This framework demonstrates improved risk assessment and prioritization in manufacturing, suggesting benefits for quality management.
The paper presents the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) method applied to a process-based case study, together with an approach for implementing the AIAG & VDA harmonized FMEA standard by using modern digital tools. While classical FMEA is widely used in the industry, risk assessment based on the Risk Priority Number (RPN) often leads to the inconsistent ranking of failures and unclear prioritization of corrective actions. This paper explores the shift from the traditional Risk Priority Number (RPN) approach to the Action Priority (AP) concept introduced in the AIAG & VDA FMEA Handbook and explains why this change leads to clearer, more consistent risk-based decisions. Rather than focusing only on the methodological differences, the paper also outlines a practical framework for full implementation, showing how Industry 4.0 technologies can strengthen traceability, improve response time, and ensure greater consistency in PFMEA development. It also examines how Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) can support engineers in everyday practice—for example, by helping identify potential failure modes, standardizing documentation, and guiding the definition of prevention and detection controls. In parallel, IoT-based monitoring and real-time data collection can provide valuable feedback to validate occurrence and detection ratings. Over time, this data-driven feedback loop can improve the accuracy and reliability of risk assessments. The proposed framework contributes to improved responsiveness in process optimization activities, reduces the probability of recurring failures, and supports continuous quality improvement in manufacturing organizations. The solution is discussed in relation to classical FMEA practices and recent trends in the digital transformation of quality management systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oancea et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: