Skip to main content

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

LevelLabelRisk ProfileSeverity Emphasis
HHighSeverity ≥9 OR (Severity ≥5 AND Occurrence ≥4)Dominates risk assessment; immediate action required
MMediumSeverity ≥5 OR Occurrence ≥4 OR Detection ≥6Moderate risk; action should be planned
LLowAll other combinationsMinimal risk; review acceptable

AP Formula Logic

The AP classification formula evaluates three input parameters:
  1. Severity (1–5) — Impact of the failure if it occurs
  2. Occurrence (0–5) — Probability of the failure occurring
  3. Detection (1–5) — Likelihood of detecting the failure before it affects the customer
AP is assigned as follows:
IF Severity >= 9
   THEN AP = High
ELSE IF Severity >= 5 AND Occurrence >= 4
   THEN AP = High
ELSE IF Severity >= 5 OR Occurrence >= 4 OR Detection >= 6
   THEN AP = Medium
ELSE
   AP = Low
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

AspectAP (Categorical)RPN (Numeric)
OutputH, M, L, N/A1–125 (1 × 1 × 1 to 5 × 5 × 5)
PhilosophySeverity-driven; categorical risk bucketsBalanced scoring; mathematical product
Use CaseProcess FMEA; quick risk prioritizationSystem/Design FMEA; detailed ranking
Aerospace FitAligns with DO-178C safety-critical cultureCommon in automotive; less common in avionics
Detection SensitivityDetection ≥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 LevelColorHex CodeVisual Meaning
High (H)Red#e53935Immediate action required; stop work
Medium (M)Amber/Yellow#fb8c00Action should be planned; schedule mitigation
Low (L)Green#43a047Acceptable risk; routine review only
N/AGrey#607d8bNot applicable; failure mode not analyzed
These colors enable visual scanning of risksheet documents — red rows immediately draw the eye for prioritization meetings and executive reviews.

Example AP Scoring

Scenario 1: High-severity, low-occurrence failure
  Severity = 4 (Critical)
  Occurrence = 1 (Remote)
  Detection = 2 (High probability of detection)
  
  Result: AP = HIGH
  Reason: Severity >= 5? No. But Severity=4 < 5, so check Medium rule.
          Severity < 5 OR Occurrence < 4 OR Detection < 6? Yes to all.
          → Wait: 4 < 5, so not HIGH by first rule.
          → Severity >= 5? No. So not HIGH.
          → Check Medium: Severity >= 5? No. Occurrence >= 4? No. Detection >= 6? No.
          → Result: AP = LOW
          
  NOTE: This example shows AP's severity-first design: a critical failure 
        with low probability might be LOW if occurrence is rare enough.

Scenario 2: Moderate-severity, frequent failure
  Severity = 3 (Major)
  Occurrence = 5 (Frequent)
  Detection = 1 (Certain detection)
  
  Result: AP = MEDIUM
  Reason: Severity >= 9? No. Severity >= 5 AND Occurrence >= 4? No (3 < 5).
          Severity >= 5? No. Occurrence >= 4? Yes (5 >= 4).
          → AP = MEDIUM (triggered by Occurrence >= 4 rule)

Scenario 3: Very high severity with any occurrence
  Severity = 5 (Catastrophic)
  Occurrence = 2 (Low)
  Detection = 5 (Difficult to detect)
  
  Result: AP = HIGH
  Reason: Severity >= 9? No (5 < 9, but this is max FMEA scale).
          Severity >= 5 AND Occurrence >= 4? No (Occurrence = 2).
          → Still check if Severity >= 5? Yes.
          → But the Medium rule is Severity >= 5 OR Occurrence >= 4...
          → Since Severity = 5 (catastrophic), AP = HIGH via first rule
          
  NOTE: Aerospace safety culture treats catastrophic failures as HIGH 
        regardless of occurrence or detection likelihood.

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:
| Item | Process Step | Failure Mode | Severity | Occurrence | Detection | AP | Risk Control |
|------|--------------|-------------|----------|-----------|-----------|----|----|
| 1    | Assembly     | Fastener missing | 4 | 2 | 1 | M | Visual Inspection Protocol |
| 2    | Welding      | Weld porosity | 5 | 3 | 2 | H | Ultrasonic Test Review |
| 3    | Testing      | Test failure | 2 | 1 | 1 | L | Routine QA |
In this example:
  • 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:
| Failure Mode | Sev | Occ | Det | RPN | AP |
|--------------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-------|
| Loss of power | 5 | 2 | 1 | 10 | M |
| Data corruption | 4 | 4 | 2 | 32 | M |
This dual display allows teams to compare numeric and categorical risk views.

AP Distribution and Counting

The Aerospace Safety Solution provides built-in dashboard macros for AP-based risk reporting:
## Macro: nxAPBuckets
Counts failure modes by Action Priority level
Parameters: 
  - High: Count of failure modes with AP = H
  - Medium: Count of failure modes with AP = M
  - Low: Count of failure modes with AP = L
  - N/A: Count of unanalyzed or invalid AP values

Example output:
  High:   12 failure modes (15%)
  Medium: 52 failure modes (65%)
  Low:    16 failure modes (20%)
  N/A:     0 failure modes
These macros power risk scorecards and executive dashboards, enabling quick risk posture assessment across the safety program.

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
N/A items appear in grey in risksheet displays and are typically excluded from risk counting until analysis is complete.

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 CategoryEquivalenceFMEA Severity
Catastrophic (I)Worst case; loss of life5 (Catastrophic)
Critical (II)Severe injury or major mission failure4 (Critical) / 3 (Major)
Marginal (III)Minor injury or degraded performance2 (Minor) / 3 (Major)
Negligible (IV)No safety impact1 (Negligible)
AP is an AIAG/automotive-rooted FMEA metric. MIL-STD-882E Categories are military hazard severity scales (I–IV). ARP 4761 Classifications (Catastrophic–No Effect) are aerospace hazard classifications used in FHA/PSSA/SSA, not in FMEA.Each serves a different phase of aerospace safety analysis. Ensure your project’s FMEA documents use the correct enumeration.

Implementation in Your Project

Configuring AP Thresholds

AP thresholds are configured in your risksheet.json template:
{
  "columns": [
    {
      "id": "ap",
      "title": "Action Priority",
      "formula": {
        "type": "ap",
        "severity_field": "severity",
        "occurrence_field": "occurrence",
        "detection_field": "detection",
        "high_threshold_sev": 9,
        "high_threshold_sev_occ": [5, 4],
        "medium_threshold_sev": 5,
        "medium_threshold_occ": 4,
        "medium_threshold_det": 6
      },
      "formatter": {
        "type": "ap_color"
      }
    }
  ]
}

Enabling AP in Process FMEA

The Process FMEA risksheet template uses AP by default:
{
  "document_type": "ProcessFMEA",
  "columns": [
    {
      "title": "Process Step",
      "field": "processStep"
    },
    {
      "title": "Failure Mode",
      "field": "failureMode"
    },
    {
      "title": "Severity",
      "field": "severity"
    },
    {
      "title": "Occurrence",
      "field": "occurrence"
    },
    {
      "title": "Detection",
      "field": "detection"
    },
    {
      "title": "Action Priority",
      "formula": "ap"
    }
  ]
}

Using AP in Dashboards

To display AP distribution in a role dashboard or project home page:
#set( $apHigh = $velocityMacros.nxAPBuckets( "High" ) )
#set( $apMedium = $velocityMacros.nxAPBuckets( "Medium" ) )
#set( $apLow = $velocityMacros.nxAPBuckets( "Low" ) )

<h3>Process FMEA Risk Posture</h3>
<p>
  High Priority: <strong>$apHigh</strong> (red — requires immediate action)<br>
  Medium Priority: <strong>$apMedium</strong> (amber — schedule mitigation)<br>
  Low Priority: <strong>$apLow</strong> (green — acceptable)
</p>

Best Practices

  1. Use AP for Process FMEA exclusively — Process-level risk is qualitative; categorical ranking is more intuitive than numeric RPN.
  2. Reserve RPN for System and Design FMEA — Component-level risk requires precise ranking; RPN’s multiplicative nature captures interaction of severity, occurrence, and detection.
  3. 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.
  4. Review detection ≥6 carefully — The Medium threshold includes Detection ≥6, which can escalate moderate severity/occurrence combinations. Ensure detection controls are realistic.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
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)