A stochastic approach for failure mode and effect analysis
RAIRO - Operations Research - Recherche Opérationnelle, Tome 51 (2017) no. 4, pp. 1077-1100.

This study presents a novel approach combining Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) and Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison (MABAC) method based on a stochastic evaluation process to prioritize potential failure modes (FMs) in an assembly line. The aim of the proposed approach is to improve the performance of FMEA by eliminating its shortcomings addressed in the study. In this context, firstly the risk factor (RF) importance weights and the performance values of the FMs for the RFs are determined by generating random numbers having uniform distribution in a range of minimum and maximum value of a limited number of expert evaluations. In this wise, the number of experts are increased to improve effectiveness of the risk evaluation process. Diverse opinions of experts are also assessed more precisely. Secondly, the priorities of the FMs are identified by implementing MABAC method. MABAC is a practical and reliable tool which provides stability for solutions. Finally, a comparative analysis is implemented to confirm the effectiveness of Stochastic FMEA-MABAC approach.

DOI : 10.1051/ro/2017010
Classification : 90B50
Mots-clés : FMEA, Stochastic, MABAC, Uniform Distribution, MCDM
Kiliç Delice, Elif 1 ; Can, Gulin Feryal 2

1 Department of Industrial Eng., Ataturk University, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey.
2 Department of Industrial Eng., Baskent University, 06810, Ankara, Turkey.
@article{RO_2017__51_4_1077_0,
     author = {Kili\c{c} Delice, Elif and Can, Gulin Feryal},
     title = {A stochastic approach for failure mode and effect analysis},
     journal = {RAIRO - Operations Research - Recherche Op\'erationnelle},
     pages = {1077--1100},
     publisher = {EDP-Sciences},
     volume = {51},
     number = {4},
     year = {2017},
     doi = {10.1051/ro/2017010},
     language = {en},
     url = {http://archive.numdam.org/articles/10.1051/ro/2017010/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Kiliç Delice, Elif
AU  - Can, Gulin Feryal
TI  - A stochastic approach for failure mode and effect analysis
JO  - RAIRO - Operations Research - Recherche Opérationnelle
PY  - 2017
SP  - 1077
EP  - 1100
VL  - 51
IS  - 4
PB  - EDP-Sciences
UR  - http://archive.numdam.org/articles/10.1051/ro/2017010/
DO  - 10.1051/ro/2017010
LA  - en
ID  - RO_2017__51_4_1077_0
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Kiliç Delice, Elif
%A Can, Gulin Feryal
%T A stochastic approach for failure mode and effect analysis
%J RAIRO - Operations Research - Recherche Opérationnelle
%D 2017
%P 1077-1100
%V 51
%N 4
%I EDP-Sciences
%U http://archive.numdam.org/articles/10.1051/ro/2017010/
%R 10.1051/ro/2017010
%G en
%F RO_2017__51_4_1077_0
Kiliç Delice, Elif; Can, Gulin Feryal. A stochastic approach for failure mode and effect analysis. RAIRO - Operations Research - Recherche Opérationnelle, Tome 51 (2017) no. 4, pp. 1077-1100. doi : 10.1051/ro/2017010. http://archive.numdam.org/articles/10.1051/ro/2017010/

J. Yang, H.-Zh. Huang, L.-P. He, Sh.-P. Zhu and D. Wen, Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis of aircraft turbine rotor blades using dempster–shafer evidence theory under uncertainty. Eng. Failure Anal. 18 (2011) 2084–2092. | DOI

S. Vinodh and D. Santhosh, Application of FMEA to an automotive leaf spring manufacturing organization. TQM J. 24 (2012) 260–274. | DOI

C. Kahraman, İ. Kaya and Ö. Şenvar, Healthcare failure mode and effects analysis under fuzziness. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. Internat. J. 19 (2013) 538–552. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, L. Liu and N. Liu, Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: A literature review. Expert Syst. Appl. 40 (2013) 828–838. | DOI

W.G. Ireson, C.F. Coombs and R.Y. Moss, Handbook of Reliability Engineering and Management. McGraw Hill (1996).

N.R. Shankar, B.S. Prabhu, D.O. Thompson, D.E. Chimenti and L. Poore, Application of fuzzy logic to matrix FMECA. In AIP Conf. Proc. AIP 557 (2001) 1987–1994 . | DOI

M. Gul and A.F. Guneri, A fuzzy multi criteria risk assessment based on decision matrix technique: A case study for aluminum industry. J. Loss Prev. Process Industries 40 (2016) 89–100. | DOI

S.H.R. Hajiagha, Sh.S. Hashemi, Y. Mohammadi and E.K. Zavadskas, Fuzzy belief structure based VIKOR method: an application for ranking delay causes of Tehran metro system by FMEA criteria. Transport 31 (2016) 108–118. | DOI

K.-S. Chin, Y.-M. Wang, G.K.K. Poon and J.-B. Yang, Failure mode and effects analysis by data envelopment analysis. Decis. Support Syst. 48 (2009) 246–256. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, L. Liu, Q.-H. Bian, Q.-L. Lin, N. Dong and P.-Ch. Xu, Failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy evidential reasoning approach and grey theory. Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (2011) 4403–4415. | DOI

J.B. Bowles and C.E. Peláez, Fuzzy logic prioritization of failures in a system failure mode, effects and criticality analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety 50 (1995) 203–213. | DOI

M. Ben-Daya and A. Raouf, A revised failure mode and effects analysis model. Inter. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 13 (1996) 43–47. | DOI

A. Pillay and J. Wang, Modified failure mode and effects analysis using approximate reasoning. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety 79 (2003) 69–85. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-X. You, X.-J. Fan and Q.-L. Lin, Failure mode and effects analysis using D numbers and grey relational projection method. Expert Syst. Appl. 41 (2014) 4670–4679. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, P. Li, J.-X. You and Y.-Z. Chen, A novel approach for FMEA: Combination of interval 2-tuple linguistic variables and gray relational analysis. Quality Reliab. Eng. Inter. 31 (2015) 761–772. | DOI

W. Song, X. Ming, Zh. Wu and B. Zhu, A rough TOPSIS approach for failure mode and effects analysis in uncertain environments. Quality Reliab. Eng. Inter. 30 (2014) 473–486. | DOI

Y.-M. Wang, K.-S. Chin, G. Ka Kwai Poon and J.-B. Yang, Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean. Expert Syst. Appl. 36 (2009) 1195–1207. | DOI

D.D. Adhikary, G.K. Bose, D. Bose and S. Mitra, Multi criteria FMECA for coal-fired thermal power plants using copras-g. Inter. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 31 (2014) 601–614. | DOI

M. Braglia, M. Frosolini and R. Montanari, Fuzzy criticality assessment model for failure modes and effects analysis. Int. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 20 (2003) 503–524. | DOI

I. Emovon, R.A. Norman, J.M. Alan and K. Pazouki, An integrated multicriteria decision making methodology using compromise solution methods for prioritising risk of marine machinery systems. Ocean Eng. 105 (2015) 92–103. | DOI

R.K. Sharma, D. Kumar and P. Kumar, Systematic failure mode effect analysis (FMEA) using fuzzy linguistic modelling. Inter. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 22 (2005) 986–1004. | DOI

Y. Ayrım, K. Atalay and F.G. Can, Kargo firması seçiminde stokastik copras yaklaşımı. In Ulusal Yoneylem Araştırması ve Endustri Mhendisliği Kongresi, Izmir. Temmuz 36 (2016) 13–15.

D. Pamučar and G. Ćirović, The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC). Expert Syst. Appl. 42 (2015) 3016–3028. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, FMEA using uncertainty theories and MCDM methods. In FMEA Using Uncertainty Theories and MCDM Methods. Springer (2016) 13–27.

Ch.-L. Chang, Ch.-Ch. Wei and Y.-H. Lee, Failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy method and grey theory. Kybernetes 28 (1999) 1072–1080. | DOI

Ch.-L. Chang, P.-H. Liu and Ch.-Ch. Wei, Failure mode and effects analysis using grey theory. Integr. Manuf. Syst. 12 (2001) 211–216. | DOI

G.A. Keskin and C. Özkan, An alternative evaluation of fmea: fuzzy art algorithm. Quality Reliab. Eng. Inter. 25 (2009) 647–661. | DOI

M. Abdelgawad and A.R. Fayek, Risk management in the construction industry using combined fuzzy FMEA and fuzzy AHP. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 136 (2010) 1028–1036. | DOI

K.-H. Chang and Ch.H. Cheng, Evaluating the risk of failure using the fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL method. J. Intel. Manuf. 22 (2011) 113–129. | DOI

Y. Park Y. Geum and Y. Cho, A systematic approach for diagnosing service failure: Service-specific FMEA and Grey Relational Analysis Approach (2011). | Zbl

F. Zammori and R. Gabbrielli, ANP/RPN: A multi criteria evaluation of the risk priority number. Quality Reliab. Eng. Inter. 28 (2012) 85–104. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, L. Liu, N. Liu and L.-X. Mao, Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment. Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (2012) 12926–12934. | DOI

A. Hadi−Vencheh and M Aghajani, Failure mode and effects analysis: A fuzzy group MCDM approach. J. Soft Comput. Appl. (2013) (2013) 1–14.

M. Ilangkumaran, P. Shanmugam, G. Sakthivel and K. Visagavel, Failure mode and effect analysis using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Inter. J. Prod. Quality Manag. 14 (2014) 296–313.

H.-Ch. Liu, X.-J. Fan, P. Li and Y.-Z. Chen, Evaluating the risk of failure modes with extended MULTIMOORA method under fuzzy environment. Eng. Appl. Artificial Intel. 34 (2014) 168–177. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, L. Liu and P. Li, Failure mode and effects analysis using intuitionistic fuzzy hybrid weighted euclidean distance operator. Inter. J. Syst. Sci. 45 (2014) 2012–2030. | DOI | MR | Zbl

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-X. You and X.-Y. You, Evaluating the risk of healthcare failure modes using interval 2-tuple hybrid weighted distance measure. Comput. Ind. Eng. 78 (2014) 249–258. | DOI

S. Helvacioglu and E. Ozen, Fuzzy based failure modes and effect analysis for yacht system design. Ocean Eng. 79 (2014) 131–141. | DOI

R. K. Sharma and P. Sharma, Qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyse reliability of a mechatronic system: a case. J. Indus. Eng. Inter. 11 (2015) 253–268. | DOI

T.-N. Tsai and J.-H. Yeh, Identification and risk assessment of soldering failure sources using a hybrid failure mode and effect analysis model and a fuzzy inference system. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 28 (2015) 2771–2784. | DOI

D. Panchal and D. Kumar, Integrated framework for behaviour analysis in a process plant. J. Loss Prevention Process Industries 40 (2016) 147–161. | DOI

Q. Zhou and V.V. Thai, Fuzzy and grey theories in failure mode and effect analysis for tanker equipment failure prediction. Safety Sci. 83 (2016) 74–79. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-X. You, M.-M. Shan and L.-N. Shao, Failure mode and effects analysis using intuitionistic fuzzy hybrid TOPSIS approach. Soft Comput. 19 (2015) 1085–1098. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-Xin You, X.-F. Ding and Q. Su, Improving risk evaluation in fmea with a hybrid multiple criteria decision making method. Inter. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 32 (2015) 763–782. | DOI

F. Lolli, A. Ishizaka, R. Gamberini, Bi. Rimini, A. Maria, Ferrari, S. Marinelli and R. Savazza, Waste treatment: an environmental, economic and social analysis with a new group fuzzy PROMETHEE approach. Clean Techn. Environ. Policy 18 (2016) 1317–1332. | DOI

H. Safari, Z. Faraji and S. Majidian, Identifying and evaluating enterprise architecture risks using FMEA and fuzzy VIKOR. J. Intel. Manuf. 27 (2016) 475–486. | DOI

B. Vahdani, M. Salimi and M. Charkhchian, A new fmea method by integrating fuzzy belief structure and TOPSIS to improve risk evaluation process. Inter. J. Adv. Manuf. Techn. 77 (2015) 357–368. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-X. You, Sh. Chen and Y.-Z. Chen, An integrated failure mode and effect analysis approach for accurate risk assessment under uncertainty. IIE Trans. 48 (2016) 1027–1042. | DOI

H.-Ch. Liu, J.-X. You, P. Li and Q. Su, Failure mode and effect analysis under uncertainty: an integrated multiple criteria decision making approach. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 65 (2016) 1380–1392. | DOI

H. Zhao, J.-X. You and H.-Ch. Liu, Failure mode and effect analysis using multimoora method with continuous weighted entropy under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Soft Comput. (2016) 1–13.

X. Wang, Y. Zhang and G. Shen, An improved FMECA for feed system of CNC machining center based on ICR and DEMATEL method. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Techn. 83 (2016) 43–54. | DOI

Yi.-Xi. Xue, J.-X. You, Xiao-Dong Lai and H.-Ch. Liu, An interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy MABAC approach for material selection with incomplete weight information. Appl. Soft Comput. 38 (2016) 703–713. | DOI

X. Peng and Y. Yang, Pythagorean fuzzy choquet integral based MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 31 (2016) 989–1020. | DOI

Su-min Yu, J. Wang and J.-q. Wang, An interval type-2 fuzzy likelihood-based MABAC approach and its application in selecting hotels on a tourism website. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. (2016) 1–15. | MR

J. Roy, A. Ranjan and A. Debnath, An extended MABAC for multi-attribute decision making using trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy numbers. Preprint (2016). | arXiv

J. Roy, K. Chatterjee, A. Bandhopadhyay and S. Kar, Evaluation and selection of medical tourism sites: A rough AHP based MABAC approach. Preprint (2016). | arXiv

D.I. Božanić, D.S. Pamučar and S.M. Karović, Use of the fuzzy AHP-MABAC hybrid model in ranking potential locations for preparing laying-up positions. Vojnotehnički Glasnik 64 (2016) 705–729. | DOI

A. Ishizaka and N.H. Nguyen, Calibrated fuzzy AHP for current bank account selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 40 (2013) 3775–3783. | DOI

E.P. Zafiropoulos and E.N. Dialynas, Reliability prediction and failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) of electronic devices using fuzzy logic. Int. J. Quality Reliab. Manag. 22 (2005) 183–200. | DOI

H. Arabian-Hoseynabadi, H. Oraee and P.J. Tavner, Failure modes and effects analysis (fmea) for wind turbines. Inter. J. Electrical Power Energy Syst. 32 (2010) 817–824. | DOI

F.M. Company, Potential failure mode and effects analysis in design (Design FMECA) and for manufacturing and assembly process (Process FMECA) instruction manual (1988).

Cité par Sources :