NDLI: Utilizing confidence bounds in Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) Hazard Risk Assessment

Content Provider	IEEE Xplore Digital Library
Author	Banghart, M. Fuller, K.
Copyright Year	2014
Description	Author affiliation: Univ. of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA (Fuller, K.) \|\| Mississippi State Univ., Starkville, MS, USA (Banghart, M.)
Abstract	The objective of this contribution is to provide a review and suggest possible extensions of the Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Risk Assessment (HRA) [2] and to demonstrate the importance of these tools to general probabilistic design for reliability (PDfR) [8]. FMEA was first introduced in the 1960s by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and is currently used extensively across many industries. FMEA is useful in understanding the failure modes of various products, qualifying the effects of failure and aiding in the development of mitigation strategies. It is a useful tool in improving quality, reliability, and the maintainability of designs, and is a critical component in risk management strategies and evaluations. This is, actually, the approach of the prognostics and health monitoring/management (PHM) engineering. Failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) [1] is an extension of (FMEA). While FMEA is a bottom-up, inductive analytical method which may be performed at either the functional or piece-part level, FMECA extends FMEA by including a criticality analysis that is aimed, like PDfR is, at charting the probability of failure modes against the severity of their consequences. The result highlights failure modes with relatively high probability and severity of consequences, allowing remedial effort to be directed where it will produce the greatest value. FMECA tends to be preferred over FMEA in space and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) military applications, while various forms of FMEA predominate in other industries. Being extensions of the FMEAs, FMECAs add severity and probability ranking aspects to the problems of interest. This is accomplished through an appropriate HRA - an engineering process of where the risk of an event is quantified by examining the chain of the preceding events, starting with, e.g., the failure mode, then stepping through to the end effects. The approach allows quantification of risk through the use of probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) and is addressed and discussed in detail. Failure oriented accelerated testing (FOAT) [9] could and should be viewed as an important constituent part of the effort. It is shown that care must be taken to establish the appropriate probabilities, to identify the statistical independence of the random variables of importance, as well as to assess the trustworthiness of the available or obtained data. It is indicated that an important drawback of the FMEA is the lack of pure operational (field) failure data. These data are frequently utilized from the computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) software, which does not always provide a true snapshot of the Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) or other critical characteristics of the product. This results in the situation that personal judgment plays a large part in the development of the FMEA. Several papers have been published recently on development of Fuzzy FMEA methodologies (see, e.g., [7]). This application of fuzzy logic to Hazard Risk Analysis will allow additional uncertainty and inaccuracy to be modeled throughout FMECA development, leading to a more robust decision making with consideration of various uncertainties.
Sponsorship	IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Soc.
Starting Page	1
Ending Page	6
File Size	496780
Page Count	6
File Format	PDF
e-ISBN	9781479916221
DOI	10.1109/AERO.2014.6836222
Language	English
Publisher	Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
Publisher Date	2014-03-01
Publisher Place	USA
Access Restriction	Subscribed
Rights Holder	Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
Subject Keyword	Lead NASA Reliability Frequency modulation Monitoring Safety
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Subjectivity in Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) Severity Classification within a Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Context

Overview of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA): A Patient Safety Tool.

Adapting failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to select hazard mitigation measures

A risk control method in the hospital environment

Reliability Monitor for PWR Safety System Using FMEA and Go-Flow Methodology: Application of Risk Monitor for Nuclear Power Plants

Risk assessment: methods on purpose?

Combining System Safety & Reliability to ensure NASA CoNNeCT's success

A multicriteria failure mode and effects analysis approach for optimizing human safety

Capture all critical failure modes into FMEA in half the time with a simple decomposition table (Actual case study savings = $4,206,000)

Utilizing confidence bounds in Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) Hazard Risk Assessment

Similar Documents

Subjectivity in Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) Severity Classification within a Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Context

Overview of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA): A Patient Safety Tool.

Adapting failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to select hazard mitigation measures

A risk control method in the hospital environment

Reliability Monitor for PWR Safety System Using FMEA and Go-Flow Methodology: Application of Risk Monitor for Nuclear Power Plants

Risk assessment: methods on purpose?

Combining System Safety & Reliability to ensure NASA CoNNeCT's success

A multicriteria failure mode and effects analysis approach for optimizing human safety

Capture all critical failure modes into FMEA in half the time with a simple decomposition table (Actual case study savings = $4,206,000)

Utilizing confidence bounds in Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) Hazard Risk Assessment