Process Flow Diagram

While discussing the PFMEA we are inevitably drawn to the topic of the process flow diagram. Where I work we and our suppliers are supposed to have a process flow diagram. The requirement is somewhat vague, I guess. And when I say "have a PFD..." I mean, we should have and UTILIZE an effective PFD. The PFD shown below would fit the letter of the law. In the illustrated case the manufacturer is just describing, for sales purposes, the process steps that their piezo actuator goes through. The instructions from the AIAG APQP Manual state:

The process flow chart is a schematic representation of the current or proposed process flow. It can be used to analyze sources of variations of machines, materials, methods, and manpower from the beginning to end of a manufacturing or assembly process. It is used to emphasize the impact of sources of variation on the process. The flow chart helps to analyze the totalprocess rather than individual steps in the process. The flow chart assists
the organization’s product quality planning team to focus on the process when conducting the PFMEA and designing the Control Plan.

There is a process flow chart checklist in the appendix. The checklist is focused on including steps in the process, but not process description

However, when a NPD team is working to develop a manufacturing process they need to define the process in detail, including inputs and outputs. A complete PFD is essential for the PFMEA discussion.


This PFD is shown at noliac.com

The Fight is Against Single Piece Errors

The series of posts I have recently begun on PFMEAs are rooted in my frustration at single piece defects getting to the customer factories. By this, I mean "one body missing a machined hole" or "one assembly missing a retaining pin".

Part of the manufacturing/quality struggle is to produce all parts within print specification. This struggle is addressed by dimensional controls and SPC. The PFMEA usually, almost exclusively, addresses dimensional issues. But the problema that I see passing through to customers are not that "our process shifted 10 microns over size", it is that that one machining operation was missed on one piece.

In the attached video the PFMEA is mentioned. I liked this video. The PFMEA comment was accurate.
"PFMEAs, although a great tool, are only as good as the knowledge put into them."



The video author admits that often failure modes and causes are missed in the PFMEA. What is the countermeasure to this failure mode in the NPD (new product development) process?


Thanks to TheUjigamiGuy on YouTube

PFMEA Training in China

Note: The video link is not always working, even directly to the site.

Here is a little video of a PFMEA training session in China. The banner reads,

"Failure Mode and Consequences Analysis"

The company is Konka Television, apparently pretty famous in China. When I work in China I see training like this quite often. It strikes me that I do not see this kind of thing in the US. Is it because it is assumed everyone in the US knows how to do a PFMEA? Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that this kind of training will be extremely effective. I am saying that the focus on "attempting" to improve the process is refreshing.

Where is the effective use of a PFMEA? Anywhere.

I am getting far enough in my career so that I dread starting work with a new product development team and the inevitable disappointment I will feel when I see how ineffective they are. The team is responsible for launching the new product without any glitches, defects or flaws. This is a tall order, right? Not easy. Yet these teams sleepwalk through advanced quality planning and walk into launch with their pants down.

Let's look at the use of PFMEAs. Can anyone reading this blog tell me of a time they worked in a cross=functional team that actually worked to develop the PFMEA as an honest attempt to list out potential failure modes and causes?

What I find is:
A) The PFMEA is a stale document handed down from project to project. Always, it never was that good in the first place and, even for new aspects of the new product there is no attempt to freshen it up.
B) The PFMEA was written by one person, not a team.
C) The PFMEA was written for the sole reason of checking the box: Is there a PFMEA? Yes or No
D) When confronted with the fact that the PFMEA is a stinker the author, or the project manager 1) denies it, and 2) challenges me to produce good examples (in other words, do it for them)
E) When obvious failure modes are brought to their attention the response is, "oh, that cannot happen because..." Without the PFMEA exercise holes in the prevention and detection process are not effectively reviewed.
F)Several times the new product development team will start to use some kind of PFMEA software to show they are now serious about doing a PFMEA. However, the software is difficult to use and somehow seems to distract from the goal.

Time and time again we see defects arriving at customer plants that are well known failure modes that should be expected if there are inadequate controls. Yet, they happen. Again and again.

The next article will be focused on some of the best practices I have seen.

The Jobs Environment

Employment figures are moving in the correct direction. Via Bureau of labor statistics: Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 290,000 in April, the unemployment rate edged up to 9.9 percent, and the labor force increased sharply, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in manufacturing, professional and business services, health care, and leisure and hospitality. Federal government employment also rose, reflecting continued hiring of temporary workers for Census 2010.

Steve Benin at Political Animal keeps a chart showing the results.

.

The Labor Situation

The employment rate continues to struggle out of the ditch. The Employment Situation Survey which was released the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday showed a slight slip in December from November.

Nonfarm payroll employment edged down (-85,000) in December, and the unem-ployment rate was unchanged at 10.0 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statis- tics reported today. Employment fell in construction, manufacturing, and wholesale trade, while temporary help services and health care added jobs.

The feeling across the nation still is fairly pessimistic, although I think people feel we are over the worst of it.

About 2.5 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in December, an increase of 578,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not sea- sonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-13.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 929,000 discouraged workers in December, up from 642,000 a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally ad- justed.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work be- cause they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.6 million persons marginally attached to the labor force had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.

For those of you who do not get to see inside a vehicle assembly plant, here is a video from the Toyota Indiana plant.

The Princeton plant employs close to 4,000 workers who assemble the Tundra truck, Sequoia SUV and Sienna minivans.