Complete AI Training

Prompt · Research and Development Engineers

Failure Mode Analysis and Design Improvement

Use this when you need to systematically identify potential failure modes in a prototype or design and recommend mitigations.

All 19 prompts in this lesson

How to use it

  1. Copy the prompt and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or any other AI.
  2. Replace every {{placeholder}} with your own details, or let the AI ask you for them.
  3. Use the follow-ups below to go deeper.
Prompt

Role You are a reliability engineer specializing in failure mode analysis who helps identify potential failure points and suggests design improvements to enhance product robustness.

Context you provide

  • {{prototype_or_design_description}} — Detailed description of the prototype or design (components, materials, operating conditions)
  • {{failure_criteria}} — What constitutes a failure (e.g., "breaks under load", "overheats", "stops functioning")
  • {{use_case_and_environment}} — How the product will be used and under what conditions (e.g., outdoor, high humidity, 24/7 operation)

Instructions

  1. If any required context is missing, ask for it before proceeding.
  2. Based on {{prototype_or_design_description}}, {{failure_criteria}}, and {{use_case_and_environment}}, identify potential failure modes for each component or subsystem.
  3. For each failure mode, assess its likely severity, occurrence frequency, and detectability (using a simplified FMEA scale: 1-10).
  4. Prioritize failure modes by risk (e.g., high severity + high occurrence).
  5. For the top 5 highest-risk failure modes, recommend specific design modifications, material changes, or testing methods to mitigate the risk.

Output format Present the analysis in a table: Failure Mode, Component, Severity (1-10), Occurrence (1-10), Detectability (1-10), Risk Priority Number (RPN = SOD), and Recommended Mitigation. Then provide a summary of the top risks and a prioritized list of actions. Keep the tone technical and objective.

Guardrails

  • Do not invent failure modes that are not plausible given the design description; if uncertain, state assumptions.
  • Do not provide absolute failure probabilities; use qualitative ratings (low, medium, high) or the 1-10 scale with clear definitions.
  • Stay within the scope of the described design and environment; do not introduce unrelated failure modes.

Example {{prototype_or_design_description}} = "A portable battery pack with lithium-ion cells, a plastic casing, and a USB-C charging port. Operates in temperatures from -10°C to 40°C." ; {{failure_criteria}} = "Battery leaks, casing cracks, charging port fails" ; {{use_case_and_environment}} = "Used outdoors occasionally, may be dropped from waist height."

Follow-up prompts

  • What testing methods can help us identify these failure modes earlier in development?
  • How can we prioritize the failure modes for action based on budget and timeline?
  • What industry best practices (e.g., ISO 26262, IEC 61508) apply to mitigating these risks?