PFMEA Intelligence validates incoming supplier PFMEAs against your own failure history and AIAG-VDA standards. Missing failure modes, weak controls, and unsubstantiated causes surface before you sign off on PPAP.
A program launch brings 40 to 80 supplier PFMEA submissions in a compressed window. Your SQE team reviews each one against experience and memory. Some failure modes get missed — not from incompetence, but from volume and time pressure. The PFMEA looks complete. The sign-off happens. The failure mode surfaces six months later in production.
When your team signs off on a supplier PFMEA as part of PPAP, you co-sign the risk. An OEM auditor who later finds the PFMEA was inadequate does not ask the supplier first. They ask why you approved it. Your historical failure data was the evidence that should have been applied. Nobody applied it.
Your organisation has seen these failure modes before. Past PFMEAs, quality escapes, warranty returns — the knowledge exists. It sits in files, sheets, and the heads of senior engineers who have been here fifteen years. No tool makes that knowledge available at the point of review, at the volume a program launch demands.
Three steps. No manual scanning. No dependency on individual SQE memory.
Upload the supplier PFMEA in Excel or PDF format, or pull directly from your PPAP portal. PFMEA Intelligence reads the part number, process family, and sub-process structure automatically. If engineering drawings accompany the submission, Adeos reads them in parallel.
Every row is cross-referenced against two knowledge sources: your own historical failure data for this process family, and AIAG-VDA standards for this process category. Gaps surface with evidence — not algorithm opinion. Each flag is traceable to a specific source.
A structured revision request goes back to the supplier. Each flag is specific, cited, and actionable. Your SQE reviews the flags, applies judgment where it matters, and signs off with a documented audit trail that holds at OEM review.
Every flag traces back to your own failure history or a cited AIAG-VDA standard. The supplier cannot dispute a flag that references their own PPAP history.
This failure mode exists in your grounded knowledge base for this process family. Evidence on record. No revision required — this row is complete.
"Weld porosity at resistance welding — seen in 3 prior PPAPs for this process family."
This failure mode has no prior record in your organisation's data for this process family. It may be a new risk introduced by a new material, geometry, or process combination. Verify before sign-off.
"New aluminium alloy grade — no prior failure mode data exists in KB for this material-process combination."
The cause listed does not meet the standard for a specific, actionable root cause. Generic causes like "operator error" or "machine wear" with no mechanism defined do not support a meaningful control plan.
""Operator error" listed as cause for dimensional deviation — no specific mechanism, no poka-yoke implication."
The causal chain between the listed failure cause and the stated failure effect is not logically consistent. A dimensional cause mapped to a surface finish effect, for example, does not hold under AIAG-VDA functional analysis standards.
"Tool wear (cause) linked to surface oxidation (effect) — mechanism is not plausible for this process step."
The assigned detection method is weaker than what your own historical data shows is required to catch this failure mode reliably. A Detection rating that does not reflect actual detection capability is an audit finding waiting to happen.
"Visual inspection assigned Detection 2 for sub-surface crack detection — your own CAR history shows this method missed this failure mode twice."
Adeos extracted a special characteristic, critical tolerance, or GD&T callout from the engineering drawing that has no corresponding failure mode in the supplier PFMEA. A critical drawing requirement with no process risk coverage is a gap the OEM auditor will find.
"Critical flatness callout (0.05mm) on sealing surface — no failure mode covers this characteristic in the submitted PFMEA."
PFMEA Intelligence runs on two knowledge sources that work together. One is built from your data. One is maintained by Adeos. Neither is a generic model trained on public information.
Your historical PFMEAs, failure records, warranty returns, and CAR data, structured and classified by part family, process, and sub-process. Specific to your supply base. No generic model can replicate what fifteen years of your own production failures know.
The grounded KB grows with every review cycle. Every validated flag, every supplier revision, every accepted correction makes the next review more precise. The longer you use it, the sharper it gets.
When your grounded KB does not yet have data for a new process family, the standards library covers it. AIAG-VDA 2019 failure mode references, process-specific detection method standards, and engineering literature — continuously maintained and updated.
Every flag from the standards library cites the specific clause or process category it comes from. The supplier receives a traceable, defensible revision request, not an algorithm's recommendation.
When engineering drawings accompany the PPAP submission, Adeos reads them alongside the PFMEA. Special characteristics, critical tolerances, and GD&T callouts extracted from the drawing are cross-referenced against the PFMEA automatically.
A critical characteristic on the drawing that has no PFMEA coverage surfaces as a MISSING FROM DRAWING flag. One platform. Drawing intelligence and PFMEA validation working from the same document set.
You review supplier PFMEAs every program launch. PFMEA Intelligence handles the systematic coverage check — known failure modes, weak controls, drawing mismatches — in minutes per document. Your judgment applies to the flagged items, not to routine scanning across 80 submissions.
Every PPAP sign-off carries risk. PFMEA Intelligence gives your team a documented, evidenced review trail. When an OEM auditor asks why you approved a supplier PFMEA, the answer is not "our SQE reviewed it." The answer is a traceable flag log with citations.
A vague PFMEA review produces vague supplier feedback. Vague feedback produces resubmissions. PFMEA Intelligence produces a specific, cited revision request on day one. The supplier revises what is flagged. First-time PPAP approval rates improve. The launch timeline does not slip for a document.
PFMEA Intelligence is deployed as a dedicated instance within your infrastructure. Your historical PFMEA data, failure records, and supplier submissions never leave your environment.
Coffee Inc. runs a structured data audit before deployment. Your historical PFMEAs, CAR records, and failure data are classified by part family, process, and sub-process. The knowledge base is seeded correctly before the first live review.
Deploy within your VPC. Your data does not train public models. It does not leave your environment. The knowledge base your organisation builds remains your intellectual property.
The grounded knowledge base is maintained and refined post-deployment. Pattern updates require human approval before they influence future reviews. The system does not self-update without your team's sign-off.