Under which conditions do P-Diagrams and FMEA complement each other effectively?
In his technical article, guest author Dr. Uwe-Klaus Jarosch takes an in-depth look at the use of the term "functions". He also answers the question as to whether P-Diagrams and FMEA are a contradiction or a symbiosis. This blog post gives a brief insight into the topic: At last year's FMEA Online, Winfried Dietz and Riccardo Stüber (Schaeffler Automotive Buehl GmbH& Co. KG) provided an in-depth description of the use of "functions" and specifically the "P-Diagram" tool, which places the function in the center of the consideration. This approach is also used in the harmonized method description of the automotive associations AIAG(USA) and VDA (Germany).
In his guest article, Dr. Jarosch, based on these basic considerations, explores the question of the concrete relationship between the P-Diagram and the FMEA. To this end, he first examines the system function with the input variables, disturbance variables and control variables acting on it, as well as the desired and undesired output variables derived from them. He then provides a detailed analysis and a concrete approach to solving the problem. Among other things, he presents the FMEA relationships in a clear diagram as a three-level structure for system, component and the production of same. In his considerations he includes the uniform international method description according to the AIAG-VDA FMEA manual.
A conclusion: P-Diagram and FMEA complement each other in terms of content, but not clearly in terms of their structure. A step towards convergence and food for thought for further developments of method and tool is described by Dr. Uwe-Klaus Jarosch in his technical article.
Dr. Uwe-Klaus Jarosch is senior expert for QM methods and tools in Global Quality Management at Benteler Automobiltechnik GmbH, Paderborn. As a guest author, he has already written on the FMEA Blog about "The special thing about special features" and has also provided a technical article on this subject