We are trying to set up a template to perform FMEAs on existing systems using Dyadem’s FMEA Pro. It’s kind of driving us nuts.

• Our systems have been operating for 9 or so years.
• Spares were decided upon and added to as real time failure experience grew.
• Job plans and PMs built and improved upon with time.
• We have a good NC/CAPA system in place to perform root cause failure analysis and incorporate corrective and preventative actions.
• We have a good work order problem code analysis program in place to identify problems with equipment; this is especially helpful in identifying systemic problems early in their life cycle that a narrow view of a system, such as an FMEA would not catch.

I’m having trouble on two fronts:
1) FMEA Pro isn’t really set up to accept existing system information to analyze existing spares, PMs and job plans. FMEA Pro has an Equipment Template and various Function Templates, but nothing set up to accept typical existing data. We need to figure out the best method to perform the FMEA, how to lay out the tabs and columns in a logical manner. It seems like a lot of work to go through the motions as if it were a new system from scratch. Since the spares represent the piece parts on the systems that could fail, we started listing functions and failure modes for each of the spares, which seemed to me a bit like we were justifying why we carry the spare. It was extremely time consuming working in this manner. And you could almost always dream up a failure for the spare.
2) It seems to me that with all of the real time improvement programs that we have in place, in combination with a very experienced work force, that the FMEA may only validate what we already do to maintain the equipment. I know that’s one of its purposes, but the existing improvement processes are more efficient at doing that, and they do that across all the systems, real time. An inexperienced FMEA team may not even dream up the actual failure experience we’ve seen. What would that look like to someone? Not good I’m afraid.

That’s about it. If someone has an example of an FMEA that incorporated existing systems- equipment, spares, PMs, Job plans, CM data, etc, I would love to get a look at it for some ideas.

Thanks,
J-

Wally,
1. I am not familiar with FMEA-Pro; if it has an Open Data Base Condiguration, and your existing data is also ODBC, you can build a data-transformer to stream data directly from one to the other. Later you can fill in missing data fields. Most RCM packages are ODBC, so if EMEA-Pro is not , consider using an RCM package.
2. Doing an FMEA merely to justify existing practice is perhaps not optimal from a business perspective. If your failure and downtime tremds are improving, surely that tells you that
you are probably doing well.

Thanks for the reply Vee,
I could have stated my trouble with FMEA-Pro better. It is an open database. Our servers are validated, but we have not validated FMEA-Pro so we don't let the two databases talk directly. We use a database query program (Brio) to query data from Maximo, we export the Brio results to Excel, then import the Excel file into FMEA-Pro. It's not too big of a deal to accomplish.

What I meant to say is that FMEA-Pro doesn't have a template set up to consider an existing maintenance program. I'm having trouble conceptualizing how to best lay the template out.

Our first attempt had the equipment listed, with each equipment's spares listed under it. It seemed logical at first, but we wound up listing failure modes for each spare to the equipment. Does a BOM (Bill of Material) or Build List belong anywhere in an FMEA?

It would help me to see how a well done FMEA was laid out on an existing system, and which data was important to consider during the FMEA, and which data is there for reference or comparison the the FMEA output.

Is it better to start from scratch, or consider existing information- CMs, PMs, job plans, spares, etc.

Thanks,
J-

Wally,
You asked

quote:

Does a BOM (Bill of Material) or Build List belong anywhere in an FMEA?

Not to my knowledge. A BoM is a drop-down from a task generated from an FMEA. Every FM may have several parts related to it; every component part in a BoM does not always have a one-to-one FM related to it, as several parts may relate to the same FM.

quote:

It would help me to see how a well done FMEA was laid out on an existing system, and which data was important to consider during the FMEA, and which data is there for reference or comparison the the FMEA output.

FMEAs can be Functional FMEA, as used in RCM. These are the best type to arrive at maintenance tasks. There are also Design FMEAs where EVERY component part (as in a BoM) gets analysed. This type is not ideal for arriving at maintenance tasks; they are far more detailed and costs a fortune to do.

quote:

Is it better to start from scratch, or consider existing information- CMs, PMs, job plans, spares, etc.

In my view, Yes, see my e-mail sent earlier.