{"title":"Agile FRACAS in Production Manufacturing","authors":"Jason D. Tanner","doi":"10.1109/rams48030.2020.9153660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"SummaryThis paper provides a detailed and methodical approach towards the implementation of an agile Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System (FRACAS). It is important that the user already have tools in place for data collection, and for the management of FRACAS activities so that this methodological proposition can be accomplished. The method is a data-driven approach to collecting failure information and utilizing / allocating resources with maximum efficiency. Current FRACAS methods are fairly basic and not set up to allow the data to lead a program towards task and resource prioritization. Per MIL-STD-2155 [1], a Failure Review Board (FRB) is the primary mechanism for the review of failure trends, corrective action status, and to assure adequate corrective actions are taken. Additionally, it describes failure reporting simplistically as it pertains to individual failed items, not necessarily to failure trends and process issues. There is nothing specific in the document to drive high-rate production manufacturing environments towards utilizing failure trend information to identify high value / volume failures, thus developing the needs for an investigation into Root Cause and Corrective Action (RCCA). This proposal works under the following assumptions/steps:1.There exists a method to capture failure information and data2.The program can properly delineate production manufacturing issues from other non-production manufacturing issues, such as Development & Verification Testing, Qualification Testing, Mission Testing, etc.3.Leadership is not just in agreement with the process, but will act as an advocate4.Appropriate risk analysis and fault tree analysis techniques are utilized and presented5.An appropriate command media process already exists for the documentation of implementation requirements","PeriodicalId":360096,"journal":{"name":"2020 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","volume":"179 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/rams48030.2020.9153660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
SummaryThis paper provides a detailed and methodical approach towards the implementation of an agile Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System (FRACAS). It is important that the user already have tools in place for data collection, and for the management of FRACAS activities so that this methodological proposition can be accomplished. The method is a data-driven approach to collecting failure information and utilizing / allocating resources with maximum efficiency. Current FRACAS methods are fairly basic and not set up to allow the data to lead a program towards task and resource prioritization. Per MIL-STD-2155 [1], a Failure Review Board (FRB) is the primary mechanism for the review of failure trends, corrective action status, and to assure adequate corrective actions are taken. Additionally, it describes failure reporting simplistically as it pertains to individual failed items, not necessarily to failure trends and process issues. There is nothing specific in the document to drive high-rate production manufacturing environments towards utilizing failure trend information to identify high value / volume failures, thus developing the needs for an investigation into Root Cause and Corrective Action (RCCA). This proposal works under the following assumptions/steps:1.There exists a method to capture failure information and data2.The program can properly delineate production manufacturing issues from other non-production manufacturing issues, such as Development & Verification Testing, Qualification Testing, Mission Testing, etc.3.Leadership is not just in agreement with the process, but will act as an advocate4.Appropriate risk analysis and fault tree analysis techniques are utilized and presented5.An appropriate command media process already exists for the documentation of implementation requirements