4.7 Article

New approach for failure mode and effect analysis using linguistic distribution assessments and TODIM method

期刊

RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY
卷 167, 期 -, 页码 302-309

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2017.06.014

关键词

Failure mode and effect analysis; Risk analysis; Linguistic distribution assessments; TODIM method; Combination weight

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71671125, 71402090]
  2. NSFC Key Program [71432007]
  3. Program for Professor of Special Appointment (Young Eastern Scholar) at Shanghai institutions of Higher Learning [QD2015019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a proactive risk management instrument, failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) has been broadly utilized to recognize, evaluate and eliminate failure modes of products, processes, systems and services. Nevertheless, the conventional FMEA method suffers from many important deficiencies when used in the real world. First, crisp numbers are adopted to describe the risk of failure modes; but, in many practical situations, it is difficult to obtain exact assessment values due to inherent vagueness in the human judgments. Second, the priority ranking of failure modes is determined based on the risk priority number (RPN), which is questionable and strongly sensitive to the variation of risk factor ratings. Therefore, this paper applies linguistic distribution assessments to represent FMEA team members' risk evaluation information and employs an improved TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese of interactive and multicriteria decision making) method to determine the risk priority of failure modes. Furthermore, both subjective weights and objective weights of risk factors are taken into account while conducting the risk analysis process. Finally, an empirical case concerning the risk evaluation of a grinding wheel system is presented to demonstrate the practicality and effectiveness of the proposed new FMEA model. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据