Multi-criteria risk analysis to improve safety in manufacturing systems

International Journal of Production Research

Volumn 50, Issue 17, 2012, Pages 4806-4821

  Silvestri, Alessandro ^a   De Felice, Fabio ^a   Petrillo, Antonella ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CASSINO AND SOUTHERN LAZIO   (Italy)

Author keywords

AHP; ANP; FMECA; risk priority number; safety

Indexed keywords

AHP; ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES; ANALYTIC NETWORK PROCESS; ANP; ASSESSMENT MODELS; CRITICALITY ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS; FMECA; INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITIES; INDUSTRY NEEDS; LOWER OPERATING COSTS; MANUFACTURING COMPANIES; MANUFACTURING EFFICIENCY; METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH; MULTI CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; MULTI-CRITERIA; RISK PRIORITY NUMBER; SAFETY COSTS;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; MANUFACTURE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ACCIDENT PREVENTION;

EID: 84865681906     PISSN: 00207543     EISSN: 1366588X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2012.657968     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abdelgawad, M. and Fayek, A.R., 2010. Risk management in the construction industry using combined fuzzy FMEA and fuzzy AHP. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136 (9), 1028-1036.
2. Aguiar, D.C., Celani de Souza, H.J., and Salomon, V.A.P., 2010. An AHP application to evaluate scoring criteria for failure. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 2 (1), 3-13.
3. Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG), 2008. Potential failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA Third Edition or Fourth Edition), July 2001 or June 2008.
4. Ben-Daya, M. and Raouf, A., 1996. A revised failure mode and effect analysis model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 13 (1), 43-47. (Pubitemid 126034000)
5. Bevilacqua, M. and Braglia, M., 2000. The analytic hierarchy process applied to maintenance strategy selection. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 70 (1), 71-83.
6. Bowles, J.B., 2003. An assessment of RPN prioritization in a failure modes effects and criticality analysis. In: Reliability and maintainability symposium, 27-30 January 2003, Tampa, FL, USA, 380-386.
7. Braband, J., 2003. Improving the risk priority number concept. Journal of Safety, 3 (4), 21-23.
8. Braband, J., 2006. Risk assessment: As simple as possible (and no simpler). In: System Safety, 2006. The 1st institution of engineering and technology international conference. 285-299.
9. Braglia, M., 2000. MAFMA: Multi-attribute failure mode analysis. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17 (9), 1017-1033.
10. Carmignani, G., 2009. An integrated structural framework to cost-based FMECA: The priority-cost FMECA. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 94 (2009), 861-871.
11. Chen, J.K. and Lee, Y.C., 2007. Risk priority evaluated by ANP in failure mode and effects . Risk priority evaluated by ANP in failure mode and effects analysis. Quality Tools and Techniques, 11(4), 1-6.
12. De Felice, F., et al., 2005. Proposal of a new decision making multi criteria methodology applied to the reengineering of layout in an electromechanical company: The score analytic hierarchy process. In: 18th international conference on production research, Salerno, Italy, 2-10.
13. De Felice, F. and Petrillo, A., 2009. Proposal of a new model for the optimization of the organizational process in industrial company through the application of the analytic network process. In: Proceedings of the international conference on modelling & applied simulation, 23-25 September, Porto de la Cruz, Tenerife, 3-12.
14. European Council, 1989. Directive 89/391 - OSH ''Framework Directive''. European Council 12 June 1989.
15. Eurostat, 2009a. 8.6% of workers in the EU experienced work-related health problems. Statistics on Focus, 63/2009. Available from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY-OFFPUB/KS-SF-09-063/EN/ KS-SF-09-063-EN.PDF [Accessed 7 January 2010].
16. Eurostat, 2009b. Number of accidents at work by economic activity and size of enterprise. Available from: http://nui.epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/ show.do?dataset=hsw- aw-nnasz&lang¼en [Accessed 7 January 2010].
17. Fleischer, J., Weismann, U., and Niggeschmidt, S., 2006. Calculation and optimisation model for costs and effects of availability relevant service elements. In: Proceedings of 13th CIRP international conference on life cycle engineering (LCE2006), 31 May-2 June 2006, Leuven, Belgium. Leuven: Acco, 675-680.
18. Gilchrist, W., 1993. Modelling failure modes and effects analysis. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 10 (5), 16-23.
19. INAIL - Italian National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work, 2010. Annual report.
20. Jacinto, C. and Aspinwall, E., 2004. A survey on occupational accidents' reporting and registration systems in the European Union. Safety Science, 42 (2004), 933-960. (Pubitemid 39421045)
21. Madu, C., 2000. Competing through maintenance strategies. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 17 (9), 937-948.
22. Muchiria, P.N., et al., 2010. Empirical analysis of maintenance performance measurement in Belgian industries. International Journal of Production Research, 48 (20), 5905-5924.
23. Nenonen, S., 2007. Fatal workplace accidents in outsourced operations in the manufacturing industry. Safety Science, 49 (2011), 1394-1403.
24. Pelaez, C.E. and Bowles, J.B., 1994. Using fuzzy logic for system criticality analysis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE annual reliability and maintainability symposium, Anaheim, CA, 449-455.
25. Rizzo, R., 1998. Industrial Plant Safety. Naples, Italy: ESI Publication.
26. Saaty, T.L., 1980. The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
27. Saaty, T.L., 1996. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
28. Saaty, T.L., 2005. Theory and applications of the analytic network process: Decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.
29. Saaty, T. L., 2000. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
30. Silvestri, A., et al., 2004. R.A.M.S. analysis in a sintering plant by the employment of a new reliability allocation method modeling and simulation. Marina del Rey, CA: IASTED.
31. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Surface vehicle recommended practice J1739: (R) Potential failure mode and effects analysis in design (Design FMEA), Potential failure mode and effects analysis in manufacturing and assembly processes (Process FMEA), and Potential failure mode and effects analysis for machinery (Machinery FMEA), June 2000.
32. Suebsomran, A. and Talabgeaw, S., 2010. Critical maintenance of thermal power plant using the combination of failure mode effect analysis and AHP approches. AIJSTPME, 3 (3), 1-6.
33. Swuste, P., van Gulijk, C., and Zwaard, W., 2010. Safety metaphors and theories, a review of the occupational safety literature of the US, UK and the Netherlands, till the first part of the 20th century. Safety Science, 48 (8), 1000-1018.
34. Teoh, P.C. and Case, K., 2004. Failure modes and effects analysis through knowledge modeling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 153-154, 253-260.