home / skills / robdtaylor / personal-ai-infrastructure / pfmea

Pfmea skill

safe

This skill generates AIAG-VDA compliant PFMEAs with RPN, ratings, and countermeasures for MNMUK processes, integrating with related skills.

npx playbooks add skill robdtaylor/personal-ai-infrastructure --skill pfmea

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (5)

SKILL.md

8.9 KB

---
name: Pfmea
description: Generate AIAG-VDA compliant Process FMEAs with proper Severity/Occurrence/Detection ratings, RPN calculations, and countermeasure recommendations. Covers MNMUK departments (Machine Shop, Damper, LVA, FML). USE WHEN user says 'PFMEA', 'FMEA', 'failure mode', 'risk analysis', 'RPN', 'severity occurrence detection', or 'process risk assessment'. Integrates with AutomotiveManufacturing, ControlPlan, and A3criticalthinking skills.
---

# Process FMEA (PFMEA)

## When to Activate This Skill
- "Create a PFMEA for [process]"
- "What are the failure modes for [operation]?"
- "Calculate RPN for [risk scenario]"
- "Rate severity/occurrence/detection for [failure]"
- "Identify process risks"
- "FMEA analysis for [part/process]"

## AIAG-VDA 7-Step Methodology

### Step 1: Planning and Preparation
- Define scope and boundaries
- Identify team members (cross-functional)
- Gather documentation (process flow, control plan, drawings)
- Review lessons learned from similar processes

### Step 2: Structure Analysis
- Define process steps from process flow diagram
- Create process tree (System > Sub-system > Process Element)
- Identify interfaces between steps
- Link to product characteristics

### Step 3: Function Analysis
- Define function of each process step
- Identify product/process requirements
- Link to customer/engineering specifications
- Document special characteristics (CC/SC)

### Step 4: Failure Analysis
- Identify failure modes (how can step fail to perform function?)
- Determine failure effects (consequences to customer/next operation)
- Identify failure causes (why would failure mode occur?)
- Chain: Cause → Failure Mode → Effect

### Step 5: Risk Analysis
- Rate Severity (S) of effects: 1-10
- Rate Occurrence (O) of causes: 1-10
- Rate Detection (D) of controls: 1-10
- Calculate Action Priority (AP) or RPN

### Step 6: Optimization
- Prioritize high-risk items
- Develop countermeasures (hierarchy: Eliminate > Substitute > Engineer > Admin > Detect)
- Assign responsibility and target dates
- Re-rate after countermeasures

### Step 7: Results Documentation
- Document all analysis
- Track countermeasure completion
- Update Control Plan linkage
- Archive for lessons learned

## Rating Scales (MNMUK Standard)

### Severity (S) - Effect on Customer/Process

| Rating | Criteria | MNMUK Examples |
|--------|----------|----------------|
| 10 | Affects safety without warning | Brake component failure, no containment possible |
| 9 | Affects safety with warning | Safety critical dimension OOS, detectable at assembly |
| 8 | Product inoperable, 100% scrap | Part cannot be reworked, total loss |
| 7 | Product operable but degraded, customer dissatisfied | Performance below spec, customer complaint |
| 6 | Product operable, comfort/convenience affected | Cosmetic defect, minor fit issue |
| 5 | 50% of product may need rework | Significant rework required |
| 4 | Product requires sorting/rework | Sorting operation needed |
| 3 | Minor rework at station | In-station repair possible |
| 2 | Slight inconvenience | Minor adjustment |
| 1 | No effect | No discernible impact |

### Occurrence (O) - Likelihood of Cause

| Rating | Failure Rate | Cpk Equivalent | MNMUK Examples |
|--------|--------------|----------------|----------------|
| 10 | Very high: ≥100/1000 | <0.33 | New process, no controls |
| 9 | High: 50/1000 | ≥0.33 | Known problem process |
| 8 | High: 20/1000 | ≥0.51 | Similar process had failures |
| 7 | Moderately high: 10/1000 | ≥0.67 | Occasional failures observed |
| 6 | Moderate: 2/1000 | ≥0.83 | Infrequent failures |
| 5 | Moderately low: 0.5/1000 | ≥1.00 | Controlled process, some failures |
| 4 | Low: 0.1/1000 | ≥1.17 | Well-controlled process |
| 3 | Very low: 0.01/1000 | ≥1.33 | Capable and controlled |
| 2 | Remote: 0.001/1000 | ≥1.50 | Proven design and controls |
| 1 | Nearly impossible: ≤0.001/1000 | ≥1.67 | Failure eliminated by design |

### Detection (D) - Ability to Detect Before Customer

| Rating | Detection Capability | MNMUK Examples |
|--------|---------------------|----------------|
| 10 | No detection possible | No inspection, no opportunity to detect |
| 9 | Unlikely to detect | Random sampling only, infrequent |
| 8 | Low: Visual inspection by operator | 100% visual check, variable attention |
| 7 | Very low: Double visual inspection | Two operators check |
| 6 | Low: Charting/SPC | Control charts, trend monitoring |
| 5 | Moderate: Attribute gaging | Go/No-go gaging |
| 4 | Moderately high: Variable gaging | Measurement with limit checking |
| 3 | High: Automated in-process test | Automatic measurement, alarm |
| 2 | Very high: Error-proofing | Poka-yoke prevents defect production |
| 1 | Almost certain: Error-proofing prevents cause | Design makes failure impossible |

## Action Priority (AIAG-VDA Approach)

Instead of or in addition to RPN, use Action Priority:

| Priority | Criteria | Action Required |
|----------|----------|-----------------|
| **HIGH** | S=9-10 (any O, D) OR S=7-8 with O≥4 AND D≥4 | Immediate action required |
| **MEDIUM** | S=5-8 with O≥4 OR D≥4 | Action recommended |
| **LOW** | All others | Monitor and document |

## RPN Thresholds (MNMUK Standard)

| RPN Range | Priority | Required Action |
|-----------|----------|-----------------|
| ≥120 | Critical | Immediate countermeasure, cannot ship without action |
| 80-119 | High | Countermeasure required before PPAP |
| 40-79 | Medium | Countermeasure recommended |
| <40 | Low | Monitor, no immediate action |

**Note:** Any Severity ≥8 requires action regardless of RPN.

## Countermeasure Hierarchy

When addressing failure modes, apply controls in this priority order:

1. **Eliminate** - Design out the failure mode entirely
2. **Substitute** - Replace with less hazardous process/material
3. **Engineer** - Install physical safeguards, poka-yoke
4. **Admin** - Procedures, training, work instructions
5. **Detect** - Inspection, testing, monitoring

## Special Characteristics

### Critical Characteristics (CC)
- Safety or regulatory impact
- Marked with shield symbol or (CC)
- Requires enhanced controls
- Mandatory documentation

### Significant Characteristics (SC)
- Fit, function, or durability impact
- Marked with diamond or (SC)
- Requires appropriate controls
- SPC typically required

## Output Format

When generating PFMEA content:

```markdown
# PFMEA: [Part/Process Name]
**Part Number**: [P/N]
**Process**: [Description]
**FMEA Number**: PFMEA-[DEPT]-[SEQ]
**Revision**: [Rev] | **Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Team**: [Names/Roles]

## Process Step: [Step Name]

### Failure Mode 1: [Description]
**Function**: [What the step should do]
**Effect**: [What happens if it fails]
**Cause**: [Why it would fail]

| S | O | D | RPN | AP |
|---|---|---|-----|-----|
| X | X | X | XXX | H/M/L |

**Current Controls**:
- Prevention: [Current prevention measures]
- Detection: [Current detection measures]

**Recommended Actions**:
- [ ] [Action description] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]

**After Action**:
| S | O | D | RPN | AP |
|---|---|---|-----|-----|
| X | X | X | XXX | H/M/L |
```

## Department-Specific Guidance

### Machine Shop
- Common failure modes: Dimensional OOS, surface finish, tool wear
- Focus on: Fixturing, program parameters, tool life management
- Key controls: First piece inspection, SPC, gage R&R

### Damper Assembly
- Common failure modes: Leak, incorrect torque, missing component
- Focus on: Seal integrity, fastener torque, component presence
- Key controls: Leak test, torque verification, poka-yoke

### LVA (Low Volume Assembly)
- Common failure modes: Wrong component, incorrect orientation, damage
- Focus on: Part identification, assembly sequence, handling
- Key controls: Visual verification, traveler documentation

### FML (Final Manufacturing Line)
- Common failure modes: Test failure, labeling error, packaging damage
- Focus on: Final test parameters, traceability, packaging
- Key controls: Automated test, barcode verification, packaging audit

## Integration with Related Skills

### ControlPlan
PFMEA feeds directly into Control Plan:
- High S/O items require enhanced inspection
- Detection controls become Control Plan methods
- Special characteristics flow to Control Plan

**Load:** `read ~/.claude/skills/Controlplan/SKILL.md`

### AutomotiveManufacturing
Work instructions should reflect PFMEA findings:
- High-risk steps highlighted
- Operator controls documented
- Quality checkpoints specified

**Load:** `read ~/.claude/skills/Automotivemanufacturing/SKILL.md`

### A3criticalthinking
When PFMEA reveals issues:
- Use 5 Whys for root cause analysis
- Fishbone diagram for cause identification
- A3 format for countermeasure planning

**Load:** `read ~/.claude/skills/A3criticalthinking/SKILL.md`

## Supplementary Resources

For detailed guidance:
`read ~/.claude/skills/Pfmea/CLAUDE.md`

For templates:
`ls ~/.claude/skills/Pfmea/templates/`

For rating scales:
`read ~/.claude/skills/Pfmea/reference/rating-scales.md`

For common failure modes:
`read ~/.claude/skills/Pfmea/reference/common-failure-modes.md`

Overview

This skill generates AIAG‑VDA compliant Process FMEAs (PFMEAs) for manufacturing processes across Machine Shop, Damper, LVA, and FML departments. It produces Severity/Occurrence/Detection ratings, RPN or Action Priority, and clear countermeasure recommendations tied to owners and dates. Use it to create traceable PFMEA outputs ready to populate Control Plans and work instructions.

How this skill works

The skill guides the user through the AIAG‑VDA 7‑step PFMEA method: planning, structure and function analysis, failure and risk analysis, optimization, and documentation. It applies MNMUK rating scales for S, O, and D, calculates RPN and Action Priority, flags any Severity ≥8, and suggests countermeasures using the Eliminate→Substitute→Engineer→Admin→Detect hierarchy. Outputs include PFMEA entries with current controls, recommended actions, and after‑action re‑ratings ready to link to Control Plan and manufacturing work instructions.

When to use it

When asked: “Create a PFMEA for [process/part]”
To list failure modes for an operation or process step
When calculating RPN or assigning S/O/D ratings
For prioritized countermeasure planning and owner assignment
To generate PFMEA content for Control Plan or A3 follow‑up

Best practices

Define clear scope and cross‑functional team before starting
Use process flow and process tree to structure steps and interfaces
Link functions to product requirements and special characteristics (CC/SC)
Apply MNMUK rating examples to justify S/O/D values and document evidence
Prioritize actions by Action Priority then re‑rate after countermeasures

Example use cases

PFMEA for a turning operation in Machine Shop identifying tool‑wear and dimensional OOS
PFMEA for Damper Assembly assessing seal leak and torque errors with leak test countermeasures
Low Volume Assembly PFMEA to prevent wrong component installation with poka‑yoke proposals
FML PFMEA on final test failure and packaging damage driving barcode verification and packaging audits
Generate PFMEA table rows ready to transfer into the Control Plan and A3 problem reports

FAQ

Do you use RPN or Action Priority?

The skill calculates both. It reports RPN and recommends Action Priority per AIAG‑VDA rules; follow Action Priority for immediate decision making.

How are Severity ≥8 cases handled?

Any Severity ≥8 is flagged as requiring action regardless of RPN. The skill elevates these items to HIGH priority and recommends immediate countermeasures.

Can outputs link to Control Plan and A3 work?

Yes. Recommended controls map to Control Plan methods and countermeasures can be exported into A3 formats for root‑cause and implementation tracking.