1、_ SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising there
2、from, is the sole responsibility of the user.” SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be revised, reaffirmed, stabilized, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions. Copyright 2013 SAE International All rights reserved. No part of this p
3、ublication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) Tel: +1 724-776-497
4、0 (outside USA) Fax: 724-776-0790 Email: CustomerServicesae.org SAE WEB ADDRESS: http:/www.sae.org SAE values your input. To provide feedback on this Technical Report, please visit http:/www.sae.org/technical/standards/J2886_201303 SURFACE VEHICLE RECOMMENDED PRACTICE J2886 MAR2013 Issued 2013-03 De
5、sign Review Based on Failure Modes (DRBFM) RATIONALE Design Review Based on Failure Modes (DRBFM) has been adopted by both automotive and non-automotive companies. There is a growing demand for DRBFM information since these companies expect their global supply base to utilize the process as well. As
6、 with FMEA, companies tend to use slight variations of the process which can cause complexity for suppliers that support multiple companies. Development of a recommended practice (SAE J2886) has been supported by users of DRBFM from both manufactures and suppliers. SAE J2886 Design Review Based on F
7、ailure Modes (DRBFM) Recommended Practice will provide a common approach to the implementation of the methodology. FOREWORD There are many approaches to Quality Improvement. Problem detection, root cause analysis, countermeasure development, and recurrence prevention are all necessary activities to
8、quickly address product concerns in the market. However to achieve the highest levels of quality it is certainly best to avoid market concerns altogether. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a well-established tool to avoid potential problems at the planning stages before the design, tooling
9、, and manufacturing processes are finalized. In its earliest form SAE Aerospace published the Recommended Practice titled “Fault/Failure Analysis Procedure” in 1967 (ARP926). Eventually automobile manufacturers began to adopt similar methods which evolved into the SAE Surface Vehicle Standard J1739
10、Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Design (Design FMEA) and Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Manufacturing and Assembly Processes (Process FMEA). The FMEA is a comprehensive tool meant to identify pockets of risk prior to product release. Its only limitation is that it is e
11、ffective for mitigating risks with single cause and effect relationships. The FMEA process attempts to identify these risks by reviewing the entire product prior to release. The DRBFM focuses on a few risks but to a great depth of detail Design Review Based on Failure Modes (DRBFM) is a Quick Design
12、 Review tool meant to complement FMEA by applying some of the same principles. For efficiency, DRBFM focuses on engineering changes once a baseline design has been established. A cross-functional team looks at how the changes could potentially diminish the products function. Follow up actions are id
13、entified to ensure the potential concerns are prevented (guilty until proven innocent). The foundation of DRBFM can be found in the book (Toyota Style Mizenboushi (Preventative Measures) Method GD3, How to Prevent a Problem Before It Occurs, JUSE Press, 2002), the SAE white paper (JSAE 20037158 SAE
14、2003-01-2877 Reliability Problem Prevention Method for Automotive Components Development of GD3 Activity and DRBFM (Design Review Based on Failure Modes) and the SAE white paper QUICK DR Application on Puddle Light System. Additional information on DRBFM and DRBTR can be found in the SAE Ebook, Desi
15、gn Review Based on Failure Modes (DRBFM) and Design Review Based on Test Results (DRBTR) Process Guidebook. SAE J2886 Issued MAR2013 Page 2 of 25 The essential elements of this DRBFM Recommended Practice are formed by information within the reference documents and industry usage and knowledge. DRBFM
16、 is a creative, collaborative, and interactive approach. To be successful an open, inquisitive, and challenging mindset is a prerequisite. In many cases implementation of this approach requires an organizational cultural change that can only happen with strong management buy-in and over sight. TABLE
17、 OF CONTENTS 1. SCOPE 3 1.1 Purpose . 3 2. REFERENCES 3 2.1 Applicable Publications . 3 2.2 Related Publications 4 3. DEFINITIONS . 4 4. DRBFM PARTICIPATION . 5 4.1 Management . 5 4.2 Engineers 5 4.3 DRBFM Roles . 5 4.4 When to do DRBFM: . 6 5. DRBFM PROCESS . 6 5.1 Step One: Preparation . 6 5.2 Ste
18、p Two: Change Point FMEA 8 5.3 Step Three: Design Review . 11 5.4 Step Four: Action Results and Feedback 14 6. DRBFM CONSISTENCY. 15 6.1 DRBFM Review and Audit . 15 7. NOTES 15 7.1 Marginal Indicia . 15 APPENDIX A CHANGE POINT AWARENESS WORKSHEET 16 APPENDIX B DRBFM PROCESS MAP 17 APPENDIX C RISK AS
19、SESSMENT AND PLANNING 18 APPENDIX D DEFINTION OF FUNCTIONS, CHANGE POINTS AND INTERFACES (EXAMPLES) . 19 APPENDIX E ADVP document why the observation is not an issue, document the observation is an issue and will be addressed in a specified company format, or document an action to explore the observ
20、ation further. 3.6 COUNTERMEASURES A defensive action that is done in order to deal with a potential risk such as a defined cause of a failure mode or concern in DRBFM. A countermeasure is an action taken to prevent an undesirable outcome to the customer. The countermeasure explains why a design fea
21、ture, material property, interface clearance, etc. will ensure the specific failure will not be experienced by the customer. 4. DRBFM PARTICIPATION 4.1 Management Management is responsible for establishing a focus on continuous improvement, systems engineering, and promote an engineering mind set to
22、 establish a clear understanding of expected DRBFM proficiency. Management supports engineers by providing them guidance, support in the DRBFM process, and ensuring tasks are completed at the proper time. Management should establish DRBFM policies to create a culture of making decisions based on a f
23、oundation of “Engineering Knowledge”. 4.2 Engineers Engineers are responsible to ensure the product and/or process design meets requirements (including specifications and performance limits) and customer expectations. DRBFM is a tool engineers can use in their daily activity to identify and resolve
24、concerns for product or process changes early in the development process. 4.3 DRBFM Roles In general, there are key roles designated to ensure the success of the “Good Discussion” using DRBFM. a. DRBFM Expert has knowledge and experience conducting and reviewing DRBFM reports. The DRBFM Expert inter
25、faces with management to establish best practices in the company and has the ability to train DRBFM Professionals and coach individual teams as needed. b. DRBFM Professional is trained by a DRBFM Expert, who leads teams and promotes DRBFM discussion and methodology on the right products at the right
26、 time. The Professional should have at least a basic knowledge of the product or process. The Professional is responsible for the adequate and thorough completion of the DRBFM. DRBFM does not promote this role as an additional person within the process but the expectation each engineer (and manager)
27、 will gain the necessary DRBFM knowledge and proficiency to be considered a DRBFM Professional. c. DRBFM Participant, also known as a team member, contributes to the Design Review discussion as a cross-functional representative of various impacted disciplines, including but not limited to: service,
28、manufacturing, supplier engineering and manufacturing, design engineering of interfacing sub-systems, peer engineers, and materials engineering. d. DRBFM “Reviewer” is the person (or change review board) who decides the direction (makes decisions and removes roadblocks) on the implementation of a ch
29、ange. The reviewer is responsible for the quality and reliability of the product. The reviewer utilizes the expertise of the team and ensures the team has considered and addressed all interfaces and interactions. SAE J2886 Issued MAR2013 Page 6 of 25 4.4 When to do DRBFM: A fundamental principle for
30、 reliability is to avoid changing the conditions of a Good Design (a field-proven design and field-proven operating environment); however design modifications occur from the actual development stage through product retirement. When these “change points” are defined, engineers need to discover proble
31、ms resulting from the change points including those that are intentional (physical part changes) and incidental (changes to surrounding environment such as load, vibration, heat sources, etc. even if the part design does not change). Determination of when DRBFM should be done (for a design, requirem
32、ents or process change) is based on many factors (Appendix A - Change Point Awareness Sheet): g120 Customer required g120 Internal company criteria such as: o If the change could impact safety, government compliance or regulations, or impact of the functionality of the part. o If the change complexi
33、ty impacts one or more of the following: design analysis, extensive testing needed, and/or impact to manufacturing, assembly or service. o If the consequences of the change could impact quality, reliability, performance, cost or customer expectations. o If there is limited organizational competency
34、relative to the change including; design standards and guidelines, engineering experience (knowledge), or manufacturing technology. o New supplier Companies that have a rigid change management system can include DRBFM as an analysis tool used to support or reject a proposed change as part of a techn
35、ical change review process. 5. DRBFM PROCESS This DRBFM recommended practice identifies each of the DRBFM steps and provides formats and definitions. Each step is an essential building block of information to ensure a thorough analysis. Each of the following steps are defined in detail (Appendix B -
36、 DRBFM Process Map). Step One: Preparation Step Two: Change Point FMEA Step Three: Design Review Step Four: Actions Results and Feedback 5.1 Step One: Preparation Planning and preparation tools help the engineer understand the many influences of the product design and make a deliberate attempt to av
37、oid missing information. Preparation can involve picking a baseline, comparing impact to the baseline and understanding what is different. In many companies some or all of these documents are completed during preparation phase. The advanced preparation must be considered prior to starting DRBFM anal
38、ysis. This preparation on the part of the engineer is required and eliminates the inefficient practice of beginning with a blank sheet. The preparation the engineer does ahead of time creates the necessary information for a “Good Discussion” with all necessary stakeholders. SAE J2886 Issued MAR2013
39、Page 7 of 25 5.1.1 Gather Engineering Knowledge There are several organizational tools and documents to help the engineer begin the DRBFM process. Although the type and number of tools may vary by company or industry there are some that are common for engineers. The sequence might vary but the engin
40、eer would consider: g120 defining a baseline design based on similarity, quality and cost (Appendix C: Risk Assessment / Planning). g120 utilizing customer and plant quality data to help select the baseline design (Appendix C: Risk Assessment / Planning). g120 pulling together the functions, require
41、ments and interactions based on new design. Often previous DFMEAs (or existing product family DFMEA), P diagrams, design guidelines and best practices provide a starting point for requirements. (Appendix D - Definition of Functions, Change Points and Interfaces) g120 design change impact to manufact
42、uring and suppliers based on obtaining and reviewing existing Process Flow Diagrams (Appendix C: Risk Assessment / Planning). g120 design change impact to validation plan and reliability targets based on obtaining and reviewing previous validation plans (Appendix E: ADVP&R Example). Companies use di
43、fferent forms of documentation to compile this data and this recommended practice does not require a specific format. 5.1.2 Define Change Points A change point is a description of a change. The change point is evaluated to assess the potential impact on the product functions. A change point may resu
44、lt in the addition of a product function, a change in attaching methods, a change to a part drawing or specification, a change in the products ability to meet governmental requirements, a change in use environment (temperature, humidity, vibration, etc.), material, shape, software, machining, assemb
45、ly, production location, and so forth. A specification change change point that is within normal design guidelines that has been previously validated may not warrant a DRBFM analysis (low impact change point). A clear company/departmental guideline is helpful to define the change point impact level,
46、 and when this corresponds to the need for a DRBFM analysis. Recommended change point tools: a. Change Point/Function Matrix: correlates the change and function . (Appendix D - Definition of Functions, Change Points and Interfaces). b. Description of Novelty (newness or experience) - (Appendix F - D
47、efinition of Novelity) c. Change comparison table: Comparison of old and new design characteristics (Appendix D - Definition of Functions, Change Points and Interfaces). d. Cange visualization (old vs new: block diagram, pictures, sketches, marked drawings). SAE J2886 Issued MAR2013 Page 8 of 25 5.1
48、.3 Develop DRBFM Plan A general planning tool is used by companies responsible for design development. The planning tool is based on the current understanding of a program and known program risks. It identifies a basic risk mitigation plan which may include development testing, process development,
49、and parts where supplier collabortion is critical. It may include the following elements: g120 Administrative information (Part discription, responsible engineer, base design discription) g120 Quality - Risk assessment (Design drivers, traceability, and historical product performance) g120 Quality - Reliability Tools (DFMEA, PFMEA, DRBFM, DRBTR, DFM/A and FTA) A plan for each part should be constructed using engineering knowl
