Overview
Action Priority replaces RPN in Process FMEA analysis and is increasingly used in System and Design FMEA workflows where teams prefer categorical risk assessment over numeric ranking. The AP approach aligns with the AIAG FMEA Handbook 4th edition methodology and is particularly suited to aerospace safety-critical applications where severity dominates risk decisions.This page documents AP based on source analysis of Process FMEA risksheet configuration. Verify specific AP thresholds and implementation details in your Aerospace Safety Solution project settings.
AP Classification Scale
| Level | Label | Risk Profile | Severity Emphasis |
|---|---|---|---|
| H | High | Severity ≥9 OR (Severity ≥5 AND Occurrence ≥4) | Dominates risk assessment; immediate action required |
| M | Medium | Severity ≥5 OR Occurrence ≥4 OR Detection ≥6 | Moderate risk; action should be planned |
| L | Low | All other combinations | Minimal risk; review acceptable |
AP Formula Logic
The AP classification formula evaluates three input parameters:- Severity (1–5) — Impact of the failure if it occurs
- Occurrence (0–5) — Probability of the failure occurring
- Detection (1–5) — Likelihood of detecting the failure before it affects the customer
Unlike RPN (which multiplies all three factors equally), AP prioritizes severity first. A high-severity failure can jump to High AP even with low occurrence and detection, reflecting aerospace’s conservative safety philosophy.
Differences from Numeric RPN
| Aspect | AP (Categorical) | RPN (Numeric) |
|---|---|---|
| Output | H, M, L, N/A | 1–125 (1 × 1 × 1 to 5 × 5 × 5) |
| Philosophy | Severity-driven; categorical risk buckets | Balanced scoring; mathematical product |
| Use Case | Process FMEA; quick risk prioritization | System/Design FMEA; detailed ranking |
| Aerospace Fit | Aligns with DO-178C safety-critical culture | Common in automotive; less common in avionics |
| Detection Sensitivity | Detection ≥6 can trigger Medium (even if Sev/Occ low) | Detection is 1 of 3 multiplied factors; less impact |
AP Color Coding and Visual Display
Action Priority levels are visually distinguished in risksheet tables using a color-coded system:| AP Level | Color | Hex Code | Visual Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| High (H) | Red | #e53935 | Immediate action required; stop work |
| Medium (M) | Amber/Yellow | #fb8c00 | Action should be planned; schedule mitigation |
| Low (L) | Green | #43a047 | Acceptable risk; routine review only |
| N/A | Grey | #607d8b | Not applicable; failure mode not analyzed |
Example AP Scoring
AP in Risksheet Documents
Process FMEA Risksheet
Process FMEA risksheets use AP exclusively (no RPN calculation). The AP/RPN column displays the categorical value with color-coded background:- Row 1: Severity=4, Occ=2, Det=1 → Sev < 5 AND Occ < 4 AND Det < 6 → AP = L (not shown, but calculated)
- Row 2: Severity=5, Occ=3, Det=2 → Sev >= 5 (triggers Medium threshold) → AP = H (shown in red)
- Row 3: Severity=2, Occ=1, Det=1 → All < thresholds → AP = L (shown in green)
System and Design FMEA with AP
System SFMEA and Component DFMEA risksheets typically use RPN by default, but can be configured to show AP alongside RPN:AP Distribution and Counting
The Aerospace Safety Solution provides built-in dashboard macros for AP-based risk reporting:N/A (Not Applicable) Status
Failure modes may have AP = N/A when:- The failure mode has not been analyzed (fields left empty)
- Severity, Occurrence, or Detection values are invalid or missing
- The failure mode is in a Draft or Rejected status and not yet approved
- The analysis is superseded by a newer version of the FMEA document
Comparison with MIL-STD-882E Risk Levels
The Aerospace Safety Solution also supports MIL-STD-882E severity and probability scales for hazard tracking and military contracts:| MIL-STD-882E Category | Equivalence | FMEA Severity |
|---|---|---|
| Catastrophic (I) | Worst case; loss of life | 5 (Catastrophic) |
| Critical (II) | Severe injury or major mission failure | 4 (Critical) / 3 (Major) |
| Marginal (III) | Minor injury or degraded performance | 2 (Minor) / 3 (Major) |
| Negligible (IV) | No safety impact | 1 (Negligible) |
Implementation in Your Project
Configuring AP Thresholds
AP thresholds are configured in your risksheet.json template:Enabling AP in Process FMEA
The Process FMEA risksheet template uses AP by default:Using AP in Dashboards
To display AP distribution in a role dashboard or project home page:Best Practices
- Use AP for Process FMEA exclusively — Process-level risk is qualitative; categorical ranking is more intuitive than numeric RPN.
- Reserve RPN for System and Design FMEA — Component-level risk requires precise ranking; RPN’s multiplicative nature captures interaction of severity, occurrence, and detection.
- Treat High AP as a stop-sign — Any High-priority failure mode should trigger immediate risk control action. Do not accept High AP without a mitigation plan.
- Review detection ≥6 carefully — The Medium threshold includes Detection ≥6, which can escalate moderate severity/occurrence combinations. Ensure detection controls are realistic.
- Document justification for Low-Severity High-Occurrence — If a frequent failure (Occ=5) with low severity (Sev=1) scores Low AP, document why this risk is acceptable. Auditors will ask.
- Align with project safety culture — If your project follows automotive standards (AIAG-VDA), AP is standard. If military (MIL-STD-882E), use the hazard categories instead.
Related Pages
- Failure Mode (failureMode) — Understanding failure mode work items
- Failure Mode Severity — The 5-level severity scale
- Failure Mode Occurrence — The 6-level occurrence scale
- Failure Mode Detection — The 6-level detection scale
- SFMEA Risksheet Configuration Reference — System FMEA risksheet with RPN
- Reference — Full reference documentation
Source References (dev)
Source References (dev)
Code:
modules/RiskTemplates/PFMEATemplate/attachments/risksheet.json (0.59) · .polarion/pages/scripts/velocity/nextedy_solutions.vm (0.57) · .polarion/tracker/fields/severity-enum.xml, status-enum.xml, priority-enum.xml, implementationStatus-enum.xml, riskSpecification-document-status-enum.xml (0.49) · .polarion/tracker/fields/systemElementType-enum.xml, systemElement-status-enum.xml (0.47) · .polarion/nextedy/sheet-configurations/DO-160G Environmental Qualification.yaml, Component RTM.yaml, Configuration Index.yaml, Design Verification Sheet.yaml, Interface Control Matrix.yaml, Problem Report Tracker.yaml, Process Steps.yaml, Review Action Item Tracker.yaml, SOI Stage Gate Dashboard.yaml, Use Steps Specification.yaml, User Need Validation Sheet.yaml, characteristics.yaml, component-characteristics.yaml, customer-requirements.yaml, design-requirements.yaml, subsystem-functions.yaml, subsystem-verification.yaml, system-elements.yaml, test-verification.yaml (0.43) · .polarion/tracker/fields/complianceObjective-standard-enum.xml, complianceObjective-status-enum.xml, complianceRequirement-complianceStatus-enum.xml, complianceRequirement-evidenceType-enum.xml (0.42) · .polarion/tracker/fields/complianceObjective-custom-fields.xml (0.40) · .polarion/tracker/fields/mappings.xml (0.40) · .polarion/tracker/fields/resolution-enum.xml, .polarion/tracker/fields/changerequest-resolution-enum.xml, .polarion/tracker/fields/changerequest-status-enum.xml, .polarion/tracker/fields/work-record-type-enum.xml, .polarion/tracker/fields/yesno-enum.xml (0.39) · .polarion/tracker/workflow/workflow.xml (0.39)