Generalized multi-attribute failure mode analysis

Neurocomputing

Volumn 175, Issue PartA, 2015, Pages 90-100

  Chang, Kuei Hu ^a  

^a DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

2 tuple Representation method; Analytical hierarchy process; Failure mode and effects analysis; Multi attribute failure mode analysis; Risk priority number

Indexed keywords

FAILURE ANALYSIS; FAILURE MODES; RISK ANALYSIS; THIN FILM TRANSISTORS;

2-TUPLE REPRESENTATIONS; ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS; FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS; RISK PRIORITY NUMBER;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

ARTICLE; ATTRIBUTABLE RISK; CASE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; GENERALIZED MULTIATTRIBUTE FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS; MULTIATTRIBUTE FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK PRIORITY NUMBER; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TAIWAN; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 84964413425     PISSN: 09252312     EISSN: 18728286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neucom.2015.10.039     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Chang, K.H., Chang, Y.C., Lai, P.T., Applying the concept of exponential approach to enhance the assessment capability of FMEA. J. Intell. Manuf. 25:6 (2014), 1413–1427.
2. Braglia, M., MAFMA: multi-attribute failure mode analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 17:9 (2000), 1017–1033.
3. Procedures for performing a failure mode effects and criticality analysis, US MIL-STD-1629, US Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., 1974.
4. Procedures for performing a failure mode effects and criticality analysis, US MIL-STD-1629A, US Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., 1980.
5. Snooke, N., Price, C., Automated FMEA based diagnostic symptom generation. Adv. Eng. Inf. 26:4 (2012), 870–888.
6. Mader, R., Armengaud, E., Griessnig, G., Kreiner, C., Steger, C., Weiss, R., OASIS: an automotive analysis and safety engineering instrument. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 120 (2013), 150–162.
7. Liao, R.J., Bian, J.P., Yang, L.J., Grzybowski, S., Cloud model-based failure mode and effects analysis for prioritization of failures of power transformer in risk assessment. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 23:7 (2013), 1172–1190.
8. Zhai, G.F., Zhou, Y.G., Ye, X.R., Hu, B., A method of multi-objective reliability tolerance design for electronic circuits. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 26:1 (2013), 161–170.
9. Ozyazgan, V., Engin, F.Z., FMEA analysis and applications in knitting industry. Tekst. Konfeksiyon 23:3 (2013), 228–232.
10. Chang, K.H., Chang, Y.C., Wen, T.C., Cheng, C.H., An innovative approach integrating 2-tuple and LOWGA operators in process failure mode and effects analysis. Int. J. Innov. Comput. I 8:1B (2012), 747–761.
11. Lu, Y., Teng, F., Zhou, J., Wen, A.Q., Bi, Y.T., Failure mode and effect analysis in blood transfusion: a proactive tool to reduce risks. Transfusion 53:12 (2013), 3080–3087.
12. Chen, C.C., A developed autonomous preventive maintenance programme using RCA and FMEA. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51:18 (2013), 5404–5412.
13. Yeh, T.M., Chen, L.Y., Fuzzy-based risk priority number in FMEA for semiconductor wafer processes. Int. J. Prod. Res. 52:2 (2014), 539–549.
14. Tay, K.M., Lim, C.P., Enhancing the failure mode and effect analysis methodology with fuzzy inference techniques. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 21:1-2 (2010), 135–146.
15. Sankar, N.R., Prabhu, B.S., Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 18:3 (2001), 324–335.
16. Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process. 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
17. Saaty, T.L., How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48:1 (1990), 9–26.
18. Su, C.T., Chou, C.J., A systematic methodology for the creation of six sigma projects: A case study of semiconductor foundry. Expert Syst. Appl. 34:4 (2008), 2693–2703.
19. Kutlu, A.C., Ekmekcioglu, M., Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst. Appl. 39:1 (2012), 61–67.
20. Herrera, F., Martinez, L., A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 8:6 (2000), 746–752.
21. Martinez, L., Herrera, F., An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: extensions, applications and challenges. Inf. Sci. 207 (2012), 1–18.
22. Halouani, N., Chabchoub, H., Martel, J.M., PROMETHEE-MD-2T method for project selection. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 195:3 (2009), 841–849.
23. Xu, Y.J., Wang, H.M., Approaches based on 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators for multiple attribute group decision making under linguistic environment. Appl. Soft Comput. 11:5 (2011), 3988–3997.
24. Chang, K.H., Chang, Y.C., Chung, H.Y., A novel AHP-based benefit evaluation model of military simulation training systems. Math. Prob. Eng., 2015 Article ID 956757.
25. Parreiras, R.O., Ekel, P.Y., Martini, J.S.C., Palhares, R.M., A flexible consensus scheme for multicriteria group decision making under linguistic assessments. Inf. Sci. 180:7 (2010), 1075–1089.
26. Zhou, S.H., Chang, W.B., Xiong, Z.J., Risk assessment model with 2-tuple temporal linguistic variable. Inf. Technol. Manuf. Syst. 58–60 (2011), 2540–2545.
27. Chang, K.H., A more general risk assessment methodology using soft sets based ranking technique. Soft Comput. 18:1 (2014), 169–183.
28. Liu, P.D., Zhang, X., Investigation into evaluation of agriculture informatization level based on two-tuple. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 17:1 (2011), 74–86.
29. Porcel, C., Tejeda-Lorente, A., Martinez, M.A., Herrera-Viedma, E., A hybrid recommender system for the selective dissemination of research resources in a technology transfer office. Inf. Sci. 184:1 (2012), 1–19.
30. de Andres, R., Garcia-Lapresta, J.L., Martinez, L., A multi-granular linguistic model for management decision-making in performance appraisal. Soft Comput. 14:1 (2010), 21–34.
31. Dhouib, D., Elloumi, S., A new multi-criteria approach dealing with dependent and heterogeneous criteria for end-of-life product strategy. Appl. Math. Comput. 218:5 (2011), 1668–1681.
32. Moreno, J.M., del Castillo, J.M.M., Porcel, C., Herrera-Viedma, E., A quality evaluation methodology for health-related websites based on a 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic approach. Soft Comput. 14:8 (2010), 887–897.
33. Tsai, C.F., Chen, Z.Y., Crossing the fuzzy front end chasm: effective product project concept selection using a 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic approach. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 25:3 (2013), 755–770.
34. Seyed-Hosseini, S.M., Safaei, N., Asgharpour, M.J., Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 91:8 (2006), 872–881.
35. Chang, D.S., Sun, K.L.P., Applying, D.E.A., to enhance assessment capability of FMEA. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 26:6 (2009), 629–643.
36. Chang, K.H., Wen, T.C., A novel efficient approach for DFMEA combining 2-tuple and the OWA operator. Expert Syst. Appl. 37:3 (2010), 2362–2370.
37. Rahimi, S.A., Jamshidi, A., Ait-Kadi, D., Ruiz, A., Using fuzzy cost-based FMEA, GRA and profitability theory for minimizing failures at a healthcare diagnosis service. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 31:4 (2015), 601–615.
38. Chang, K.H., Chang, Y.C., Tsai, I.T., Enhancing FMEA assessment by integrating grey relational analysis and the decision making trial and evaluation laboratory approach. Eng. Fail. Anal. 31 (2013), 211–224.
39. Saaty, T.L., Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 168:2 (2006), 557–570.
40. Park, J.H., Park, J.M., Kwun, Y.C., 2-Tuple linguistic harmonic operators and their applications in group decision making. Knowl. Based Syst. 44 (2013), 10–19.