Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

25832655.

xls

FMEA Work Sheet


Engineers Screw This Up! You MUST detect the failure BEFORE it blows your legs off!
Occurrence Ranking Index (Frequency for customer?): Severity Ranking Index (Think of the customer's problem?) Detection Ranking Index (Can Customer See Defect?)
Rank Criteria Rank Criteria Rank Criteria
1 Remote chance for failure 1 Undetectable effect on system 1 Almost certain detection of failure mode
2 Low failure rate based on 2 Low severity impact because failure 2 Very high likelihood of detecting failure mode
3 previous designs with low failures 3 will cause slight customer annoyance 3 High likelihood of detecting failure mode
4 Moderate failure rates based on similar 4 Moderate severity with some customer 4 Moderately high likelihood of detecting failure mode
5 designs which have some occasional 5 dissatisfaction and with performance 5 Moderate likelihood of detecting failure mode
6 failures but not in major proportions 6 loss which is noticable by customer 6 Low likelihood of detecting failure mode
7 High failure rates based on similar 7 High severity with high degree of customer 7 Very low likelihood of detecting failure mode
8 designs which have been troublesome. 8 dissatisfaction 8 Remote likelihood of detecting failure mode
9 Very high failure rates and the failures 9 Very severe problem involving potential 9 Very remote likelihood of detecting failure mode
10 will be major occurrences. 10 safety problem or major non-conformity 10 Can not detect failure mode
Component: FMEA Date/Rev Level:
Supplier: Customer:
Engineer: Assembly:

Risk
Component Cause(s) Effect(s) Of Occurrence Severity Detection
Component Failure Priority
Of Index Index Index Recommended Corrective Action
Name Mode(s) Number
Function Failure Failure (O) (S) (D)
(O)*(S)*(D)

Page 1
25832655.xls

© Barringer & Associates, Inc. 2003 & 2009

FMEA Work Sheet


Occurrence Ranking Index (Frequency for customer?): Severity Ranking Index (Think of the customer's problem?) Detection Ranking Index (Can Customer See Defect?)
Rank Criteria Rank Criteria Rank Criteria
1 Remote chance for failure 1 Undetectable effect on system 1 Almost certain detection of failure mode
2 Low failure rate based on 2 Low severity impact because failure 2 Very high likelihood of detecting failure mode
3 previous designs with low failures 3 will cause slight customer annoyance 3 High likelihood of detecting failure mode
4 Moderate failure rates based on similar 4 Moderate severity with some customer 4 Moderately high likelihood of detecting failure mode
5 designs which have some occasional 5 dissatisfaction and with performance 5 Moderate likelihood of detecting failure mode
6 failures but not in major proportions 6 loss which is noticable by customer 6 Low likelihood of detecting failure mode
7 High failure rates based on similar 7 High severity with high degree of customer 7 Very low likelihood of detecting failure mode
8 designs which have been troublesome. 8 dissatisfaction 8 Remote likelihood of detecting failure mode
9 Very high failure rates and the failures 9 Very severe problem involving potential 9 Very remote likelihood of detecting failure mode
10 will be major occurrences. 10 safety problem or major non-conformity 10 Can not detect failure mode
Component: Tube & Shell Heat Exchanger For Organic Service FMEA Date/Rev Level: 07/18/96
Supplier: Customer: XYZ Chemical (Organic Process Fluid @ 1000 psi, Cooling Tower Water @ 60 psi)
Engineer: Assembly : Validate Integrity Of In-Process Heat Exchanger For A 5 Year Extension Of Life

Occurrence Risk
Component Cause(s) Effect(s) Of Severity Detection
Component Failure Index Priority
Of Index Index Recommended Corrective Action
Name Mode(s) Number
Function Failure Failure (S) (D)
(O) (O)*(S)*(D)

Pressure Loss of Wall Process Fluid Process Fluid


Entry Tube Sheet Boundry Thickness Leak Leak 6 7 4 168 Minimum Thickness Allowed Is ___________

Pressure Loss of Wall Process Fluid Process Fluid


Exit Tube Sheet Boundry Thickness Leak Leak 6 7 4 168 Minimum Thickness Allowed Is ___________

Pressure Loss of Wall Cooling Water Cooling Water


Shell ID Boundry Thickness Leak Leak 1 2 2 4 Minimum Thickness Allowed Is ___________

Pressure Loss of Wall Cooling Water Cooling Water


Shell OD Boundry Thickness Leak Leak 1 2 2 4 Minimum Thickness Allowed Is ___________

Pressure Loss of Wall Process Fluid Process Fluid


Tube OD's Boundry Thickness/Pits Leak Leak 2 7 2 28 Minimum Wall Thickness Allowed Is ____________

Pressure Loss of Wall Process Fluid Process Fluid


Tube IDs Boundry Thickness/Pits Leak Leak 7 7 2 98 Minimum Wall Thickness Allowed Is ____________

Minimum Tube Pressure Loss of Wall Process Fluid Process Fluid


Wall Thickness Boundry Thickness/Pits Leak Leak 7 7 7 343 Minimum Wall Thickness Allowed Is ____________
Loss Of
Annode On Shell Prevent Consumption of Corrosion
ID Corossion Annode Shell Corrosion Protection 4 2 2 16 Minimum Weight Required Is ____________
Loss Of
Annode On Shell Prevent Consumption of Corrosion
OD Corossion Annode Shell Corrosion Protection 1 1 1 1 Minimum Weight Required Is ____________
Loss Of
Annode For Tube Prevent Consumption of Corrosion
ID & Tube Sheets Corossion Annode Tube Corrosion Protection 5 5 2 50 Minimum Weight Required Is ____________

Rolled Tube ID at Pressure Process Fluid


Entry End Boundry Errosion/Creep Thin Wall Leak 2 7 7 98 Shell Side Air Pressure @ 10 psig & Soap Test For Visual Leaks--If Leaks Exist, Reroll Tubes For Seal

Rolled Tube ID at Pressure Process Fluid


Exit End Boundry Errosion/Creep Thin Wall Leak 2 7 7 98 Shell Side Air Pressure @ 10 psig & Soap Test For Visual Leaks--If Leaks Exist, Reroll Tubes For Seal

Tube Contour Reduce Loss Of Contour & Process


Entry End Pressure Drop Wall Thickness Pressure Loss Higher DP 3 3 3 27 Visual Inspect--Plug If Required

Tube Contour Reduce Loss Of Contour & Process


Exit End Pressure Drop Wall Thickness Pressure Loss Higher DP 3 3 3 27 Visual Inspect--Plug If Required
Flow Channels Loss Of Flow Larger
& Tube Paths For Quantity Of
Internal Baffles Support Corrosion Cooling H2O Cooling H2O 1 2 1 2 Look For Loss Of Straight Line Sight In Tube--Borescope On Shell Side If In Doubt

Page 2
25832655.xls

Cooling Water Pressure Cooling Water Cooling Water


Inlet/Exit Nozzles Boundry Corrosion Leak Leak 1 2 2 4 Minimum Wall Thickness Allowed Is ____________
Cooling Water
Inlet/Exit Flange Pressure Loss Of Cooling Water Cooling Water
Gaskets Boundry Compression Leak Leak 6 5 7 210 Replace

Process Nozzles Pressure Process Fluid Process Fluid


On Entry/Exit Boundry Corrosion Leak Leak 4 4 2 32 Minimum Wall Thickness Allowed Is ____________

Process Inlet/Exit Pressure Loss Of Process Fluid Process Fluid


Flange Gaskets Boundry Compression Leak Leak 9 9 9 729 Replace
Corrosion
Protection & Slow Loss Of Slow
Paint Job On Shell Housekeeping Paint Thickness Unattractive Deterioration 3 3 5 45 Visual Inspect--Repaint If Required

Flow Direction Label Loss Or Poor Work


Labels Safety Deterioration Safety Practices 7 3 9 189 Visual Inspect--Replace If Labels Are Missing
Mechanical Plugs
Mechanical To Seal Bad Loss Of Heat
Plugged Tubes Seal Tubes Transfer Count Of Plugs 6 7 7 294 Retube if plug count exceed 10% of total tubes

Risk Priority Number


800

700

600
Should Do Must Do

500

400
O*S*D

300

200

100

0
Shell ID Minimum Tube Wall Thickness Rolled Tube ID at Entry End Internal Baffles Process Inlet/Exit Flange Gaskets
Entry Tube Sheet Tube OD's Annode On Shell OD Tube Contour Entry End Cooling Water Inlet/Exit Flange Gaskets Flow Direction Labels

Page 3
Suggested Reading List For FMEA
1. The Basics Of FMEA, CRC Press, 2nd edition, 2009, 90 pages, ISBN 0-978-156327-377-3, http://www.crcpr
2. Failure Mode and Effect Analysis, 2nd edition by D. H. Stamatis, ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI, 2003
http://www.qualitypress.asq.org, ~$105/copy
3. FMEA-4 Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis, Fourth Edition, 2008, Automotive Industry Act
Phone 1-810-358-3003, http://www.aiag.org, ~$75/copy
This is the technical equivalent of SAE J-1739
4. Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Design (Design FMEA) and Potential Failure Mode
in Manufcturing and Assembly Processes (Process FMEA) and Effects Analysis for Machinery (Ma
Document Number: J1739A, January 2009, ~$61/copy
http://www.sae.org/servlets/productDetail?PROD_TYP=STD&PROD_CD=J1739_200208
5. MIL-STD-1629A, Procedures For Performing A Failure Mode, Efffects and Criticality Analysis
No cost download from http://assist.daps.dla.mil/docimages/0000/59/77/37027.PD0, this 4615.7KB PDF file is
historical document by the US Government which is now obsolete and replaced by SAE J1739, rev date is 24
Or you can download the document from http://www.barringer1.com/mil.htm or specifically these documents
MIL-STD-1629 Rev A at http://www.barringer1.com/mil_files/MIL-STD-1629RevA.pdf
MIL-STD-1629 Rev A Change Notice - 1 at http://www.barringer1.com/mil_files/MIL-STD-1629RevA-C
MIL-STD-1629 Rev A Change Notice - 2 at http://www.barringer1.com/mil_files/MIL-STD-1629RevA-C
© Barringer & Associates, Inc. 2003 & 2009
Revised April 8, 2009

Paul Barringer
Barringer & Associates, Inc.
P. O. Box 3985
Humble, TX 77347-3985

Phone: 281-852-6810
FAX: 281-852-3749
Email: hpaul@barringer1.com
Web: http://www.barringer1.com
MEA
156327-377-3, http://www.crcpress.com, ~$15/copy
ality Press, Milwaukee, WI, 2003, ISBN 0-87389-593-3,

2008, Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG),

) and Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis


s Analysis for Machinery (Machinery FMEA),

nd Criticality Analysis, 54 pages


7.PD0, this 4615.7KB PDF file is a
ed by SAE J1739, rev date is 24 November 1980.
or specifically these documents:
-1629RevA.pdf
m/mil_files/MIL-STD-1629RevA-ChangeNotice-1.pdf
m/mil_files/MIL-STD-1629RevA-ChangeNotice-2.pdf