Skip to main content

Hello,

I am having difficulty understanding the combination of Failure Analysis Setup Navigator i.c.w. Fault Reporting. It was my initial understanding the FASN should we filled so mechanics would have a smarter/ filtered way of reporting causes.

However, what I currently see, is all of the options. This does not seem to directly relate to each other. Could somebody please explain what I am doing wrong?

Below a some screenshots;

example Item Class: Measuring Equipment
​​​​

When creating a fault report I see all of the other fault types. While I only defined 2 fault types. The same applies for Causes and Symptoms.

 

Thanks in advance

So I have made a bit of progress. First off I have to admit, I was working in 2 environments (TEST and LIVE).

I now see in LIVE;

  • 2 Fault types, as created in FASN
  • a double summary of the causes (the causes are defined exactly the same on both Fault Types)
    • Does it matter what Cause I select? Or is it bound to a Fault Type?
    • Shouldn't there only remain unique Causes, after the Fault Type is admitted?

 

When I select a Cause, from other than the Fault Type, the Fault Type is changed automatically…

 

Please see the answers for your questions below,

  • Does it matter what Cause I select? Or is it bound to a Fault Type? - Yes it is bound to the Fault Type
  • Shouldn't there only remain unique Causes, after the Fault Type is admitted? - No it should always be 02 records bound with Fault Type.

  • When I select a Cause, from other than the Fault Type, the Fault Type is changed automatically… - This is correct behavior each unique cause has a Fault Type. -Refer the image below -

  •  

@Mayura Wasantha

Thank you for replying. But the last point/ answer you gave does not completely makes sense to me. I'd rather see the fault type as a sort of filter, to select the fault more directly. 

Is there something I can do to improve this? Or is this how it is?

Interesting topic and I’m also trying to use this. I have problems to understand how to use the Work Task template connected to Corrective Actions.

When reporting a Fault report I can enter Fault type and Cause but how is the corrective action supposed to be linked to this?

I can report something called Performed Action but that is a completely different basic data that is not part of the Failure Analysis.

Any idea?

@LevOrjanM  I do not know exactly, but you are able to connect a Template to a Cause. My colleagues abroad tried something below.

 

As far as I know, the Performed Action is an input given by a technician. This is done during reporting in the Work Tasks. This is good to know if you were to analyse performed actions.
 

You can find the input for Performed Actions here

 

@LevOrjanM I hope this helps you a little bit. If you learn anything about linking Templates to Causes and how it works I also would like to know.

@Mayura Wasantha

Thank you for replying. But the last point/ answer you gave does not completely makes sense to me. I'd rather see the fault type as a sort of filter, to select the fault more directly. 

Is there something I can do to improve this? Or is this how it is?

Our IM department is investigating in implementing a thing he called a “saved search” to filter the Causes linked to a Fault Type.

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings