A Guide to GD3 Activities and

DRBFM Technique to Prevent Trouble

Ver.　
　5.0

Shigeto Kano
Hirokazu Shimizu
Reliability and Strength,
Vehicle Technology Dept No. 1
 (1/39)

3
How to Implement GD Activities and DRBFM

The first invariable principle in ensuring reliability in product development is to

"make no changes." You should keep this in mind.
Although the principle is to "make no changes," we understand that you have
many things to change when producing a new design. That is what you must
pay attention to. The concept of GD3 to note the changes and use techniques
different from conventional techniques for controls and checks, thus achieving
the high goal of preventing the outflow of the problems encountered.

The changes you must note are "what a designer changed deliberately" and
"what changed" in loads and environmental conditions imposed on a specific
component due to ambient conditions despite the lack of change in the
component design. The DRBFM technique is to use the FMEA, Design
Review and other techniques (which have so far been used for controls) as
techniques for creation (for awareness).

The first requirement to complete a product in a short development period is to

produce a design with few problems, or a good design. To that end, it is
important to "make no changes" that are unnecessary. You should also
identify problems in the first stage of development. To that end, it is important
to have a good discussion on the design and conduct a good design review by
carefully examining the test results and tested article. The GD3 is a technique
that organizes all these.
 (2/39)
Contents
Section 1. What is the GD3 (G.D. Cube)? 3/39

Section 2. DRBFM and creative FMEA for perceptiveness 4/39

Section 3. Timing for the DRBFM 7/39

Section 4. Procedure for the creative FMEA 8/39

1) Preparations 8/39
2) Fill out an FMEA worksheet one week before the DRBFM. 8/39
3) Consider the product as disassembled into components. (The key points are the 8/39
changed parts.)
4) Note the changes (both the changes deliberately made and the changes that resulted 9/39
from them).
5) Fill out the field for component functions, specifying the functions to be fulfilled by the 9/39
components.
6) Define the operating conditions of the components. (The key point is the operating 9/39
condition that has changed.)
7) Note the changes and specify the disorders about the functions and unmarketability. 10/39
8) Note the changes. Write down in what cases you have concerns and what the factors 10/39
of functional disorders and unmarketability (failure mode) are.
9) Specify the possible effects of a specific disorder. 15/39
10) Analyze importance to identify the most important issues. 15/39
11) Do not overlook the factors related to the manufacturing process. 15/39
12) Write down what kind of design you have made to eliminate the concerns. 15/39

Section 5. How to proceed with DRBFM 17/39

1) Preparations 17/39
2) Things to be provided on the day of DRBFM 17/39
3) Readiness for DRBFM (design reviews for perceptiveness) 18/39
4) Begin debate while noting the changes in each component. (The key point is the 20/39
changed part.)
5) Note the changes, and discuss if there are any concerns other than those listed in the 20/39
worksheet.
6) Note the changes. Discuss in what cases concerns will result and the causes of 20/39
functional disorders and unmarketability (failure modes).
7) Connect the factors about the manufacturing process FMEA. 20/39
8) Examine the design considerations implemented to eliminate the concerns. 21/39
9) Discuss design actions and evaluation methods while examining the particular 21/39
component and its drawings carefully for each concern and its cause in relation to the
changes.
10) Specify a department responsible, person responsible, and deadline. 22/39
11) Organize the discussions in the DRBFM and complete the FMEA. 22/39
12) Check if the items discussed in the DRBFM are actually reflected on the drawings 23/39
and evaluation items and effectively "prevent failures."
13) DRBFM on the test-completed product 23/39
14) DRBFM in the manufacturing process 24/39

Section 6. An embodiment: Hair drier 25/39

 (3/39)

Section 1. What is the GD3 (G.D. Cube)?

The GD3 (G.D. Cube) stands for:

・ a good design
・ a good discussion
・ a good design review

The GD3 is a set of these three elements designed to prevent problems, as you "go
back to where you were at the beginning." The GD3, in other words, involves: (1)
identifying requirements for a "good design" at the initial stage of development and
observing them, (2) holding a "good discussion" with related departments and
coordinating one another's efforts, and (3) examining the product carefully and
conducting a "good design review."

The first invariable principle in ensuring reliability in product development is to

"make no changes." You should keep that in mind.
Thus, the GD3 recommends in its clause on "Good Design" the practice of
"identifying and observing requirements for a basically good design." Although the
principle is to "make no changes," we understand that you have many things to
change when producing a new design. That is what you should pay attention to.
The concept of the GD3 is to note the areas where you must make changes and
use techniques for "taking advantage of the humans' capability of identifying issues
(perceptiveness)" different from conventional techniques for controls and checks,
thus fulfilling the high goal of preventing the outflow of problems.

The changes are "what a designer changed deliberately" and "what changed" in
loads and environmental conditions imposed on the component due to ambient
conditions despite the lack of changes in the component design. The DRBFM
technique is to use FMEA, design review and other techniques (which have so far
been used as techniques for controls) as techniques for creation (perceptiveness).
 (4/39)

Section 2. DRBFM and creative FMEA for perceptiveness

Conventional design reviews tended to emphasize management. Although they helped
establish the GD3 in the development process, they are losing its original significance of
identifying issues. For that reason, we have found a technique for combining creative
FMEA with design reviews, which is a breakthrough from control techniques. We have
come up with a technique of noting the changes, using creativity to discuss even more
issues, and stimulate one another's brains to make one another notice things, thus
preventing problems. We named that technique the DRBFM (Design Review Based on
Failure Mode). We believe that the DRBFM links design, evaluation, manufacturing,
and quality assurance organically, which makes it possible to prevent problems.
FMEA stands for "Failure Mode and Effects Analysis." It means a process of predicting
what kind of failure is likely to occur, identify the factors of such a failure based on
conceivable failure modes, and analyze the degrees of effects. Items that need
corrective actions are subjected to design measures in advance and also appropriate
evaluation methods to prevent trouble.
These days, the FMEA is actively used to minimize problems that are likely to occur in
development and increase development efficiency. The FMEA in the design stage is
called the Design FMEA (DFMEA) and the FMEA in the manufacturing stage the
Process FMEA (PFMEA).
Fig. 1 shows a standard worksheet for use in the FMEA. Many engineers have
probably seen one before, at least once, and we believe that they understand the
usefulness of the FMEA well. However, when you see a form where you must make
many entries, you may lose your motivation at once or you may get preoccupied with
the question of how to proceed with each item. We believe that the reality is that you do
not easily start to use it in actual business.
Now please think again of the purpose of the FMEA. The FMEA is a method for
identifying conceivable failure modes and preventing trouble. The purpose of the FMEA
is not to fill out the worksheet in all entries, thus completing the FMEA form. The
important thing is to use your creativity and find a good way to notice many things and
lead them to preventing problems. A creative FMEA is a tool for having an effective
discussion to produce good ideas. Please use the FMEA to have debate first, without
sticking to the way it should be done.
For those who cannot get used to the FMEA, we have provided a new DRBFM
worksheet as shown in Fig. 2. It is basically the same as the FMEA worksheet shown in
Fig. 1. You may use either of them.
Section 3 shows the implementation timing for the DRBFM, Section 4 the procedure for
implementing creative FMEA, and Section 5 how to proceed with the DRBFM.
 (5/39)

F M E A WORK SHEET
No.;
Component Article # Date prepared;
Originator; Participants ; Date corrected;

Effect due to Reflection on evaluation, quality check

Importance
Dysfunction and

Frequency
Change and disorder Factors that produce dysfunction

Representative
Component's unmarketability Reflection on design

Necessity
Constituent

Deadline
No. component nature of and unmarketability
functions due to change (design measure) Necessary items of

Deadline
Represen-
change (cause of failure)
evaluation and check

tative
(failure mode) System Vehicle

Fig. 1. A typical FMEA worksheet

 (6/39)

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Design Review Based on Failure Mode
Model ; No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? Effects on What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results)
Component customers eliminate the concerns? Activities
No. Any other (such as design performed as

Representative

Representative

Representative
Importance
Function Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM

Priority rating
requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline
factors to

Deadline
and
concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be a result of the
Change
quency

unmarketability consider? reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the actions

Fre-

(DRBFM) sheets)
due to change design evaluation manufacturing process
(DRBFM)

Fig. 2. DRBFM worksheet

 (7/39)
Section 3. Timing for the DRBFM
The DRBFM switches from the viewpoint of "management" which performs specified
tasks correctly to the viewpoint of "taking advantage of the humans' capability of
identifying issues (perceptiveness)." It combines the FMEA with design reviews. Thus, the
DRBFM is an unprecedentedly creative technique. Fig. 3 shows the steps of the DRBFM.

Fig. 4 specifies the timings in development for the DRBFM. To prevent problems, it is
important to implement the DRBFM on prototype drawings on a top-priority basis. It is the
most effective way to increase the quality of the drawings. However, since the prototype
is not complete at this point in time, similar components and plastic models (photo-
molding) should be provided.
These days, because of the need to shorten development time, the DRBFM may be
conducted even earlier, that is, in the stage of compiling conceptual diagrams of the
product. In that stage, which is prior to a detailed design, people have debate mainly as to
how to design the items that one is concerned about. People can consider many design
methods there. In the stage of conceptual diagrams, the DRBFM is a tool that stimulate
designers' creativity.
The DRBFM is a technique that "takes advantage of the humans' capability of identifying
issues (perceptiveness)" to prevent problems. One must constantly examine whether the
corrective actions discussed were actually implemented and whether they proved
effective. For that reason, it is important to implement the DRBFM while actually holding
the tested product and having a close look at it before the disassembled test product and
test results after the prototype test.

As discussed above, the DRBFM can be conducted about three times or so. In the
process of development, redesigns may be conducted. Therefore, please conduct the
DRBFM flexibly to make sure that the discussed details are reflected in the drawings and
evaluation in a timely manner.
Product planning
Creative FMEA
Components
Basic design produced
Design

Changes noted DRBFM

Good

(DR of the conceptual

Discussion

Concerns over the changes diagrams)

Design
Good

(failure mode) DRBFM

(DR of the prototype
Causes of the concerns diagram )
Prototype
Effects and importance (Redesign)
Evaluation DRBFM
Design Review (DR of the official
diagram after the FS)
Reflection on the design Reflection on the evaluation
Preparations for mass-production
DRBFM
Actions checked (DR of the permanent
model )
Good Design Review Mass-production launched

Fig. 3. Composition and steps of the DRBFM Fig. 4. Timing for the DRBFM
 (8/39)
Section 4. Procedure for the creative FMEA
Shown below is how to fill out a worksheet for the creative FMEA (DRBFM), which
forms the basis for debate at the DRBFM. These steps may be implemented either by
individuals or by groups. They will presumably prove more effective when implemented
by a group. However, since many of the explanations are overlapped with the DRBFM
to be mentioned later on, this section will mainly show how an individual can fill out a
worksheet for the creative FMEA.
(People who are to prepare such a worksheet in a group are referred to the DRBFM
Procedure.)
1) Preparations
To fill out an FMEA worksheet efficiently, organize the following information in
advance:
a) Required specifications: Requirements for performance and reliability
b) Operating environment, destinations, etc.
c) Structure of components and functions of parts
d) Changes made on the previous version, design considerations
- Identify the changes made for a reason and the changes that resulted from
those deliberate changes.
--- "What" was changed "how" "for what" and "what resulted" from those changes,
for example?
Before beginning work, provide the following:
a) Drawings (such as plans, assembly diagrams, component diagrams, and
drawings of old parts)
b) Components (The drawings should preferably show the internal structures of such
components.)
(If the prototype is incomplete, provide a similar component or a plastic model.)
c) FMEA worksheet (DRBFM worksheet)

2) Fill out an FMEA worksheet one week before the DRBFM.

Since DRBFM debate progresses according to the worksheet, the FMEA should be
implemented in advance. However, you do not have to complete the entire
worksheet as shown in Fig. 1. If only you have entered some results you have given
sufficient consideration to concerning what kind of design you have produced in
order to address the failure mode, its factors, and problems, you can have debate in
the DRBFM over specific corrective actions about "items to be reflected in the
design" and "items to be reflected in the evaluation." Through debate for the DRBFM,
you can also verify the failure mode and its factors again.

3) Consider the product as disassembled into components. (The key points are
the changed parts.)
Divide the product to the level of component diagrams and consider it while watching
the components and component diagrams.

Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results) Activities
Component Effects on eliminate the concerns?
customers performed
No. Function Any other (such as design
Importance

Loss of function Any other Items that the Items that the Items that the DRBFM as a result
Representative
Representative

Representative
Priority rating

and factors to requirements, design

Deadline
Deadline

Deadline

DRBFM indicates DRBFM indicates indicates should be of the

Change unmarketability concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check
consider? should be reflected should be reflected reflected on the
quency

(DRBFM) sheets) actions

Fre-

due to change on the design on the evaluation manufacturing process

(DRBFM)
 (9/39)

4) Note the changes (both the changes deliberately made and the changes that
resulted from them).
Most problems occur when a change is made in a conventional design. To proceed
efficiently with the FMEA, identify the changes first, then note the changes and consider
the problems. Here, identify all changes that are considered to affect the performance of
the components.
In that case, it is important to remember to check the changes that resulted from
deliberate changes (such as heatup in the surroundings, the shape of the component in
contact with the changed component, a change in material, and a change in oils).

5) Fill out the field for component functions, specifying the functions to be fulfilled
by the components.
Next, start listing up the functions that the target components are supposed to fulfill.
While looking closely at the drawings and components, give sufficient consideration to
the functions of the entire system and the interaction between the components. If you
are to conduct the FMEA in the stage of conceptual diagrams where you have not
decided on the details of the components, proceed with the examination with emphasis
on the functions of the entire system.

6) Define the operating conditions of the components. (The key point is the
operating condition that has changed.)
Before noting the changes and considering the possible concerns, consider in what
environment the target component will be used, while putting yourself in a customer's
shoes. Examining what kind of stress (operating environmental conditions) the target
component will be subjected to will identify the concerns over disorders about the
component functions and their unmarketability.

Photo 1. Filling out a DRBFM worksheet

 (10/39)

7) Note the changes and specify the disorders about the functions and
unmarketability.
Envisage the various environmental conditions under which the component will be used,
then consider what the possible concerns a customer may have as a result of the
changes (those made deliberately and those resulting from them).
When you think of the failure mode, you tend to think only of such disorders as damage,
distortion and wear. While putting yourself into a customer's shoes, do not forget to list
up functional losses and items that may affect marketability, such as "abnormal noise"
and "difficulty in operation."
You may find it hard to identify all failure modes in a short time all alone. You can also
have debate in the DRBFM to be mentioned later on. So list up the modes thinking as if
you were a customer.
At the start of a discussion, concerns (failure modes) and their factors come up in
confusion. Do not think too much about which category each item belongs to. Just let
what comes to your mind come out. If defects expected at first (factors and causes)
come to your mind, begin with the next step: "functional disorders and factors of
unmarketability (failure mode)." However, it is important to go back to the start line
again and again and conduct an examination from scratch to check for any other
concerns in order to make sure all concerns (failure modes) are identified.

8) Note the changes. Write down in what cases you have concerns and what the
factors of functional disorders and unmarketability (failure mode) are.
Finding a way to list up specific factors of failure modes is the key to useful debate
about the subsequent "items to be reflected on the design," "items to be reflected on
the evaluation," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process." Do not write
down such generic statements as "defect in ...." Instead, specify "which region is
defective in what way" in relation to a specific change made. While having a close look
at the "component" and "drawing," remember to write down sentences, not words.
"Writing sentences" should allow you to embody any image you may have in mind and
concretize the phenomenon of a specific defect in your mind.
If factors of failure modes are confused and you cannot reach the real cause of a
specific failure mode, you can conduct the Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), thus organizing
the factors of the failure. However, it is basically important to identify the issues and
problems while noting the changes and use your creativity to think of the causes.
 (11/39)

Fig. 5 shows a typical FMEA procedure. It is part of the FMEA used in a design review
for considering the use of resin for the lever in the engine room. For each component,
the worksheet specifies the component functions, failure modes, causes of the failures,
and corrective actions taken. For the corrective actions, the worksheet separates the
design actions from the actions checked in the test. At a glance, you will find standard
and well-organized FMEA results.
However, the study results of the cause of failure is summarized with a generic
statement common to all resin parts, "defect in ...." This FMEA does not give any clue to
the molding defects and dimensional imperfections. This FMEA would look natural
enough if the resin lever had been replaced with a resin knob of the parking brake lever.
The causes of damage, distortion, and wear are specified with a repetition of identical
words. The worksheet does not specify problems peculiar to that particular component.
This sheet lists up universal factors common to all resin parts. It is a great deviation
from the purpose of the FMEA which is to make people notice of various issues and
problems and find problems peculiar to the component in relation to the particular
change made.
To have useful debate about "items to be reflected on the design," "items to be reflected
on the evaluation," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process" in the
subsequent DRBFM requires you to write sentences in a specific manner. You cannot
decide on a specific corrective action unless the cause of the component being
discussed is identified.
Fig. 6 shows a typical operation where, concerning the cause of the failure, people first
thought of heat, moisture, oils, and other environmental conditions under which the
particular component is used and they progressed in the thinking process to the input
conditions and molding process. As shown in this example, describing in specific
sentences the consideration results of the cause of the failure of the particular
component will allow one to determine a specific corrective action in the subsequent
"items to be reflected on the design" and "items to be reflected on the evaluation."
Fig. 7 shows how a DRBFM worksheet was typically used. You can determine a specific
corrective action for "items to be reflected on the design" and "items to be reflected on
the evaluation," along with "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process."
 (12/39)

Effect of disorder Corrective action

classification
Frequency

Difficulty of
Severity
Cause of failure

detection

Fatality
Failure
Component's
No. Region Failure mode (initial, deterioration
function
over time) Effect on
Vehicle or E/G Design action Check method and result
assembly

1. Defective material 1 3 1 3
1 Resin lever 1. Spring
( PA66 ) retention 2. Defective molding 1 3 1 3
1. Rupture of
the boss 3. Defective dimension 1 3 1 3
Unable to open Unable to
that fixes 4. Thermal deterioration ・ Selection of a material that allows ・ Durability tests conducted: No
travel 1 3 2 6 ○
the spring of material for deterioration problems revealed
hook 5. Selection of the wrong
material 1 3 1 3
・ A shape design conducted, ・ Durability tests conducted: No
6. Internal residual stress 1 3 2 6 allowing for residual stresses problems revealed ○
1. Defective material 1 3 1 3
2. Distortion
of the
2. Defective molding 1 3 1 3
boss that 3. Defective dimension 1 3 1 3
fixes the
spring 4. Thermal deterioration ・ Selection of a material that allows ・ Durability tests conducted: No
of material 1 3 2 6 for deterioration problems revealed ○
hook
5. Selection of the wrong
material 1 3 1 3
1. Defective material 1 1 1 1
2. Defective molding 1 1 1 1
3. Wear of
the boss
3. Defective dimension 1 1 1 1
that fixes 4. Thermal deterioration ・ Selection of a material that allows ・ Durability tests conducted: No
of material 1 3 2 6 for deterioration problems revealed ○
the
spring 5. Selection of the wrong ・ Selection of a material that allows ・ Durability tests conducted: No
material 1 3 2 6 for deterioration over time problems revealed ○
hook
6. Spring resonance 1 1 1 1

Fig. 5. A typical FMEA on a resin functional part (1)

 (13/39)

Functional Effect of Factors leading to functional

Corrective action

Importance
Frequency
Change disorder disorders and unmarketability
disorder and
No. Component and Component's
unmarketability

Represen-

Represen-
(region) nature of function Symptom

Necessity
due to the change Reflection on the design Quality check

tative

tative
change System Vehicle as a
(failure mode) Cause of failure (design actions) (check method and result)
factor
- Static strength declined and damage resulted - Perform strength calculations allowing for - Perform a durability test after
due to resin deterioration. the causes of deterioration. deterioration.
1 Resin Metal to 1. Spring * Thermal deterioration * Determine the safety factor. * Durability test after deterioration due
lever PA retention * Grease deterioration * Perform calculations based on the to heat and grease
Deteriora- * Deterioration due to moisture characteristics after deterioration due to * 100°C x 500 hrs
tion over * Deterioration due to calcium chloride Ａ Ａ heat and grease. - Perform a composite deterioration
time * Deterioration due to E/G oil, fuel, and LLC - Survey the stickable solvents (such as E/G durability test.
- Fatigue strength declined and damage oil, fuel and LLC). * Cold and heat: coat with calcium
resulted due to resin deterioration. chloride (-35 to 100°C, 95%)
- Perform a test at the top limit spring
force.

- Conduct an approximate quote on impact - Perform an impact test (at low and
Impact - Damage due to spring impact Ｂ Ａ strength. high temperatures).
1. Damage to the Unable Unable
boss that fixes the to to - Cracks resulted from a boss having too small - Conduct a quote on fatigue strength.
- Conduct a durability test after
spring hook open travel an outside diameter and the repeated Ｂ Ｂ * Conduct an estimate based on an S-N
deterioration.
reaction of the spring. chart of stresses generated and PA.

- A boss bottom with a small radius of
curvature resulted in stresses concentrated,
which then resulted in cracks.
 
- Boss radius of curvature: 0.5 or more
Ｂ Ａ indicated in the drawings
- Check the dimensions of the sample.

- A high GF fill-up ratio resulted in repeated - Consider the optimal fill-up ratio of glass
Fatigue  loading, which then resulted in fatigue cracks fiber.
Ｃ Ｃ
in the boss bottom. * Consider static strength, fatigue, and
impact strength.
 

- Control the molding conditions thoroughly.

- Dispersions in the molding conditions * Specify in the QC process chart: resin - Perform a durability test on a worst-
resulted in welds in the boss bottom, which Ａ Ａ temperature, mold temperature, injection scenario sample with welds.
then resulted in cracks. pressure, injection speed, etc.

- Forcible releasing of the mold resulted in - Give instructions to check the boss for
cracks in the boss bottom. Ｂ Ａ cracks in an inspection instruction sheet.

- Resin deterioration resulted in a decline in
static strength and creep strength, which then
resulted in a deformed boss.
* Thermal deterioration
Deteriora- * Grease deterioration
tion over * Deterioration due to moisture
time * Deterioration due to calcium chloride
* Swelling due to E/G oil, fuel and LLC
- Plastic deformation of the boss due to the
spring reaction
- Perform deformation calculations based on - Check for deformation in a hot
atmosphere.
 adeterioration.
material characteristics chart after
- Perform a deformation test after
(A stress-strain curve.) deterioration (due to heat, grease,
Ｂ Ａ * Consider the outside diameter and height and temperature).
of the boss.
* Give instructions about the tolerance of
the spring force.

2. Deformation of
the boss that fixes - Make sure that the instructions are followed
the spring hook Overload - Deformed when the spring was installed. Ｂ Ｂ in installing the spring.

- Dispersions in the molding conditions (resin - Control the molding conditions thoroughly. - Perform a deformation test on a
 temperature and mold temperature) resulted Ａ Ａ * Specify in the QC process chart: resin sample under the worst molding
in deformation after the mold was removed. temperature, mold temperature, injection conditions.
pressure, injection speed, etc.

- Deformed due to the orientation of the glass - Check the orientation of the glass
- Consider the gate position. fibers. (Consider optimizing the
 fibers. Ａ Ａ
molding conditions.)

Fig. 6. A typical FMEA of resin functional components (2)

 (14/39)

[Typical formal FMEA cases]

Effect of disorder Corrective action

classification
Frequency

Difficulty of
Severity
Cause of failure

detection

Fatality
Failure
Component's Failure
No. Region (initial, deterioration
function mode over time) Effect on
Vehicle or E/G Design action Check method and result
assembly

1. Defective material 1 3 1 3
1 Resin lever 1. Spring
( PA66 ) retention
1. Rupture 2. Defective molding 1 3 1 3
of the
boss that 3. Defective dimension 1 3 1 3
fixes the Unable to open Unable to
spring travel ・ Selection of a material that allows ・ Durability tests conducted: No
hook
4. Thermal deterioration 1 3 2 6 for deterioration problems revealed
○
of material

5. Selection of the 1 3 1 3
wrong material

6. Internal residual ・ A shape design conducted, ・ Durability tests conducted: No ○

stress
1 3 2 6 allowing for residual stresses problems revealed

1. Defective material 1 3 1 3
2. Distortion
of the 1 3 1 3
2. Defective molding
boss that
fixes the
spring 3. Defective dimension 1 3 1 3
hook

[Typical DRBFM cases]

Concerns over the change

Activity performed
What design was

as a result of the
Concerns in what case? Effects on Recommended actions (DRBFM results)
Change (failure mode) made to eliminate
customers the concerns? (such

actions
Component and
No. Function as design
(region) nature of Any other requirements,
Importance

Any other

Representative

Representative
Representative

Loss of function
Priority rating

Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM
change factors to be

Deadline

Deadline
design standards,
Deadline

and concerns? indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be

Cause/factor
Frequency

unmarketability considered? and check sheets)

reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
due to change (DRBFM)
(DRBFM) design design design

- Perform strength - Perform a durability test - Sampling inspection

- Static strength declined and damage * Aromatic PA calculations allowing for  after deterioration. (once a month)
  resulted due to resin deterioration. adopted in view  the causes of * Durability test after After thermal
* Thermal deterioration of thermal
1 Resin Metal 1. Spring 1. Damage * Grease deterioration deterioration
deterioration. deterioration due to heat deterioration, a
lever to PA retention to the * Determine the safety and grease durability test was Test in
* Deterioration due to E/G oil, fuel, and
Deterioration

Party C, Sep.
Party A, Mar.

factor. * 100°C x 500 hrs conducted.

Party B, Jun.
over time

boss that and LLC Unable deterioration progress

High

* Deterioration due to moisture to travel A due to A * Perform calculations - Perform a composite (sched-
fixes the based on the deterioration durability uled to be
* Deterioration due to calcium moisture.
spring chloride
characteristics after test. finished in
deterioration due to heat * Cold and heat: coat
hook - Fatigue strength declined and June)
  damaged resulted due to resin and grease. with calcium chloride
- Survey the stickable (-35 to 100°C, 95%)
deterioration. - Perform a test at the top
solvents (such as E/G
oil, fuel and LLC). limit spring force.
Party B, May
Party A, Apl.

- Conduct an approximate - Perform an impact test

Impact

↑
Low

- Damage due to spring impact A C quote on impact (at low and high Completed
strength. temperatures).

- Conduct a quote on Test in

Party B, Jun.
Party A, Mar.

- Cracks resulted from a boss having fatigue strength. - Conduct a durability test progress
* Safety factor of
  too small an outside diameter and
the repeated reaction of the spring.
↑ A static strength
A * Conduct an
estimate based on an after deterioration.
(sched-
uled to be
>3.0 S-N chart of stresses finished in
generated and PA. June)
Party C, Sep.

- A boss bottom with a small radius of - Boundary samples to be

Party A, Feb.

Party B, Apl.

curvature resulted in stresses
  concentrated, which then resulted in
cracks.
- A high GF fill-up ratio resulted in
- Boss radius of curvature: - Check the dimensions used to make sure that
↑ A B 0.5 or more indicated in
the drawings
of the sample. all workers observe the
requirements.
- Items of acceptance
- Consider the optimal fill-
Party C, Sep.

inspection of molding
Party A, Mar.

repeated loading, which then

resulted in fatigue cracks in the boss
↑ A B up ratio of glass fiber.
* Consider static
materials to be
determined and
Medium

Fatigue

bottom. strength, fatigue, and

observed by all
impact strength.
personnel
- Molding conditions to be
controlled thoroughly
  * A 3-point gate * Specify in the QC process
- Dispersions in the molding - Perform a durability test
Party C, Sep.

 
conditions resulted in welds in the ↑ A to be used to
prevent welds
A on a worst-scenario
chart the resin temperature,
mold temperature, injection
boss bottom, which then resulted in and increase sample with welds. pressure, and injection speed.
cracks. * Boundary samples to be
resin fluidity used to make sure that all
workers observe the
requirements

- Use an inspection
instruction to instruct the
Party C, Sep.

- Forcible releasing of the mold

resulted in cracks in the boss bottom. ↑ A B personnel to check the
bosses for cracks.
* Boundary samples to
be used to make sure
that all workers observe
the requirements

Fig. 7. How a DRBFM worksheet is typically filled out

 (15/39)

9) Specify the possible effects of a specific disorder.

For an effect analysis, please list up the possible items from assembly components
to systems on which the particular part is to be mounted, while putting yourself in the
customer's shoes.

10) Analyze importance to identify the most important issues.

An importance analysis is not conducted to eliminate discussions about "reflection
on the design" and "reflection on the evaluation" in the DRBFM by dropping
unimportant items one by one from the particular level. It is conducted to identify the
most important issues such as "recall issue" and "vehicle fire" in view of the
functions of the entire system. Her, divide importance into about three levels (A, B,
and C) and check the low-importance item (rank C) well for any hidden problems.
In the FMEA in Fig. 5, factors of low importance are not subjected to the subsequent
studies in "items to be reflected on the design" and "items to be reflected on the
evaluation." Even if you successfully identify various factors, you may overlook
some hidden important items. Your previous accumulated efforts in FMEA may turn
into a waste. Please keep in mind that you must do this to find new issues.

11) Do not overlook the factors related to the manufacturing process.

You must also consider variances in the manufacturing process. It is particularly to
be noted that molding conditions and methods of material control may affect the
performance of resin parts. Therefore consider carefully and list up the factors
related to the manufacturing process.

12) Write down what kind of design you have made to eliminate the concerns.
When you start FMEA, the design examination should be complete. For the causes
of any concerns listed up regarding the changes, please write down in advance any
design requirements incorporated in the design examination and which can be
subjected to some corrective action.
You are to specify the items already incorporated in the design and items subjected
in advance to a design examination according to the design standards, checklists,
preventive information and other documents, in relation with the possible causes.
There should be problems that cannot be solved with the design requirements
incorporated in the design examination. Conducting FMEA to identify issues should
make items that cannot be detected with conventional checklists come to the
surface.
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results) Activities
Component Effects on eliminate the concerns?
Any other (such as design performed
No. Function customers
Representative

Representative

Representative
Importance

Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM as a result
Priority rating

factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline

Change and
concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be
of the
unmarketability consider? reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
quency

sheets)
(DRBFM) actions
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

 (16/39)

Organizing the findings obtained so far in a worksheet identifies the concerns to be

expected by noting the changes in the particular part and making the design changes and
identifies the possible causes of such concerns. The design findings obtained so far will
also determine whether such concerns are likely to be solved.

When the DRBFM worksheet has been filled out to this stage, you are to conduct DRBFM
in the next step. DRBFM, where active debate is held among the personnel concerned,
will identify concerns and specific corrective actions that you did not notice by yourself.
This process will then turn into a creative design review for identifying the issues.
 (17/39)
Section 5. How to proceed with DRBFM
"We have conducted many design reviews in the process of development, but we cannot
identify the issues so easily." "I am not sure if we have detected all issues." Those are
comments we often hear. In such a case, we ask them "Do you find such meetings just
following a pattern?" They respond, "Yes, those meetings tend to be places for only reporting
what is going on." That is the result of continued emphasis on the administrative aspect of
design reviews. It has helped establish the concept of design review in the process of
development, but the result is that the personnel concerned are losing the significance of
identifying the issues, which significance is what design reviews are supposed to have.
We therefore wish to recommend design reviews and DRBFM which emphasize the aspect of
the design review where "people notice the issues and make corrective actions." DRBFM
identifies all anticipated issues in order to proceed with the debate by means of worksheets.
As a result, the design, evaluation, manufacturing, and quality assurance of components will
be organically connected, which will presumably make it possible to "take design measures in
advance to prevent trouble," thus preventing problems.
Described below is the DRBFM method of proceed with a design review based on FMEA.

1) Preparations
Organize information given below and distribute it to the participants in advance in order
to have efficient debate in DRBFM.
a) Requirements: Requirements for performance and reliability
b) Operating environment, destinations, etc.
c) Structures and functions of components
d) Changes and design considerations in the system
- Identify the changes made as a necessity and the changes resulting from them.
--- "What" was changed "how" "for what" and "what changed as a result?" etc.

2) Things to be provided on the day of DRBFM

To start DRBFM, be sure to provide the following:
a) Drawings (such as scheme drawings, assembly drawings, component diagrams, and
drawings of old components)
b) Components (It is better to have cut articles that show their internal structures.)
- If a prototype is not complete, provide a similar sample, conventional component,
or plastic model that allows people to understand the structure and functions of the
product easily.
c) DRBFM worksheets
- Worksheets where previous FMEA results are organized should clearly indicate
what are the concerns that are conceivable by noting the changes, what causes
such concerns, and which of the necessary corrective actions can be taken in the
design examination so far.
 (18/39)

3) Readiness for DRBFM (design reviews for perceptiveness)

In DRBFM, it is very important for participants to participate actively in debate and
exchange ideas, thus stimulating one another's brains and making one another notice
various things. Described below are the readiness and considerations for joining the
DRBFM process, which is a method for perceptiveness (creation).

[What designers should be ready for]

Honestly speaking, designers hate to join a design review. "They give us all those stupid
complaints, give us a ton of homework, and give us no good advice at all. If anybody says
they know these things better than we designers do, let them dare to speak!" That is
probably what those designers think in their minds. As far as designers think that way, a
design review will not be a success.
Being at a DRBFM session, designers should be thinking "they are going to stimulate our
brains and inspire us." They should organize the items on the agenda for debate at the
DRBFM session. If any design review failed to inspire them, they must think that it was their
fault.
When having a design review with a supplier, some designers say nothing but "Everything is
all right!" whatever the supplier says, because those designers are too interested in
stressing that their system is problem-free. Such design reviews are a failure.

[What chairpersons should be ready for]

It is no exaggeration to say that the success in DRBFM depends on the chairperson of the
session. The chairperson should create an atmosphere where people can relax but have an
appropriate degree of tension so that experts' opinions can be heard sufficiently in order to
prevent the discussions from going one way. It is important to lead the debate while
constantly being aware of the need to concentrate the participants' attention to a single point
and then spreading it to the entire spectrum.

[What participants should be ready for]

Debate for DRBFM should be joined not only by component designers but also by
representatives of the teams for materials, evaluation, manufacturing and other operations.
They should discuss what concerns there are from various viewpoints and identify the
issues. When joining a design review, are you not having an easy attitude, like "I am going
to get some inputs." When attending a DRBFM session, you should be as ready as to think
to yourself "I am going to help the designers with my own expertise. Any problem with this
system would be my responsibility."
   
The number of the attendants should be about 10 or 15 at the most, to make sure that all
members can join the debate.
 (19/39)
[What you should be ready for when looking at a thing]
In a DRBFM session, you will proceed with debate while looking carefully at the drawings
and components. Looking carefully at a thing is harder than you may think. For that reason,
you should be ready for what is described below. At a DRBFM session for a test-completed
item, it is important to pick up each component in your hand and look carefully at all its
regions and corners. Make a sufficient check to detect any hidden problems stemming from
discoloration and wear.
- Looking at things that are seen
Some people look only at the parts that are on the agenda. It is important to look at all
the things surrounding them, covering all corners.
- Looking at things that are hidden
Looking at things disassembled and cut sections is a must for participants other than the
designers.
- Comparing and arranging
If you do not notice anything easily when you are handling the article in question alone,
arrange good things with bad ones. You can then see the difference.
- Measuring with an easy method
Apply a ruler to the component, roll it on a desk, or measure it with an easy method. You
can then see a lot of things. You can get a lot of information for debate without using an
upmarket meter.

[Debate considerations]
Described below are the considerations for proceeding with creative FMEA and DRBFM.
Use your creativity and notice various factors in debate about the concerns (failure modes)
and their causes related to the changes.
- First of all, think of the concerns that may result from the changes anticipated, while
putting yourself in your customers' shoes. (Note the changes deliberately made and
those resulting from them.)
- Consider the operating environmental conditions (stresses) and think of the factors,
beginning with materials and moving on to the shapes and manufacturing process.
- Have debate about the causes of the variances (such as dimensions and manufacturing).
- Think not only of the mechanical factors. Think of the chemical ones as well.
* Electric corrosion (the formation of local batteries due to contact between different
metals and corrosion in the clearance: such as corrosion due to an atmosphere of
acids or alkalis)
* Effects of oils and solvents and those of various additives and fillers
* Effects of products generated by deterioration (such as oxides)
* For oils and solvents, consider the status of new articles and the effects of
deterioration.
- Note not only those in direct contact. Note the indirect factors as well. (They include
acids, metal ions dissolved in oils and other liquids, adhesion of cleaning agents, and
adhesion of machine oil.)
- Note the temperatures from high to low. Pay particular attention to ice and condensation
(especially those on electric parts).
- Note the fasteners (such as bolt fasteners, crimping, and snap fits), welds, fused parts
(methods and shapes of fusion), and sealed parts. (Note the regions of discontinuity.)
- Discuss the unique methods of the customers.
(Have sufficient debate about how the customers will use the product, while putting
yourselves in their shoes.)
 (20/39)

4) Begin debate while noting the changes in each component. (The key point is the
changed part.)
In DRBFM, you are to have debate about one item at a time, about the items organized
on a DRBFM worksheet. With the dimensions changed, the product may retain the same
shape and its changes are often not listed. First, the members should check the changes
in the particular component.

5) Note the changes, and discuss if there are any concerns other than those listed in
the worksheet.
Next, envisage the environmental conditions under which the particular component is to
be used, then all members should think what concerns will result from the changes made
(notice the changes made deliberately and those resulting from them), while putting
themselves in the customers' shoes.
It may be hard for a person to identify all concerns (failure modes) all alone in a short
time. However, debate by all members from various angles should identify modes other
than the items listed in the DRBFM worksheet. The DRBFM worksheet provides a
separate field in the field for concerns concerning the changes, where ideas raised in a
DRBFM session can be entered. Entering such ideas in the separate field may identify
the items raised from angles different from those people are accustomed to and may
lead to new ideas.

6) Note the changes. Discuss in what cases concerns will result and the causes of
functional disorders and unmarketability (failure modes).
As described in the procedure for creative FMEA described above, the possibility of
listing up specific items about the causes of concerns (failure modes) is the key to useful
discussion in the subsequent "items to be reflected on the design," "items to be reflected
on the evaluation," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process." In a
DRBFM session, have debate about each item listed in the worksheet and discuss any
other causes from various angles. The DRBFM worksheet provides a separate field
similar to those for concerns, which can be stratified.
Debate about the causes of concerns (failure modes) should be deepened until the
participants come to envisage concretely a specific symptom of defect in their minds. If
the factors are too complicated for people to identify the causes, an FTA-assisted
analysis is recommended.
If specific results can be obtained from a study of the causes of failures peculiar to the
particular part, each cause can be given a specific corrective action in debate about the
subsequent "items to be reflected on the design," "items to be reflected on the
evaluation," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process."

7) Connect the factors about the manufacturing process FMEA.

Variances in the manufacturing process should also be considered. If methods of
material control and manufacturing conditions may affect component performance, have
sufficient debate abut the factors related to the manufacturing process as well. If such
cannot be identified in DRBFM, they should be discussed in process FMEA.
 (21/39)
8) Examine the design considerations implemented to eliminate the concerns.
The DRBFM worksheet lists up the items already incorporated in the design, items
for which design examinations were conducted in advance, and other items for which
corrective actions are possible, selected from among the design requirements,
design standards, and checklists of trouble prevention concerning the causes of the
concerns identified with attention paid to the changes in the stage of design
examination.
The DRBFM identifies the additional items and items that cannot be subjected to
solutions with traditional designs and evaluations alone, based on a discussion of the
items considered in the stage of design examination. Concerning the concerns that
are considered to be likely to be resolved by using a conventional design as a result
of the discussion, you can lower the priority ranking of the discussion. As a result, it
should become clear what the peculiar problems are in relation to the changes.

9) Discuss design actions and evaluation methods while examining the particular
component and its drawings carefully for each concern and its cause in
relation to the changes.
While checking each cause listed in the DRBFM worksheet, discuss the design
actions and evaluation methods for each item and identify the "items to be reflected
on the design (design actions)," "items to be reflected on the evaluation
(considerations to be noted in the evaluation)," and "items to be reflected in the
manufacturing process (such as process control items)."
In discussions about strength, you are to check the method of calculating the safety
factor and data to be used. Discussions about dimensional tolerances are designed
to check the method of drawing instructions and process capability. On the other
hand, items where changes over time are an issue need to be tested. You are to
discuss and determine in concrete terms the temperature, time, and conditions of
deterioration, and test method.
At that time, it is important to proceed with debate while matching each item to each
cause, while looking closely at the particular component and its drawings in order to
avoid collective debate about two or three items at one time. If debate covers as
wide range of topics, fill in later items provisionally and then go back to the original
concern (failure mode). It is important to determine the corrective actions discussed,
on the spot. If any item can be dropped, specify it in the DRBFM worksheet. If you
leave it for later, your homework will build up, making you stuck.
While in debate about the concerns (failure modes) and their causes, you will have
many items. To organize such discussions, you will have to identify the items to be
considered in the design, items to be checked in the evaluation, and items to be fed
back to the manufacturing process. You will often see a case where the conclusion is
that all items will be checked in a durability test. Before checkup by durability testing,
you must first make a "basically good design." You should also be able to omit a part
of the evaluation process by using imaginative methods of design calculation and
drawing instructions.
If variances in the manufacturing process or other manufacturing condition affects
the performance of a specific component, have sufficient debate about the causes
related to the process. In order to ensure a good performance of the component,
identify the items to be considered and controlled for the manufacturing process and
enter the items to be fed back to the manufacturing process, in the "items to be
reflected in the manufacturing process." Use a DRBFM worksheet to have a close
linkage with the "process FMEA" and the manufacturing process to be implemented
later on.
 (22/39)

The difference between the checklist and the DRBFM is that the checklist is
"something t observe common requirements," while the DRBFM is "something that
helps find requirements peculiar to a specific design." In filling out the worksheet,
therefore, do not use such comprehensive expressions as "as per the design
standards" and "perform various durability tests." Instead, use such specific
expressions as "the ......... region ensures a value R of 0.5" and "measure the
dimensions of the sliding parts after the operation durability test."
As you go on that far with the debate, you will have clarified the problems and
corrective actions peculiar to the component regarding the changes. However, since
we have proceeded with the debate for each component, you may overlook the
problems that may arise on the borders between components. Sometimes note also
the relationship between surrounding components and the relationship among the
components in the entire system by going back to the beginning, asking yourself
"let's see if there is any other concerns."

10) Specify a department responsible, person responsible, and deadline.

Concerning the items discussed in terms of the corrective actions, specify the items
to be reflected on the design, evaluation, and manufacturing, then determine a
person responsible and deadline.

Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result

Representative

Representative

Representative
Importance

Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM
Priority rating

factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and Cause/factor indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be of the
Change unmarketability
concerns? consider?
standards, and check
reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
quency

sheets) actions
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

11) Organize the discussions in the DRBFM and complete the FMEA.
Discuss the concerns that are likely to occur as a result of a specific change
(changes made and those resulting from them) in the DRBFM (failure modes) and
their causes. Determine design actions, evaluation methods, and action methods
and organize the items in the form of "items to be reflected on the design (design
actions)," "items to be reflected on the evaluation (considerations to be noted in the
evaluation)," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing (items to be reflected
on the process)." You can then complete the FMEA.

Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result
Representative

Any other
Representative

Representative

Loss of function
Importance

Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM
Priority rating

factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline

and concerns? Cause/factor indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be of the
Change unmarketability consider?
standards, and check
reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
quency

(DRBFM) sheets) actions

Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

Discuss these
Do these prior to the DRBFM.
in the DRBFM.
 (23/39)

12) Check if the items discussed in the DRBFM are actually reflected on the drawings
and evaluation items and effectively "prevent failures."
We believe it important for a DRBFM worksheet, which is as it were a crystallization of
wisdom with much work, is used in relation to all processes ranging from design
(drawings) to evaluation and then to quality auditing. These days, many developed
components are based on FMEA. However, it is far from true that a checkup is
conducted to see if the worksheets are maintained in the process of development and
the items discussed in the DRBFM are actually reflected on the drawings and evaluation
items. The completion of a worksheet does not mean that of DRBFM. To make DRBFM
debate prove effective, always follow up on the items listed below, check the actions,
and write the results down in the field for "activities taken as a result of the actions."
a) Check if the items listed in "items to be reflected on the design" are reflected on the
drawings of the component.
b) Check if the items listed in "items to be reflected on the evaluation" are reflected on
the evaluation items and evaluation conditions and an actual evaluation conducted.
c) Check if the items listed in "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process" are
reflected on the control and inspection items of the manufacturing process.

13) DRBFM on the test-completed product

In the DRBFM conducted in the drawing stage, we identified predictable concerns and
determined specific actions to be taken. Concerning action methods discussed in the
"items to be reflected on the design," be sure to conduct the DRBFM on the test-
completed product when the prototype incorporated in the drawings is complete and the
evaluation designed to check its effect is complete.
Disassemble each component and conduct the DRBFM while watching the drawings and
the DRBFM worksheet. To check the changes in the internal structure of the particular
component, provide a sample with a cut cross section and check every corner of the
inside sufficiently.

Cut and see.

Disassemble and see.

FMEA　
　
　Sheet
　　Work　
　　
Drawing
 (24/39)

Similarly to the DRBFM conducted in the stage of drawing, note the changes and check
for "any other concerns" and "any other factors" while monitoring the test results and
checking the entries made in the "items to be reflected on the evaluation" in the
worksheet. At that time, it is important not only to discuss whether the answer is yes or
no. It is also very important to hold each test-complete component in your hands and
have a close look at it. To find hidden issues such as "is this test appropriate?" and "is
it not necessary to redesign the product in view of the condition of the component?"
Conduct a sufficient analysis of the "looks" of the test-complete product.
When having a close look at the "looks" of a discolored or scratched product, the
component you are looking at should begin talking to you about the hidden issues. It is
important to examine each corner of the product well until you have such a feeling.
(Note: See Section 5-3 "What you should be ready for in the DRBFM: [What you should
be ready for when looking at a commodity].)

14) DRBFM in the manufacturing process

The DRBFM in the manufacturing process can be conducted in the same manner as in
the drawing stage. Instead of the component, note the changes in each process,
identify the concerns anticipated and their causes, and determine specific action
methods. You are also to determine specific action methods to eliminate problems
related to the manufacturing process discussed in the DRBFM of the drawing stage.
In debate about specific action methods, it is important to stratify and organize the
items to be implemented in the process design and the items to be implemented in the
process control. Take care not to lead the personnel responsible to the conclusion that
all actions are to be taken by process control and inspection.

Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
Priority rating

Any other (such as design

Representa-

Representa-
No. Function Loss of function Any other customers as a result
Importance

Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM

Deadline

Deadline
factors to requirements, design
and concerns? Cause/factor indicates should be indicates should be of the
tive

tive
standards, and check
Change unmarketability consider? reflected on the reflected on the
quency

(DRBFM) sheets) actions

Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation

1) Add an automatic 1) Control wax viscosity

1 Wax the Wax the Insufficient 1) Spray head clogged up Reduced - Use a coating temperature thoroughly (twice,
inside of bottom of waxing in - Wax viscosity too high corrosion spray gun. regulator and an directly).
the door. the some - Discharge pressure too low resistance automatic agitator to 2) Clean the spray head
From inside of areas - Wax too cold of the door the wax tank. more frequently
manual to the door. 2) Add a check process (twice, directly).
automatic to the spray pattern.
waxing

We have so far discussed the steps for implementing the DRBFM. Although the FMEA
may look inaccessible at first, you can complete it progressively by conducting the
DRBFM (that is, combining it with a design review and letting many interested
engineers share their ideas).
We earnestly recommend you to use the FMEA method on a product you are currently
developing, as at ease as if you were writing meeting minutes, and try a creative design
review: Design Review Based on Failure Mode (DRBFM).
 (25/39)
Section 6. An embodiment: Hair drier
As an actual embodiment, let's pick up the hair drier. It involves 58 components as shown
in Table 1, while Photo 2 shows the shapes of the main components.
The hair drier is based on the following specifications:
- Power supply: 100V AC, 50/60Hz - Power consumption: 1,200W for hot air
- Hot air temperature: 120°C (ambient temperature, 30°C)
- Weight: 34g - Cord length: 1.8m
- Equipped with a overheat controller (thermostat and temperature fuse)

13 14-2 14-1
16 25 62
50 51

4 19
67
23

18

15
17

Photo 2. An exploded-view photo of a hair drier

Bimetal (30) Traveling contact plate (29)

Contact (28)

Insulation block (31)

Terminal block (32) Terminal block (33)

Fig. 8. General view of the hair drier Fig. 9. Overheat controller

Fig. 10. Electric circuit diagram

 (26/39)

Bearing (42) Commutator (39) Rotor (69) Ferrite (40) Housing (70) End plate (71)

Brush (38)

Fig. 11. Structure diagram of a typical DC motor

To reach the component being discussed, disassemble it to the constituent for which a
part diagram is available. The point in disassembling the product to the constituents is in
the possibility of consideration while having a close look at the drawings and component.
You can concentrate on the target component by considering each constituent.

The target component of the hair drier picked up for the present case study consists of 58
constituents shown in Table 1. If it is better to consider the product on a unit-by-unit basis
with the parts collected in small groups, enter a unit designation in the field for the target
component.
 Table 1. Composition of a typical hair drier (a hierarchical structure)
(27/39)

(unit) Plug (1)

Cord U (61) Power cord (2)
Protector (3)
Control lever (4) Contact (5)
Power Contact spring (6)
Switch U
supply Traveling contact (7)
Contact grease (8)
Switch proper (62) Slider (9)
Temperature fuse Slider click (10)
Switch cover (11)
Body A (13)
Switch base (12)
Body B-1 (14-1)
Body B-2 (14-2)
Body U Barrier (15)
Hood (16)
Grip A (17)
Casing Grip U Grip B (18)
Hinge ring (19)
Tapping (20)
Heat-insulating Heat-insulating mica (21)
U (63)
Heat-insulating plate (22)
Heater U (64) Heater A (23)
Heater B(24)
Mica A (25)
Heater holder
Hair drier

Mica B (26)
Heat U (65)
Clamp (27)
source
Contact (28)
Traveling contact plate (29)
Bimetal (30)
Overheat Insulating block (31) Shaft (34)
controller U (66) Terminal A (32) Rotor (69) Core (35)
Terminal B (33) Windings (36)
Rectification Commutator (39)
mechanism Brush (38)
Brush holder (39)
DC motor (67) Ferrite (40)
Housing (70) Case (41)
Motor U Bearing A (42)
Voltage-drop Bearing B (43)
resistance (47) End plate (71) Terminal (44)
Fan Ripple capacitor (48) Terminal holder (45)
Diode (49)
Sealing mica (46)

Fan U Motor holder (50)

Fan (51)
Lead (52)
Lead wire (53)
Terminal lug (54) Operating manual
Connection Electric Crimp terminal (55) Manual U Precaution label
unit connection U (68)
Insulating tube (56) Tag
Soldering (57)
Stopper (58)
 (28/39)

14−
−2
Note: Snap fit
Orifice B Snap The flexibility of the resin
fit material is used to build a Screw tightening hole
structure where the lug A is
inserted into the orifice B
and the lug A is stuck, thus
being prevented from
Lug A coming loose.
14−
−1

Photo 3. An exploded-view photo of the bodies B-1 and B-2 Photo 4. Motor holder

Press-fit the fan directly.

50

Photo 5. An exploded-view photo of the motor, motor holder, and fan

When all constituents are listed up, identify the target constituents, for both the changes made
deliberately and those resulting from them.
In the present discussion, we will assume that the operating environmental conditions are the
same as those of conventional hair driers and will explain how to disassemble the hair drier,
while noting only the changes made deliberately. For the changes made deliberately, make a
sufficient check on the changes in material, material changes, and changes in shapes (such as
changes in plate thickness and dimensions). For constituents that remain completely
unchanged and based on traditional designs without modification, you can lower the priority
ranking in the FMEA. First, note the components subjected to a change and proceed with the
consideration.
In this study, we base ourselves on the assumption that design changes have been made
concerning the three components listed below. Fig. 14 shows typical entries made in the
DRBFM worksheet.
① Simplifying the mating methods for the parts of the casing and the "rear bodies (14-1 and
14-2)":
Switch from snap-fit mating (see Photo 3) to a friction melting structure (where the resin is
melted with friction heat from vibration).
② Change the method of fixing the motor holder (50) and motor from screw fastening to direct
press-fitting.
 (29/39)

Listed below are the operating conditions for a typical hair drier in view of the need to
dry hair, wet laundry, and futon.
- Operating atmospheric temperature: -10 to 35°C
- Operating humidity: 95% (possibility of use with a wet hand)
            
- Applicable regions: Throughout the country (from excessively salty sea coasts to
cold areas)
                 
- Applicable places: Bathrooms, lavatories, kitchens, living rooms
- Storage: Lavatories (hot and humid), living rooms (directly sunlit, hot)
- Users: From children to adults
- Power supply: Service outlet (possibly with too many cords plugged into a single
service outlet)
- Operation time: Normal (approx. 10 minutes), continued use (negligence to switch
off the unit)
- Objects to be dried: Drying of hair and wet clothes and futon, as well as softening
of resins and adhesives, among other objectives
- Abnormal use: Purposes other than drying (such uses as children's toys and fans)
- Other: Possibility of disassembly when broken down

You are to secure such operating conditions first, then proceed with your FMEA.
Some customers may be using the product in a peculiar manner. Although it may seem
odd to the designers, the customers may find it quite an ordinary method of use. The
designers should therefore give sufficient consideration at this stage.
 (30/39)
Concerning the hair drier that we picked up for the present case study, we will note the
changes in the three components listed below and identify the concerns to be anticipated as
a result of such redesigns, by taking full advantage of our creativity.
① Simplifying the method of mating the parts of the casing and the "rear bodies (14-1) and
(14-2)":
Change from snap fit mating to a friction melting structure. Fig. 12 shows a structural
outline of the fused parts.

（14−2）
（14−1）

Fig. 12. A structural outline of the fused parts of the rear bodies

② Change the method of fastening the motor holder (50) and the motor from screw
fastening to direct press-fitting to prevent them from coming loose. Fig. 13 shows a
structural outline of the press-fit parts.

Before the After the

change change
Motor holder
（50）
Screw fastening
t

(Motor )

1.5
Extension

Fig. 13. A structural outline of the location where the motor holder is press-fitted

If there is no change whatsoever in the designs of other constituents shown in Table 1,

you have only to proceed with your FMEA for the changed parts alone. However, you
must examine carefully what the changes are. (Note the changes made deliberately and
those resulting from them.)
In the present study, we are to proceed with the embodiment concerning the changes in
the friction fusion structure of the mating parts of the "rear bodies (14-1) and (14-2)" of
①. While referring to the case ①, conduct the DRBFM starting with the FMEA, in
relation to the case where the method of fastening the motor holder (50) in ② and the
motor from screw fastening to direct press-fitting in order to prevent them from coming
off. Shown below is the press-fitting process implemented as a result of the study of the
motor holder dimensions, the characteristics of the resin materials of the holder, and the
required press-fit load when direct-fitting is used.
(31/39)
 (32/39)
【Characteristics of polypropylene resin: at normal temperature】
】
1) Vertical plastic modulus (E): 1000MPa 2) Tensile strength : 30MPa
3) Coefficient of linear expansion : 11～12×10 /°C-5

(Coefficient of linear expansion of the motor casing); 1×10-5/°C)

【Study overview of the dimensions of the press-fit parts and the press-fit load 】

Motor holder OD : 2R3=30.0

Motor holder ID : 2R2=27.3±0.1
Motor OD : 2R1=27.6
δ: Compression margin of the motor holder

Stress in the direction E・δ・(R32－ R22)

of compression σr =
2・R2・R32

Stress in the direction P・(R32＋ R22)

of circumference σt =
R 3 2 － R2 2
―　 Dimensions of the motor holder 　―

1) Maximum stress in the E・δmax・(152－ 13.62)

= = 0.13 kg/mm2 （δmax＝0.2mm）
direction of compression σrmax 2×152×13.6

2) Maximum stress in the direction σrmax×(152 + 13.62)

of circumference σtmax = = 1.34 kg/mm2
152－13.62
3) Required press-fit load P = σrmax・S・μ = 0.13×(27.2・π×17.4）×0.2
= 0.13×1486×0.2 = 38.6kg

(Assume that the PP motor holder and the motor circumference have a friction coefficient (µ) of 0.2.)

【Overview of the press-fit process (Press-fit the motor holder, then solder the
wire harness.) 】 P

Fasten the motor casing. Install the motor holder. Press-fit the motor holder.
 (33/39)
Concerning the hair drier we picked up for the present case study, note the changes in the
two components in the case 1), then identify the concerns to be anticipated as a result of
such redesigns, by taking full advantage of your creativity as an FMEA implementer.
① Simplifying the method of mating the parts of the casing and the "rear bodies (14-1 and
14-2)":
Change from snap-fit mating to a friction fusion structure.

First of all, enter the rear bodies (14-1) and (14-2) (to be subjected to the FMEA) in the field
for the component designations. Then specify the friction fusion structure to be changed.
Concerning the functions of the components, do not forget to list up the relationships with
the surrounding parts and the functions of the components in terms of marketability.

If no change whatsoever has been made in the designs of other components shown in
Table 1, you have only to proceed with your FMEA for the changed parts alone. However,
the FMEA implementer is requested to identify the changes (changes made deliberately and
those resulting from them) carefully.
DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )
Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? Effects on What design was made to Recommended actions (DRBFM results)
Component eliminate the concerns? Activities
Any other customers (such as design
No. performed as
Importance

Representative
Function

Representative

Representative
Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM
Priority rating

factors to requirements, design

Deadline
Deadline

Deadline
and
concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be a result of the
Change unmarketability consider?
quency

reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the actions

Fre-

(DRBFM) sheets)
due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

1. Fastening
the body
1 Body B-1 B-2
(14-1)

2. Preventing
Friction the
fusion ingress of
structure foreign
matter

3. Air intake

1. Holding
the body A

2 Body B-2
(14-2)

2. Holding
the body
B-1

Friction
fusion
structure

3. Holding
the grip U

4. Smooth
activation
of the grip
U

Fig. 14. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (1)

 (34/39)

Concerning the hair drier we picked up in the present case study, we noted the change 1)
and summed up the designations of the components to be studied and their changes, along
with their functions in Fig. 14.
① Simplifying the method of mating the parts of the casing and the "rear bodies B-1 (14-1)
and B-2 (14-2)":
Change from snap fit mating to a friction fusion structure.

Next, you are to identify the concerns to be anticipated as a result of the redesigns as
described in ①, by taking full advantage of your creativity as an FMEA implementer. Here,
you must list up all concerns anticipated. Since they can be discussed in the latter half of
the DRBFM, it is so designed that the items identified in the DRBFM can be entered in the
field for "Any other concerns? (DRBFM)."

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? Effects on What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results)
Component eliminate the concerns? Activities
Any other customers (such as design performed as

Representative
Representative

Representative
Importance

No. Function Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM
Priority rating

requirements, design

Deadline
factors to

Deadline

Deadline
and indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be a result of the
Change concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check
unmarketability consider? reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the actions
quency

sheets)
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

(DRBFM)

1. Loosening
1. Fastening due to a
the body crack in the
1 Body B-1 B-2 resin of the
(14-1) mating parts

2. Enlarged
Friction
distortion of
fusion
the resin of
structure
the mating
parts

3. A level
difference in
the mating
parts (low
marketability)

4. Fusion burrs
in the mating
parts (low
marketability)

1. Loosening
1. Holding due to a
of the crack in the
2 Body B-2 body B-1 resin of the
(14-2) mating parts

2. Enlarged
distortion of
Friction the resin of
fusion the mating
structure parts

3. A level
difference in
the mating
parts (low
marketability)

4. Fusion burrs
in the mating
parts (low
marketability)

Fig. 15. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (2)

 (35/39)

We have listed up in Fig. 15 the results of a study of the concerns to be anticipated as a

result of the redesign as described in ①. Next, consider in concrete terms how the
concerns over the changes will occur.

Fig. 16 shows a typical result of a study of the ways and causes of concerns over the
changes occurring, concerning the body B-1 (14-1). Here, you should list up all
conceivable causes. Since you can consider them again in the latter half of the DRBFM, it
is so designed that the items identified in the discussion in the DRBFM can be entered
into the field for "Any other factors to be considered? (DRBFM)."

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM as a result
Any other

Representative

Representative

Representative
Loss of function
Importance

Priority rating
factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be of the
Change concerns? Cause/factor standards, and check
consider? reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
quency

unmarketability
actions
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) sheets)

design evaluation manufacturing process
(DRBFM)

1. Loosening 1. The fused parts break down

due to a due to thermal deterioration.
2. Fastening
crack in the 2. The resin in the fused parts
the body
1 Body B-1 resin of the cracks due to creep
B-2
(14-1) mating parts distortion.
3. The mating parts undergo
fusion damage due to heat.
4. The mating parts break
down due to motor vibration
Friction (microscopic vibration or
fusion resonance).
structure 5. The fused parts get
damaged due to the
repetition of thermal
expansion and shrinkage.
6. The fused parts break down
du to a drop impact imposed
when assembled or in use.

2. Enlarged 1. The poorly fused parts get

distortion of distorted greatly due to heat.
the resin of 2. The fused parts get
the mating distorted due to moisture.
parts 3. The body gets distorted due
to residual strains occurring
at the time of molding.
4. Poor fusion results in
reduced penetration,
leading to great distortion.

3. A level 1. The bodies get distorted due

difference in to residual strains occurring
the mating at the time of molding,
parts (low resulting in a level difference.
marketability) 2. The poorly fused parts get
distorted due to heat,
resulting in a level difference.
3. A level difference occurs due
to a phase deviation at the
time of fusion.

4. Fusion burrs 1. Excessive penetration in the

in the mating fused parts results in stuck-
parts (low out burrs.
marketability) 2. A large gap between the
mating parts results in stuck-
out burrs.

Fig. 16. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (3)

 (36/39)

Fig. 15 summarizes the study results of what concerns are anticipated as a result of the
redesign as presented in ①, while Fig. 16 lists up the items that may cause such
symptoms.
The next step is to specify in concrete terms what designs have been made to eliminate
the adverse effects on the customers and the concerns related to the particular change, in
relation to the causes of the concerns.
In the stage where the FMEA is implemented, the design of the body B-1 (14-1) should be
almost complete. Fill out the worksheet while basing yourself on the design requirements,
design standards, and defectives-preventive checklists, along with other information and
while relating them with the items already incorporated in the design at that time and the
items subjected to design consideration in advance, and other adverse factors and
causes to be anticipated.
DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )
Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result

Representative

Representative

Representative
Loss of function Any other
Importance

Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM Items that the DRBFM

Priority rating
factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and Cause/factor indicates should be indicates should be indicates should be of the
Change concerns? standards, and check
unmarketability consider? reflected on the reflected on the reflected on the
quency

sheets) actions
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design evaluation manufacturing process

(DRBFM)

1. Loosening 1. The fused parts break down Unserviceable 1. Dimensions and

due to a due to thermal deterioration. (they find it A shapes that result
Low

2. Fastening
crack in the 2. The resin in the fused parts risky) in the breakdown
the body
1 Body B-1 resin of the cracks due to creep of the base
B-2
(14-1) mating parts distortion. material in the
3. The mating parts undergo general part of the
fusion damage due to heat. resin
4. The mating parts break 2. Keep it at or below
down due to motor vibration the resin melting
Friction (microscopic vibration or temperature with
fusion resonance). an overheat
structure 5. The fused parts get controller (at no
damaged due to the more than 120ºC).
repetition of thermal 3. Unify the body
expansion and shrinkage. proper at the same
6. The fused parts break down grade for proven
du to a drop impact imposed PP resins.
when assembled or in use. 4. Do not use
components that
dropped during
assembly.
(Conduct thorough
process control.)

2. Enlarged 1. The poorly fused parts get Unserviceable A 1. Determine the

Medium

distortion of distorted greatly due to heat. (they find it optimal value by

the resin of 2. The fused parts get risky) adjusting the fusion
the mating distorted due to moisture. and molding
parts 3. The body gets distorted due conditions.
to residual strains occurring 2. Unify the body
at the time of molding. proper with highly
4. Poor fusion results in water-resistant and
reduced penetration, proven PP resins.
leading to great distortion.

3. A level 1. The bodies get distorted due They find it B 1. Determine the
High

difference in to residual strains occurring defective. optimal value by

the mating at the time of molding, adjusting the
parts (low resulting in a level difference. fusion and molding
marketability) 2. The poorly fused parts get conditions.
distorted due to heat, 2. Identify and
resulting in a level difference. implement
3. A level difference occurs due thoroughly the
to a phase deviation at the items of process
time of fusion. control and
inspection in the
fusion process.

1. Determine the
4. Fusion burrs 1. Excessive penetration in the They find it B optimal value by
High

in the mating fused parts results in stuck- low in quality. adjusting the
parts (low out burrs.
fusion and molding
marketability) 2. A large gap between the
conditions.
mating parts results in stuck-
2. Identify and
out burrs.
implement
thoroughly the
items of process
control and
inspection in the
fusion process.

Fig. 17. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (4)

 (37/39)

The DRBFM allows the participants to have thorough debate on the items listed in the
FMEA worksheets in Figs. 15 through 17 implemented so far by a single person from
different angles, thus enabling you to find new items that you have never thought of before.
Here, as typical items identified anew, we have entered the mode of "the smoking and burns
of the resin due to heat in the body B-1" in the field for "Any other concerns? (DRBFM)," and
the "progress in the cracks starting with the welds" and the "deterioration and cracks due to
the UV rays in direct sunlight" in the field for "Any other factors to be considered?
(DRBFM)."

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Component Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results) Activities
Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result

Representative
Importance

Representative

Representative
Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the Items that the DRBFM

Priority rating
factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and Cause/factor indicates should be DRBFM indicates indicates should be of the
Change concerns? standards, and check
consider?
quency

unmarketability reflected on the should be reflected reflected on the

Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) sheets)

design on the evaluation manufacturing process
actions
(DRBFM)
1. Dimensions and
1. Loosening 1. The fused parts break down Unserviceable A shapes that result in
due to a due to thermal deterioration. (they find it the breakdown of
1. Fastening
crack in the 2. The resin in the fused parts risky) the base material in
Low

the body the general part of

1 Body B-1 resin of the cracks due to creep distortion.
B-2 the resin
(14-1) mating parts 3. The mating parts undergo
2. Keep it at or below
fusion damage due to heat. the resin melting
4. The mating parts break down temperature with an
due to motor vibration overheat controller
(microscopic vibration or (at no more than
Friction resonance). 120ºC).
3. Unify the body
fusion 5. The fused parts get damaged proper at the same
structure due to the repetition of thermal grade for proven PP
expansion and shrinkage. resins.
6. The fused parts break down 4. Do not use
du to a drop impact imposed components that
dropped during
when assembled or in use. assembly. (Conduct
thorough process
7. Loosening due to control.)
progress in the cracks
starting with the welds
8. Deterioration and DRBFM additions
cracks due to the UV
rays in direct sunlight

2. Enlarged 1. The poorly fused parts get Unserviceable A 1. Determine the

Medium

distortion of distorted greatly due to heat. (they find it optimal value by

the resin of 2. The fused parts get risky) adjusting the fusion
the mating distorted due to moisture. and molding
parts 3. The body gets distorted due conditions.
to residual strains occurring 2. Unify the body
at the time of molding. proper with highly
4. Poor fusion results in water-resistant and
reduced penetration, proven PP resins.
leading to great distortion.

3. A level 1. The bodies get distorted due They find it B 1. Determine the
difference in to residual strains occurring defective. optimal value by
High

adjusting the
the mating at the time of molding, fusion and molding
parts (low resulting in a level difference. conditions.
marketability) 2. The poorly fused parts get 2. Identify and
distorted due to heat, implement
resulting in a level difference. thoroughly the
items of process
3. A level difference occurs due control and
to a phase deviation at the inspection in the
time of fusion. fusion process.

1. Determine the
4. Fusion burrs 1. Excessive penetration in the They find it B optimal value by
High

in the mating fused parts results in stuck- low in quality. adjusting the
parts (low out burrs. fusion and molding
marketability) 2. A large gap between the conditions.
2. Identify and
mating parts results in stuck- implement
out burrs. thoroughly the
items of process
control and
inspection in the
fusion process.

5. Smoking and
burns of the resin
due to heat DRBFM additions

Fig. 18. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (5)

 (38/39)

While confirming the causes listed in the worksheet, discuss ways to make designs and
evaluate them for each item and identify the "items to be reflected on the design (design
actions)," "items to be designed on the evaluation (considerations to be noted in the
evaluation)," and "items to be reflected on the manufacturing process (process control and
inspection items)."

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results) Activities
Component Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result

Representative

Representative

Representative
Importance
Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the Items that the DRBFM

Priority rating
factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and Cause/factor indicates should be DRBFM indicates indicates should be of the
Change concerns? standards, and check
unmarketability consider? reflected on the should be reflected reflected on the
quency

sheets) actions
Fre-

due to change (DRBFM) design on the evaluation manufacturing process

(DRBFM)

1. Loosening 1. The fused parts break down Unserviceable A 1. Dimensions and

shapes that result
* Consider the fusion
conditions (frequency,
* Subject a sample
with the worst
due to a due to thermal deterioration. (they find it in the breakdown time, and pressure fusion conditions
1. Fastening
Low

applied) under which to heat

the body crack in the risky) of the base
the base metal breaks deterioration, then
1 Body B-1 B-2 resin of the material in the down in the general perform a static
(14-1) mating parts general part of the part. strength test.
resin (80°C × 2,000 hrs)
* Shape the fused parts
with a level difference
and provide a
2. Keep it at or below clearance of 0.2mm to
Friction the resin melting contain the burrs.
fusion temperature with
structure an overheat * Subject a sample with the
2. The resin in the fused parts controller (at no worst fusion conditions to
thermal deterioration, then
cracks due to creep distortion. more than 120ºC). perform a distortion test.
(80°C × 2,000 hrs)

3. Unify the body * Check the PP resins

3. The mating parts undergo for distortion
proper at the same
fusion damage due to heat. grade for proven temperature and
fusion starting
PP resins. temperature.

* Subject a sample with

4. The mating parts break down the worst fusion
due to motor vibration conditions to thermal
deterioration, then
(microscopic vibration or perform a vibration
resonance). durability test.
(80°C × 2,000 hrs)

4. Do not use * Subject a sample

5. The fused parts get damaged components that with the worst fusion
due to the repetition of thermal dropped during conditions to a cold
expansion and shrinkage. assembly. and heat repeat test.
(Conduct thorough (-20°C to 120°C ×
process control.) 100 cycle)

* Perform a low- * Prevent it from

6. The fused parts break down temperature (-20°C) dropping during
du to a drop impact imposed drop test (1.5m) on assembly and strictly
new samples and prohibit the use of
when assembled or in use. thermally dropped
deteriorated ones components.
(80°C x 2,000 hrs).

* Consider a multi- * Subject a sample with * Control the molding

point gate, film gate, the worst molding conditions (mold
7. Loosening due to progress in and other conditions to thermal temperature and
the cracks starting with the parameters for a deterioration, then injection pressure).
welds mold structure. perform a vibration
durability test.
(80°C x 2,000 hrs)

* Weatherproofness
8. Deterioration and cracks due (Sun Shine) (If the
to the UV rays in direct current PP is
problem-free, use a
sunlight
product of the same
grade.)

* Consider the fusion * Subject a sample with * Control the fusion

2. Enlarged 1. The poorly fused parts get Unserviceable A 1. Determine the conditions (frequency, the worst fusion conditions
time, and pressure conditions to thermal (frequency, time,
Medium

distortion of distorted greatly due to heat. (they find it optimal value by applied) under which deterioration, then and pressure
the resin of risky) adjusting the the base material perform a distortion applied).
fusion and breaks down in the test.
the mating general parts. (80°C × 2,000 hrs)
parts molding
conditions. * Subject a sample with
2. The fused parts get the worst fusion
distorted due to moisture. conditions to a cold,
humid, and heat
repeat test. (-20°C to
50°C, 90% to 120% ×
100 cycle)

* If residual strains after * Subject a sample with * Control the molding

3. The body gets distorted due 2. Unify the body the molding are great, the worst fusion conditions (mold
consider using conditions to thermal temperature and
to residual strains occurring proper with highly annealing (thermal deterioration, then injection pressure).
at the time of molding. water-resistant treatment). perform a distortion
test.
and proven PP (80°C × 2,000 hrs)
resins.
* Consider the fusion * Check the penetration * Control the fusion
4. Poor fusion results in conditions (frequency, status of the cross conditions
reduced penetration, time, and pressure section of the fused (frequency, time,
applied) under which parts by a polarization and pressure
leading to great distortion. the base metal breaks microscope. applied).
down in the general * Perform a static
parts. strength test on a
sample with the fusion
conditions.

Fig. 19. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (6)

 (39/39)
In the final step, you should follow up on whether the items determined in the DRBFM are
actually reflected on the drawings and evaluation items. Enter the follow-up results into the
field for "activities as a result of the actions" in the worksheet.
After the DRBFM, it is important to use the worksheets while maintaining the additions and
corrections and constantly checking that the decisions are actually implemented.

DRBFM WORK SHEET (For new designs and redesigns )

Model ;
Design Review Based on Failure Mode No.;
System ; Date prepared;
Component; Originator; DR members; Date corrected;
Concerns over the change Concerns in what case? What design was made to Recommended actions (DR BFM results) Activities
Component Effects on eliminate the concerns? performed
No. Function Any other customers (such as design
as a result

Representative

Representative
Importance

Representative
Loss of function Any other Items that the DRBFM Items that the Items that the DRBFM

Priority rating
factors to requirements, design

Deadline

Deadline

Deadline
and Cause/factor indicates should be DRBFM indicates indicates should be of the
Change concerns? standards, and check
unmarketability consider?
quency

reflected on the should be reflected reflected on the

actions
Fre-

(DRBFM) sheets)
due to change (DRBFM) design on the evaluation manufacturing process

A 1. Dimensions and
shapes that result
* Consider the fusion
conditions (frequency,
* Subject a sample
with the worst
* Start
considering
1. Fastening 1. Loosening due to a 1. The fused parts break down Unserviceable time, and pressure fusion conditions
in the breakdown the fusion
crack in the resin of (they find it
Low

the body due to thermal deterioration. of the base applied) under which to heat conditions
1 Body B-1 B-2 the mating parts risky) material in the the base metal breaks Party deterioration, then Party (frequency,
(14-1) general part of the A down in the general
part.
A
00/02
perform a static
strength test.
C time, and
pressure
resin (80°C × 2,000 hrs) 00/03
applied).
* Shape the fused parts
with a level difference
2. Keep it at or below and provide a
the resin melting clearance of 0.2mm to
Friction temperature with contain the burrs.
fusion an overheat
* Subject a sample with the
structure 2. The resin in the fused parts controller (at no Party
B
worst fusion conditions to
more than 120ºC). thermal deterioration, then C
cracks due to creep distortion. perform a distortion test. 00/04
(80°C × 2,000 hrs)

3. Unify the body * Check the PP resins

3. The mating parts undergo proper at the same for distortion Party
fusion damage due to heat. grade for proven C temperature and C
PP resins. fusion starting 99/12
temperature.

* Subject a sample with

4. The mating parts break down 4. Do not use the worst fusion Party
due to motor vibration components that B conditions to thermal
deterioration, then C
(microscopic vibration or dropped during perform a vibration 00/03
resonance). assembly. durability test.
(80°C × 2,000 hrs)
(Conduct thorough
process control.)
* Subject a sample
5. The fused parts get damaged with the worst fusion
Party
due to the repetition of thermal conditions to a cold
expansion and shrinkage. A and heat repeat test.
(-20°C to 120°C ×
C
99/03
100 cycle)

* Perform a low- * Prevent it from

6. The fused parts break down temperature (-20°C) dropping during
drop test (1.5m) on Party assembly and strictly
du to a drop impact imposed
when assembled or in use. A new samples and
thermally
C prohibit the use of
dropped
00/03
deteriorated ones components.
(80°C x 2,000 hrs).

* Consider a multi- * Subject a sample with * Control the molding

point gate, film gate, the worst molding conditions (mold
7. Loosening due to progress in and other Party conditions to thermal Party temperature and
the cracks starting with the C parameters for a B deterioration, then C injection pressure).
welds mold structure. 00/03 perform a vibration 00/03
durability test.
(80°C x 2,000 hrs)

* Weatherproofness * Decided that

8. Deterioration and cracks due Party (Sun Shine) (If the the current
to the UV rays in direct C B current PP is PP was
sunlight 99/11 problem-free, use a problem-free.
product of the same
grade.)

1. Determine the * Consider the fusion * Subject a sample with * Control the fusion
conditions (frequency, Party
2. Enlarged distortion
1. The poorly fused parts get
Unserviceable A optimal value by time, and pressure A
the worst fusion
conditions to thermal
Party conditions
(frequency, time,
* Start
Medium

of the resin of the

distorted greatly due to heat.
(they find it adjusting the A applied) under which
the base material 00/02
deterioration, then
perform a distortion
C
00/04
and pressure
applied).
considering
the fusion
mating parts risky) fusion and breaks down in the test. conditions
molding general parts. (80°C × 2,000 hrs)
conditions.
* Subject a sample with
2. The fused parts get the worst fusion
distorted due to moisture. conditions to a cold, Party
humid, and heat
A repeat test. (-20°C to
C
50°C, 90% to 120% × 00/03
100 cycle)

* If residual strains after * Subject a sample with * Control the molding

3. The body gets distorted due the molding are great, Party the worst fusion Party conditions (mold
2. Unify the body
to residual strains occurring
proper with highly
C consider using
annealing (thermal B
conditions to thermal
deterioration, then C
temperature and
injection pressure).
at the time of molding. treatment). 00/04 perform a distortion 00/04
water-resistant test.
(80°C × 2,000 hrs)
and proven PP
4. Poor fusion results in resins. * Consider the fusion * Check the penetration * Started
* Control the fusion
reduced penetration, conditions (frequency, status of the cross conditions considering
time, and pressure Party section of the fused Party (frequency, time, the fusion
leading to great distortion.
A applied) under which A
the base metal breaks 00/02
parts by a polarization
microscope.
C
00/02
and pressure
applied).
conditions.
* Starting
down in the general * Perform a static
parts. strength test on a observations
sample with the fusion with a
conditions. microscope.

Fig. 20. FMEA worksheet for a typical hair drier (7)