期刊文献+

基于经济损失的失效排序及纠正方法 被引量:1

Improved failure ranking and correcting method
下载PDF
导出
摘要 失效排序及纠正方法是可靠性研究的重要内容,针对传统失效模式和影响分析(FMEA)中风险优先数(RPN)排序方法的准确性差、灵敏度低以及RPN数值的离散性、重复性等缺陷,从减少主观因素干扰,提高优先数可信度的角度,建立一种改进方法—基于经济损失的RPN排序方法(ERPN)。首先确定某潜在失效情景的严重度,再确定其初始事件发生的概率P以及由失效导致的经济损失E,用P和E的乘积作为ERPN值。将该改进方法用于某厂珍珠岩吸声板生产线的冲压工艺的失效分析,并用发明问题解决理论(TRIZ)对失效模式进行分类和纠正。结果表明,ERPN方法在解决工程实际问题上是可行、有效的。 Failure ranking and correcting methods are important parts of reliability research. Aiming at the defects in conventional risk priority number(RPN) methodology for FMEA, such as low accuracy, low sensitivity and discreteness and repeatability of the RPN number, in the purpose of reducing the interference of subjective factors and improving the credibility of risk prioritization, an improved approach based on economic losses named ERPN was worked out. First step is determining the severity of a potential failure situation, then calculating the probability P of the initial event and the economic loss E, taking the product of P and E as the ERPN value. The improved method was applied to the failure analysis of the stamping process in a certain pearlite sound board production line, and the TRIZ theory was used to classify and correct the failure. The results show that the ERPN method is feasible and effective in solving practical engineering problems.
出处 《中国安全科学学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2016年第7期58-62,共5页 China Safety Science Journal
关键词 失效模式和影响分析(FMEA) 经济损失 失效概率 基于经济损失的风险优先数(RRPN) 发明问题解决理论(TRIZ) failure mode and effects analysis(FMEA) economic losses failure probability risk priority number based on economic losses(ERPN) TRIZ theory
  • 相关文献

参考文献17

  • 1CHANG K H, WEN T C. A novel efficient approach for DFMEA combining 2-tuple and the OWA operator [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, 37(3):2 362-2 370.
  • 2CHIN K S, WANG Y M, POON G K K, et al. Failure mode and effects analysis using a group-based evidential reasoning approach [J]. Computers & Operations Research, 2009, 36 (6): 1 768-1 779.
  • 3KUTLU A C, EKMEKCIOGLU M. Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2012, 39 (1):61-67.
  • 4CHIN K S, WANG Y M, POON G K K, et al. Failure mode and effects analysis by data envelopment analysis [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2009, 48(1):246-256.
  • 5GEUM Y, CHO Y, PARK Y. A systematic approach for diagnosing service failure: service-specific FMEA and grey relational analysis approach [J]. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 2011, 54(11):3 126-3 142.
  • 6ZAMMORI F, GABBRIELLI R. ANP/RPN: A multi criteria evaluation of the risk priority number [J]. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2011, 28(1): 85-104.
  • 7LIU Huchen, LIU Long, LIU Nan. Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: a literature review [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2013, 40(2):828-838.
  • 8SHARMA R, SHARMA P. Integrated framework to optimize RAM and cost decisions in a process plant [J]. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2012, 25(6): 883-904.
  • 9SONG Wenyan, MING Xinguo, WU Zhenyong, et al. A rough TOPSIS approach for failure mode and effects analysis in uncertain environments [J]. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2014, 30(4): 473-486.
  • 10ZHANG Zaifang, CHU Xuening. Risk prioritization in failure mode and effects analysis under uncertainty [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, 38 (1):206-214.

二级参考文献18

  • 1崔文彬,吴桂涛,孙培廷,张余庆.故障模式影响分析方法的整体性与经济性改进[J].大连海事大学学报,2006,32(4):73-76. 被引量:4
  • 2GjB/Z1391-2006,故障模式、影响及危害性分析指南[S].北京:中国人民解放军总装备部,2006.
  • 3Childs Joseph A. Turning multiple PFMECA results into an optimal action plan [ C ]//Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium. Fort Worth, USA : IEEE ,2009:412 - 416.
  • 4Kai Meng Tay. On fuzzy inference system based failure mode and effect analysis ( FMEA ) methodology [ C ]// 2009 International Conference of Soft Computing and Pattern Recognition. Ayer Keroh, Malaysia: IEEE ,2009 :329 - 334.
  • 5Bowles John B. An assessment of RPN prioritization in a fail-ure modes effects and criticality analysis [C]//Proceedings Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium. Tampa Flor-ida: IEEE ,2003:380 - 386.
  • 6Kmenta Steven, Kosuke Ishii. Scenario-bases FMEA : a life cycle cost perspective[C]//2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences. Baltimore, Maryland : ASME ,2000: 10 - 14.
  • 7Niu Yumei. The optimization of RPN criticality analysis meth-od in FMECA [ C ]// International Conference on Apperceiving Computing and Intelligence Analysis( ICACIA2009 ). Chengdu, China: IEEE,2009 : 166 - 170.
  • 8Iranmanesh H, Jalili M, Pirmoradi Z. Developing a new structure for determining time risk priority using risk breakdown matrix in EPC projects [ C ]//2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management. Singapore : IEEE,2007:999 - 1003.
  • 9Chang K H, Cheng C H. Evaluating the risk of failure using the fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL method[J]. Journal of Intelli- gent Manufacturing,2011,22(2) : 113 - 129.
  • 10Bowles John B. An assessment of RPN prioritization in a failure modes effects and criticality analysis[C]. Proceedings of Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 2003:380 -386.

共引文献59

同被引文献15

二级引证文献10

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部