the motorist

Service function disturbed

The customer is not capable of detecting this

potential failure.

The minimal nature of the disturbed service

function does not cause any perceptible effect
with regard to the performance of the vehicle
or its equipment.

2-3

The potential failure constitutes a slight

inconvenience for the customer.

The minimal nature of the disturbed service

function does not cause and notable
interference with the performance of the
vehicle or its equipment.

4-5

The potential failure upsets or disturbs the.

The disturbed service function, with preincident signs, causes a slight degradation to
the performance of the vehicle or its
equipment

6-7

The potential failure displeases the customer.

Repair costs are moderate.

The disturbed service function, without any

pre-incident signs, causes notable degradation
to the performance of the vehicle or its
equipment.

The potential failure greatly annoys the

customer. Repair costs are higher.

The disturbed service function, with or without

pre-incident signs, causes the loss of a
function, without necessarily putting the
vehicle off the road.

The potential failure is a major grievance for

the customer: off-the-road breakdown.

The disturbed causes a vehicle off-road

breakdown.

10

The disturbed function causes a potential failure relative to safety or a failure out-ofconformity with applicable regulations.

Notes:
-

If in doubt when choosing between 2 degrees, the FMECA group will always opt for the higher
degree.

G = 10 is exclusively reserved to potential failures with an impact on safety or regulations.

G = 9 is exclusively reserved to potential failures causing a vehicle off-road breakdown (ex:

battery failure, etc).

G = 8 is reserved for potential failures causing high repair costs.

RENAULT 2000

Page 33/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 5 (continued)
RATING SCALES (continued)

Scales used in the product and process FMECA

PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE
P1 x P2/1

PROBABILITY OF REACHING
CUSTOMER N+1: P3

to

1%

1/10 000

1%

to

4%

to

3/10 000

4%

to

9%

3/10 000

to

1/1 000

9%

to

16 %

1/1 000

to

3/1 000

16 %

to

25 %

3/1 000

to

1/100

25 %

to

36 %

1/100

to

3/100

36 %

to

49 %

3/100

to

10/100

49 %

to

64 %

10/100

to

30/100

64 %

to

81 %

10

30/100

to

100 %

10

81 %

to

100 %

to 3/100 000

3/100 000 to

1/10 000

Note:
During the product FMECA, it is sometimes more difficult to estimate P1 and P3, in which case the
designer may use the qualitative scale below:

Qualitative scales that can be used during the product FMECA

EVALUATION CRITERIA

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Characteristics and solutions already

upgraded, same environment and same
utilisation.

Validation on vehicle (5 x 150 000 km) and

endurance test followed by a component
analysis.

Characteristics and solutions already

upgraded, however environment and
utilisation different.

Test on bench and/or vehicle.

Characteristic defined on drawing, however

reliability not proven.

Chains of dimensions and calculations,

digital simulation, dimensioning calculations,
mock-up, ...

A volume production reference exists,

however it is poorly defined or not known.

Reinstallation (at nominal, digital), drawing

review, ...

10

Characteristic not defined on drawing, or not

known or interpretable.

10

Without detection or what is envisaged is

inefficient.

RENAULT 2000

Page 34/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 6
RATING SCALES

Flow FMECA
Gravity degree (G)

Consequences for users

Product

et/ou

In conformity

Volume

Order

et/ou

Without
consequence

In conformity

In conformity

Inconvenienced

Non conforming rework

on line

Small loss of volume (1)

Unhappy

Non conforming rework

off line

Medium loss of volume (1) Order moderately

disturbed (vehicle cycling
indicator(1))

Very unhappy

The non-conformity
reaches the internal
customer

High loss of volume (1)

Catastrophic

The non-conformity may

reach the automobile
customer

Order slightly disturbed

(vehicle cycling indicator
(1))

Order highly disturbed

(vehicle cycling
indicator(1))

Production stoppage

(1) The % of volume loss and cycling are defined at the beginning of the FMECA in conjunction with
the manufacturer and the Central Production Department (DPLI).

Frequency degree (F)

Occurrence probability (P1 x P2/1)

Note: in the absence of P1 and P2/1, occurrence
is indicated in days.

RENAULT 2000

Less than once a month

Once a month
once from [6 days to 20 days]

Once a week
Once from [2 days to 5 days]

Once or n times a day

Page 35/36

01 - 33 - 200 / - - A

RENAULT

ANNEX 6 (continued)
RATING SCALES (continued)

Flow FMECA - Non-detection degree (D)

Probability P3 that the cause or mode will reach Customer n+1

Practical measure

D
P3

Flow level
measure

Alert

Response

Measure

Detection
efficient P3 in
direction of 0

YES

YES

YES

YES

Moderately
efficient

YES

YES

YES

NO

YES

YES

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

RENAULT 2000

Slightly
efficient
P3 in direction
of 1
detection is
inefficient or
without
detection

Page 36/36