fmea template
TRANSCRIPT
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Panel handling Humidity indicator missing Voids in solder joints 7 8 Visual inspection 5 280 JH
Complete
Panels have to be dried 3 7 Visual inspection 5 105 JH
Complete
Panel packages are broken Voids in solder joints 7 7 Humidity indicator 3 147 JH
Complete
Panels have to be dried 3 7 Humidity indicator 3 63
Poor solder joints 7 Handled with bare fingers 3 Work instructionn 4 84
Humidity in Aramid layers Voids in solder joints 7 7 5 245
de-lamination 7 inner layer separation 2 5 70
Wk36/00
6 Grippers are dirty 2 Maintenace 2 24
6 Production stoppages 4 Work instruction 3 72
3 2 None 10 60
Solder paste printing may fail 4 Grippers are dirty 2 Maintenace 2 16
4 Production stoppages 4 Work instruction 3 48
3 2 None 10 60
5 1 2 10
Panels are bended 6 Supplier process 2 2 24
6 Wrong way of storing 3 Work instructions 3 54
6 Inadequate material quality 2 2 24
Stencil bottom gets dirty 6 Supplier process 2 Supplier process control 2 24
6 Wrong way of storing 3 Work instructions 3 54
6 Inadequate material quality 2 2 24
Panel has to be rejected 4 Supplier process 2 Supplier process control 2 16
4 Wrong way of storing 3 Work instructions 3 36
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
Handling failure (supplier, transport or NMP)
Work instruction updating, supplier information. Moisture absorbtion study complete
Handling failure (supplier, transport or NMP)
Work instruction updating, supplier information. Moisture absorbtion study complete
Handling failure (supplier, transport or NMP)
Work instruction updating, supplier information. Moisture absorbtion study complete
Handling failure (supplier, transport or NMP)
Dirt (grease, finger prints, dust etc.) on PCB
brittle solder joints, poor reliability
Humidity indicator, PCB handling instructions
Humidity indicator, PCB handling instructions
Pasi to check with ASPOCOMP for root cause and corrective action
Panel picking from stacker
Panel gets dirty due to conaminated nozzles
Panel may be scrapped (at the end of process)
Extra dust generated from packing cell at the end of the line (near to paste printing)
Extra dust generated from packing cell at the end of the line (near to paste printing)
Two panels are picked in same time
Solder paste printing and SMD placements fail
Panels are wet (stacked while still damp)
Panels are dried out and hermetically packed. There is silicagel and humidity indicator in packages
Solder paste printing (side 1)
Panels move during paste printing
Supplier is measuring the straighness
Supplier is measuring the straighness
Supplier is measuring the straighness
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
4 Inadequate material quality 2 2 16
Printing result inaccurate 6 Supplier process 2 3D-Laser Inspection 3 36
6 Wrong way of storing 3 3D-Laser Inspection 3 54
6 Inadequate material quality 2 3D-Laser Inspection 3 36
Wrong handling of panels Open solderings 6 Fingerprints on PCB 3 Work instructions 4 72
6 Panel is set to dirty surface 2 4 48
6 Dirt stucked on panel 3 CR-inspection 3 54
Solder paste viscosity wrong 8 5 2 80
Paste spreads (short circuits) 8 3 Supervising, PDM-system 2 48
8 4 7 224
JH wk32/99
Humidity-% of paste is wrong Voids in solder joints 8 Over-aged paste 3 Work instructions 3 72
8 Wrong way of storing 5 Work instructions 2 80
Solder balls 8 Over-aged paste 3 Work instructions 3 72
8 Wrong way of storing 5 Work instructions 2 80
Wrong handling of paste Paste dries out 3 Use of partly dried out paste 3 3 27
3 3 Work instruction 3 27
3 3 Work instruction 3 27
Printer settings wrong Printing can't be done 3 Wrong program is selected 2 2 12
Positioning varies 5 2 3 30
Printing results vary 5 Locking of stencil is not working 1 Maintenance 1 5
5 1 Maintenance 1 5
5 Squeegee is not properly working 3 3 45
Supplier is measuring the straighness
Work instruction, training about panel handling
Insufficient amount of solder on small pads
Wrong handling/storaging of paste
Work instruction, control of the dates
Production stoppages (paste dries out)
Viscosity varies in different batches
Supplier process control; Operator Visual Inspection, Monthly Audits
Metering of viscosity has been started in Merikaari. Updating work instruction about paste handling.
Work instructions, marks in paste containers'
Paste collecting from stencil not done
Stencil washing not properly done
Program names are identical with stencil and PCB
Setting values in program are not correct
SMD Process Specification defines parameters
Stencil tower is not adjusted compared to printing base
Maintenance, work instructions
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
Printer in defective condition 3 2 Maintenance 2 12
3 Sencors are dirty 2 Maintenance 2 12
3 Conveyor is not rotating 1 Maintenance 2 6
5 3 Maintenance 2 30
5 2 Maintenance 2 20
5 2 Maintenance 2 20
5 3 Maintenance 2 30
5 1 Maintenance 2 10
5 3 Maintenance 2 30
5 2 Maintenance 2 20
5 2 2 20
Location failures of panels Paste location varies 6 3 Maintenance 4 72
6 2 2 24
6 2 Maintenance 2 24
6 Camera out of its place 2 Maintenance 2 24
6 1 Test panel, line verification 2 12
6 1 Test panel, line verification 2 12
6 3 Work instructions 3 54
Stencil in defective condition Amount of paste varies 6 2 Visual inspection 2 24
Place of paste varies 6 2 2 24
Printing result unclear 6 2 Visual inspection 2 24
6 Frame is not straight 2 Visual inspection 2 24
PCB's are not traveling well in the conveyor
Conveyor belts are in defective condition (worn out, dirty)
Paste printing can't be done or printing result is not satisfactory
Squeegee system is not working properly (worn out, dirty, wrongly adjusted, imbalanced)
Stencil mounting rail is not clean, fastening is broken-down, adjustments are wrong
Height sensor in wrong place (moved) or is not clean or wrongly adjusted
Support table worn out, dirty, wrongly installed or dimensioned
Coplanarity of stencil and support table
Cleaning system functioning not properly (too much/little fluid, blade wrongly adjusted, paper feeding not functioning or mounting failure)
Focusing system not working properly (camera and locating rails dirty, adjustments wrong)
Printing program not working properly (wrong parameters, software bugs)
Maintenance, SMD Process Specification defines parameters
Fiducial marks are "wrong colour", unclear, dirty or damaged
Stencil or stencil version number is wrong
Program names are identical with stencil and PCB
Camera dirty or lamp too weak (=too old)
Holes for components in support table are not deep enough or wrongly located
Support table is not properly installed (locking, straighness
Support table is not clean (tin, components etc.)
Stencil worn-out, damaged or scratched
Stencil or stencil version number is wrong
Program names are identical with stencil and PCB
Stencil screen not tight enough
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
Stencil dimensions are wrong Wrong amount of paste 6 Stencil openings wrong size 2 Supplier process control 2 24
6 Stencil thickness wrong 2 Supplier process control 2 24
6 Dents on support table 3 Visual inspection 2 36
6 Support table is not clean 3 Work instruction 3 54
8 Variation in solder joint volume 4 3 96 AOI machine installed into line
8 absence of solder paste. 4 3 96
Data matrix marking EMC automatic board cleaner
Wrong laser power setting Internal failures in PCB
Incorrect Reading Inaccurate data collection 7 Panel Warping 4 3 84
7 Optical Failure 4 3 84
7 4 3 84
7 Wrong Software Program 4 3 84
Board Loading Failure Machine stops 5 Panel not positioned properly 3 1 15
5 Fiducial Not found 3 1 15
5 Optical Failure 3 1 15
5 Conveyor adjustment 3 1 15
SMD-placement CSP-components misaligned Component moves on PCB 6 3 Self Test at FLALI 3 54
6 Incorrect part data 2 3 36
6 2 3 36
6 3 Supplier process 3 54
6 Table moves too fast 2 Software controls table speed 4 48
Support table in defective condition
Solder bridges, tin balls, incomplete or missing solder joints
0.5 mm pitch CSP solder paste printing fails
open solder joint; poor reliability
3-D laser scanner inspection machine
component may move after placement
3-D laser scanner inspection machine
Line stops, PCB must be manually removed and scrapped
Data matrix laser marking fails
Line stops, panel must be manually removed
Can cause PCB failures on module area
Isolate data matrix on pcb, I.e., do not connect to any device.
3D Laser Inspection For Paste and Component
Soldermask thickness/colour varies
Component moves in nozzle during pick-up after camera inspection
Tape board, test panels, line verification
Camera inspection fails (Points in bottom of package are disturbing)
Tape board, test panels, line verification
Component placed in wrong position to tape
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
6 2 Software controls nozzle speed 4 48
6 Hitting existing components 5 2 60
Filter does not function electrically 7 5 5 175
Coil component misplaced chip coil placement fails 7 6 AOI ; test 5 210
Shield placement fails 7 3 Testing 4 84
7 3 Testing 4 84
Reflow soldering 7 6 4 168
7 3 Testing 2 42
7 Wrong reflow profile 2 3 42
7 2 Work instruction 3 42
Wrong soldering profile Open solder joints 8 2 Reflow profile measurements 3 48
Popcorning Component Damage 8 Moisture Absorbtion 3 Handling procedure 8 192
Buffer Panel has to be scrapped 7 Wrong track width in rack 2 None 2 28
7 Racks damaged 2 Visual inspection 2 28
7 2 None 2 28
7 Pusher defective 2 None 2 28
Panel falls down Panel has to be scrapped 7 Wrong track width in rack 2 None 2 28
7 Racks damaged 2 Visual inspection 2 28
7 2 None 2 28
7 Pusher defective 2 None 2 28
Panel sticks Line stoppage 7 Wrong track width in rack 2 None 2 28
7 Racks damaged 2 Visual inspection 2 28
7 2 None 2 28
Component placement speed too high (in Z-direction)
Already Placed components will be moved
SAW-filters placed in wrong position
Polarity not properly marked to component
Tape board, test panels, line verification, AOI inspection
product fails in testing and must be reworked
AOI machine installed into line, Stencil thickness reduced to 100 um
Short circuits between components and metal can
Shield must be removed and module reworked or whole module scrapped
LEDs in short circuits with shield
Shield must be removed and module reworked or whole module scrapped
Metal shield bends during re-flow soldering
Shield coplanarity not within specs
shield perimeter not totally soldered, poor shield properties
Supplier process, Incoming Audit
Connection area between shield and PCB not big enough due to LEDs
Shield separates in drop tested
Shield is not soldering properly
Work instruction with standard profile, oven calibration
Fan is switched off by operator
Soldering temperature too low
Panel cracks while placing to buffer
Sensor adjustment wrong or sensor damaged
Sensor adjustment wrong or sensor damaged
Sensor adjustment wrong or sensor damaged
PROCESS FMEA
Ranking Guidelines: [attached as copy]
Erkki Rajala Retu Niemi 1 = Minor/No effect 10 = Very high/Hazardous
FMEA Responsible: Erkki Rajala Minna Keränen Matti Huoponen 1 = Remote/Unlikely 10 = Very high/Almost inevitable Date (Orig.): 23.9.1998
Other Areas Involved/Effected: Anssi Saari Jarmo U. Heinonen 1 = Very high/Almost certainly 10 = Very low/Unlikely Date (Rev.): 15.6.1999
Ari Pullinen Severity * Occurrence * Detection Page of
Process Description and Potential Potential Severity Potential Occurrence Current Process Detection RPN Recommended Responsible Completion Status Action Results
Process Purpose Failure Mode Effect(s) of Failure of effect Cause(s) of Failure of cause Control(s) of cause (S*O*D) Action(s) Person Date Action Taken [S] [O] [D]
Process Name: Allu Board Assembly FMEA Team: FMEA Worksheet Document No:
Process Responsible: Riitta Hellman Severity of failure effect: File Location:
Occurrence of failure cause:
Detection of failure cause:
Risk Priority Number (RPN) =
7 Pusher defective 2 None 2 28
Panel sticks Line Stops 3 Conveyor speeds not balanced 2 Setup and Maintenance 3 18
3 3 Setup and Maintenance 3 27
3 Misaligned components 3 Setup and Maintenance 3 27
Panel falls down Damaged Board 5 Conveyor speeds not balanced 2 Setup and Maintenance 3 30
5 3 Setup and Maintenance 3 45
5 Misaligned components 3 Setup and Maintenance 3 45
NMP 7 Problem Solving Steps: 1 Identify Problem2 Analyse Problem3 Determine Cause(s)4 Develop Solution(s)/Model(s)5 Plan Actions6 Implement Solution7 Evaluate Outcome
Conveyors and gates etc.
Conveyor width/height adjusted wrongly
Conveyor width/height adjusted wrongly
RPN
RPN
RPN
RPN
RPN
RPN