Failure mode identification method for cigarette industry
By identifying and analyzing the risks in the design and manufacturing stages throughout the product cycle, combining process analysis methods, failure mode and consequence analysis methods, the problem of difficulty in comprehensively managing quality risks in the existing technology is solved, and the risks to the product cycle are achieved Management reduces risk losses and improves the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of quality management.
Patent Information
- Application Number
- CN202411425276.4
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2024-10-12
- Publication Date
- 2025-01-07
AI Technical Summary
The prior art is difficult to fully identify and control quality risks in the design and manufacturing stages throughout the product cycle, resulting in the problem of incomplete risk management.
Starting from the entire cycle of the product, we identify the risks of the product design stage and cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk, and use process analysis method and comparison method to identify the failure pattern, combine the failure pattern and consequence analysis method to score severity and frequency and undetectable degrees, determine the risk level and divide high-risk terms.
It realizes quality risk management for the entire product cycle, helps reduce risk losses, ensures risk control at an acceptable level, and improves the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of overall product quality management.
Smart Images
Figure CN119273159A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of cigarette production, and more specifically, to a failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry. Background Art
[0002] Quality risk management is to reduce the existence of risk sources and the probability of risk events by identifying, evaluating and controlling a series of factors that cause product quality risks, thereby reducing risk losses and keeping risk losses within an acceptable level for decision makers.
[0003] The main methods and tools of quality risk management include: failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA), fault tree analysis (FTA), hazard analysis and critical control point (HACC·P), pre-hazard analysis (PHA), etc.
[0004] Among them, Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) can help enterprises identify existing or potential quality risks (i.e. product failure modes) in the manufacturing process, deeply analyze the causes of their occurrence, and evaluate the resulting quality risks, so as to formulate risk control plans and countermeasures. However, from the perspective of the full product cycle, the product includes two stages: design and manufacturing. Therefore, only controlling the quality risks of the manufacturing process is not comprehensive for the overall quality management of the product. Summary of the invention
[0005] The present application provides a failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry, which identifies and analyzes risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process to determine high-risk items, conducts quality risk management throughout the product life cycle, and contributes to the comprehensive and effective control of risk losses.
[0006] The present application provides a failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry, comprising:
[0007] Starting from the whole product life cycle, identify the risks in the product design stage and cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk;
[0008] Analyze each cause of each identified risk and obtain the corresponding risk value;
[0009] Determine the risk level classification rules based on the risk value statistics of all causes of all risks;
[0010] Identify high-risk items based on risk level classification rules.
[0011] Preferably, starting from the whole product life cycle, identify the risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk, including:
[0012] Collect user feedback on the product;
[0013] Based on the feedback information, with the product quality formation path as the main line, in accordance with national laws and regulations, industry and enterprise standards, with product design, appearance design, manufacturing process or process as the object, conduct a comprehensive and systematic identification of the existing or potential failure modes in each process of product design and cigarette manufacturing process;
[0014] Analyze the causes of failure modes;
[0015] Among them, each failure mode corresponds to a risk.
[0016] Preferably, the failure mode is identified by using a process analysis method and a comparison method.
[0017] Preferably, the causes of the failure mode are analyzed, specifically including:
[0018] For each failure mode identified, the system searches for all failure causes that lead to the failure mode;
[0019] The main cause of the failure mode is determined based on the theoretical correlation between each failure cause and the failure mode and the actual frequency of the failure mode caused by the failure cause.
[0020] Preferably, a failure mode and effects analysis method is used to analyze each cause of each identified risk to obtain a corresponding risk value.
[0021] Preferably, the failure mode and effect analysis method is used to obtain the risk value corresponding to each risk, specifically including:
[0022] Formulate scoring standards for the three risk dimensions of severity, frequency and undetectability during the product design stage and cigarette manufacturing process based on the quality characteristics of cigarette products and the actual situation of cigarette enterprises;
[0023] Collect the data needed to score each risk dimension for each cause of each risk during the product design phase and cigarette manufacturing process;
[0024] Scoring of three risk dimensions is performed for the data;
[0025] The product of the score values of the three risk dimensions of each cause is taken as the risk value of the cause.
[0026] Preferably, the following factors are taken into account when developing severity scoring criteria:
[0027] Whether it affects the health of cigarette consumers; whether it affects the basic functions of cigarettes; whether it affects the sensory quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the appearance quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the brand and corporate image; quality factors that cigarette consumers are concerned about; relevant national laws, regulations and industry standards.
[0028] Preferably, the risk level classification rules are determined, specifically including:
[0029] Determine the proportion of each risk level;
[0030] Determine the risk value that matches the ratio based on the statistical results as the dividing node;
[0031] The division nodes are used as the dividing values of different risk levels to form the risk level division rules.
[0032] Preferably, risks that are within the high risk range of the risk level classification rule are regarded as high risk items.
[0033] Preferably, risks that are within the high risk range of the risk level classification rule and risks with severity higher than a threshold are regarded as high risk items.
[0034] Other features and advantages of the present application will become apparent from the following detailed description of exemplary embodiments of the present application with reference to the accompanying drawings. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0035] The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of the specification, illustrate embodiments of the application and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the application.
[0036] Figure 1 A flow chart of the failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry provided in this application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0037] Various exemplary embodiments of the present application will now be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that unless otherwise specifically stated, the relative arrangement of components and steps, numerical expressions and numerical values set forth in these embodiments do not limit the scope of the present application.
[0038] The following description of at least one exemplary embodiment is merely illustrative in nature and is in no way intended to limit the present application, its application, or uses.
[0039] Technologies, methods, and equipment known to ordinary technicians in the relevant art may not be discussed in detail, but where appropriate, the technologies, methods, and equipment should be considered part of the specification.
[0040] In all examples shown and discussed herein, any specific values should be interpreted as merely exemplary and not as limiting. Therefore, other examples of the exemplary embodiments may have different values.
[0041] The present application provides a failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry, which identifies and analyzes risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process to determine high-risk items, conducts quality risk management throughout the product life cycle, and contributes to the comprehensive and effective control of risk losses.
[0042] like Figure 1 As shown, the failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry provided by the present application includes:
[0043] S110: Starting from the whole product cycle, identify the risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk. Among them, the product design stage includes product design, appearance design, etc. The cigarette manufacturing process involves the storage and transportation of raw materials, storage of tobacco materials, shredding (leaf shreds, stem shreds, expanded shreds), rolling and packaging, and storage of finished products.
[0044] Risk identification is the process of discovering, listing and describing risk factors in the field of cigarette manufacturing using certain methods, including the identification of risk sources, risk events and their causes. Risk identification includes failure mode identification and failure cause identification.
[0045] As an example, starting from the whole product life cycle, we identify the risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk, including:
[0046] S1101: Collect user feedback on the product.
[0047] S1102: Based on the feedback information, with the product quality formation path as the main line, in accordance with national laws and regulations, industry and enterprise standards, with product design, appearance design, manufacturing process or process as the object, conduct a comprehensive and systematic identification of the existing or potential failure modes in each process of product design and cigarette manufacturing process. Each failure mode corresponds to a risk.
[0048] Please refer to Table 8 below for the types of failure modes.
[0049] As an embodiment, a process analysis method and a comparison method are used to identify failure modes.
[0050] Process analysis is used to find out the various ways in which a product or manufacturing process may go wrong in order to identify all possible failure modes, including known and unknown failure modes. Known failure modes are those that have occurred before, while unknown failure modes are those that have never occurred or are beyond the scope of experience. Process analysis is applicable to the identification of failure modes in the cigarette manufacturing process.
[0051] The comparison method is a method of determining possible failure modes of new products or systems through comparative analysis. This method is based on the analysis of known failure modes and their failure modes, causes and effects. By comparing the similarities between the design, materials, processes and other aspects of new products or systems and known failure modes, possible failure modes can be predicted. The key to this method is to collect and analyze a sufficient number of known failure cases so that similar problems that new products or systems may encounter can be accurately identified. Through this method, potential failure modes can be identified in the early stages of new product design or system development, so that corresponding preventive or improvement measures can be taken to avoid failure of new products in subsequent use. The comparison method is suitable for failure mode identification in the product design stage.
[0052] S1103: Analyze the cause of the failure mode.
[0053] As an embodiment, the reasons for the failure mode are analyzed, specifically including:
[0054] P1: For each failure mode identified, the system searches for all failure causes that lead to the failure mode.
[0055] When analyzing the failure causes in the product design stage, we use methods such as product quality function deployment to systematically analyze the failure causes of failure modes based on cigarette smoke and intrinsic quality in the product design process. When analyzing the failure causes in the cigarette manufacturing process, we systematically analyze the specific causes of each failure mode in each process and procedure of cigarette manufacturing from the aspects of people (personnel), machines (equipment, etc.), materials (materials, etc.), methods (working methods), environment (environment), and measurements (measurements).
[0056] P2: Determine the main cause of the failure mode based on the theoretical correlation between each failure cause and the failure mode and the actual frequency of the failure mode caused by the failure cause.
[0057] S120: Analyze each cause of each identified risk to obtain a corresponding risk value.
[0058] As an example, a failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) method is used to analyze each cause of each identified risk to obtain a corresponding risk value, specifically including:
[0059] S1201: Based on the quality characteristics of cigarette products and the actual situation of cigarette companies, formulate scoring standards for the three risk dimensions of severity (S), frequency (O) and undetectability (D) during the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process.
[0060] Severity is an evaluation index to measure the severity of the failure mode affecting the use of the product. Severity is a comparative level within a given range, and severity is expressed from weak to strong using 1-10, with 1 representing the lowest degree and 10 representing the highest degree.
[0061] When formulating the severity rating standard, the following factors are taken into consideration: whether it affects the health of cigarette consumers; whether it affects the basic functions of cigarettes; whether it affects the sensory quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the appearance quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the brand and corporate image; quality factors that cigarette consumers are concerned about; relevant national laws, regulations and industry standards. Tables 1 and 2 show an example of the severity (S) rating standard for the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing stage.
[0062] Table 1 Severity (S) scoring criteria for product design stage
[0063]
[0064]
[0065] Table 2 Cigarette manufacturing process severity (S) scoring standard
[0066]
[0067]
[0068] Frequency refers to the level of the frequency (likelihood) of a specific failure cause. It is a comparative level within a given range and has a relative meaning. The frequency level focuses on its meaning rather than the specific value. Frequency is expressed in 1-10, with 1 representing an extremely low frequency (likelihood) or impossible occurrence, and 10 representing a high frequency (likelihood) or inevitable occurrence. Tables 3 and 4 show an example of the frequency (O) scoring criteria for the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing stage.
[0069] Table 3 Product design stage frequency (O) scoring criteria
[0070]
[0071] Table 4 Cigarette manufacturing process frequency (O) scoring criteria
[0072]
[0073]
[0074] Undetectability is an evaluation index of the possibility of detecting and isolating failures using current preventive control methods or detection control methods. Undetectability is a comparative level within a given range, expressed as 1-10, with 1 representing that the problem can definitely be found or prevented, and 10 representing that the problem cannot be detected or the control measures are missing. Undetectability is usually formulated based on its detection capabilities for results and preventive control methods for causes. Tables 5 and 6 show an example of the undetectability (D) scoring criteria for the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing stage.
[0075] Table 5 Scoring criteria for undetectability (D) in product design stage
[0076]
[0077]
[0078] Table 6 Scoring criteria for undetectability (D) of cigarette manufacturing process
[0079]
[0080]
[0081] S1202: For each cause of each risk, collect the data needed to score each risk dimension during the product design phase and cigarette manufacturing process.
[0082] S1203: Score the data in three risk dimensions.
[0083] S1204: The product of the score values of the three risk dimensions of each cause is taken as the risk value RPN of the cause (RPN=S*O*D).
[0084] S130: Determine risk level classification rules based on risk value statistics of all causes of all risks.
[0085] As an embodiment, determining the risk level classification rule specifically includes:
[0086] S1301: Determine the proportion of each risk level.
[0087] S1302: Determine a risk value that matches the ratio based on the statistical results as a division node.
[0088] S1303: Using the division nodes as the boundary values of different risk levels to form a risk level division rule.
[0089] Table 7 shows an example of risk value statistics. The risk level is divided into three levels: high risk (5%), medium risk (30%) and low risk (50%). In the example of Table 7, the risk level division rule is: 120≤RPN≤1000 is high risk; 50≤RPN<120 is medium risk; 1≤RPN<50 is low risk.
[0090] Table 7 Statistical results of RPN values
[0091]
[0092]
[0093] S140: Determine high-risk items based on risk level classification rules.
[0094] As an embodiment, the risk in the high risk range of the risk level classification rule is taken as a high risk item. In the example of Table 7, the risk corresponding to the cause of RPN value ≥ 120 (ie, failure mode) is taken as a high risk item. Table 8 shows the high risk items corresponding to Table 7.
[0095] Table 8 High risk items
[0096]
[0097]
[0098]
[0099] Preferably, risks that are within the high risk range of the risk level classification rule and risks with severity higher than a threshold (eg, 8) are regarded as high risk items.
[0100] After obtaining the high-risk items, optimization measures are taken to reduce the risks to medium and low risk ranges, or measures are taken to reduce both the frequency (O) and undetectability (D) to a smaller range.
[0101] Although some specific embodiments of the present application have been described in detail by way of example, it should be understood by those skilled in the art that the above examples are only for illustration, not for limiting the scope of the present application. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that the above embodiments may be modified without departing from the scope and spirit of the present application. The scope of the present application is defined by the appended claims.
Claims
1. A failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry, characterized in that: include: Starting from the whole product life cycle, identify the risks in the product design stage and cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk; Analyze each cause of each identified risk and obtain the corresponding risk value; Determine the risk level classification rules based on the risk value statistics of all causes of all risks; High-risk items are determined based on the risk level classification rules.
2. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 1, characterized in that: Starting from the whole product life cycle, identify the risks in the product design stage and the cigarette manufacturing process and the causes of each risk, including: Collect user feedback on the product; Based on the feedback information, with the product quality formation path as the main line, in accordance with national laws and regulations, industry and enterprise standards, with product design, appearance design, manufacturing process or process as the object, conduct a comprehensive and systematic identification of the existing or potential failure modes of each process in the product design and cigarette manufacturing process; Analyze the causes of the failure mode; Among them, each failure mode corresponds to a risk.
3. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 2, characterized in that: The process analysis method and the comparison method are used to identify the failure mode.
4. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 2, characterized in that: Analyze the causes of the failure mode, including: For each failure mode identified, the system searches for all failure causes that lead to the failure mode; The main cause of the failure mode is determined according to the theoretical correlation between each failure cause and the failure mode and the actual occurrence frequency of the failure mode caused by the failure cause.
5. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 1, characterized in that: The failure mode and effects analysis method is used to analyze each cause of each identified risk and obtain the corresponding risk value.
6. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 5, characterized in that: The failure mode and effects analysis method is used to obtain the risk value corresponding to each risk, including: Formulate scoring standards for the three risk dimensions of severity, frequency and undetectability during the product design stage and cigarette manufacturing process based on the quality characteristics of cigarette products and the actual situation of cigarette enterprises; Collect the data needed to score each risk dimension for each cause of each risk during the product design phase and cigarette manufacturing process; For the data, three risk dimensions are scored; The product of the score values of the three risk dimensions of each cause is taken as the risk value of the cause.
7. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 6, characterized in that: When developing severity rating criteria, the following factors were taken into consideration: Whether it affects the health of cigarette consumers; whether it affects the basic functions of cigarettes; whether it affects the sensory quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the appearance quality of cigarettes; whether it affects the brand and corporate image; quality factors that cigarette consumers are concerned about; relevant national laws, regulations and industry standards.
8. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 1, characterized in that: Determine the risk level classification rules, including: Determine the proportion of each risk level; Determine a risk value that matches the ratio based on the statistical results as a dividing node; The division nodes are used as the dividing values of different risk levels to form the risk level division rules.
9. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 1, characterized in that: The risks that fall within the high-risk range of the risk level classification rule are regarded as high-risk items.
10. The failure mode identification method for the cigarette industry according to claim 1, characterized in that: The risks that are within the high risk range of the risk level classification rule and the risks whose severity is higher than the threshold are regarded as high risk items.