Application of Fuzzy Inference Techniques to FMEA

  • Kai Meng Tay
  • Chee Peng Lim
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Soft Computing book series (AINSC, volume 34)

Abstract

In traditional Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), the Risk Priority Number (RPN) ranking system is used to evaluate the risk level of failures, to rank failures, and to prioritize actions. This approach is simple but it suffers from several weaknesses. In an attempt to overcome the weaknesses associated with the traditional RPN ranking system, several fuzzy inference techniques for RPN determination are investigated in this paper. A generic Fuzzy RPN approach is described, and its performance is evaluated using a case study relating to a semiconductor manufacturing process. In addition, enhancements for the fuzzy RPN approach are proposed by refining the weights of the fuzzy production rules.

Keywords

Membership Function Fuzzy Inference System Fuzzy Approach Failure Risk Risk Priority Number 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ben-Daya, M., and Raouf, A. (1993). “A revi sed failure mode and effects analysis model,” International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 3(1):43–7.Google Scholar
  2. Bowles, John B. and Pelæz, C. Enrique (1995), “Fuzzy logic prioritization of failures in a system failure mode, effects and criticality analysis,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 50, Issue 2, Pages 203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chrysler Corporation, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation (1995), Potential Failure Mode And Effect analysis (FMEA) Reference Manual.Google Scholar
  4. Guimaræs, Antonio C. F., and Lapa, CelsoMarcelo Franklin (2004), “Effects analysis fuzzy inference system in nuclear problems using approximate reasoning,” Annals of nuclear Energy, vol 31, pp 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ireson, G., Coombs, W., Clyde, F., and Richard Y. Moss (1995). Handbook of Reliability Engineering and Management. McGraw-Hill Professional; 2nd editionGoogle Scholar
  6. Jang, J. S. R., Sun, C. T., and Mizutani, E. (1997). Neural-Fuzzy and soft Computing, Prentice-Hall 1997.Google Scholar
  7. Lin, C. T., and Lee, C. S. G. (1995), Neural Fuzzy Systems, A Neuro-Fuzzy Synergism to Intelligent systems. Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Peláez, C. Enrique and Bowles, John B.(1996), “Using fuzzy cognitive maps as a system model for failure modes and effects analysis,” Information Sciences, Volume 88, Issues 1–4, Pages 177–199.Google Scholar
  9. Pillay, Anand and Wang, Jin (2003), “Modifi ed failure mode and effects analysis using approximate reasoning,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Volume 79, Issue 1, Pages 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Xu, L., Tang, L. C., Xie, M., Ho, L. H., and Zhu, M. L (2002). “Fuzzy assessment of FMEA for engine systems,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Volume 75, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 17–19.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Yeung, D. S., and Tsang, E. C. C. (1997), “Weighted fuzzy Production rules,” Fuzzy sets and Systems, vol.8, pp.299–313.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Meng Tay
    • 1
  • Chee Peng Lim
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Electrical and Electronic EngineeringUniversity of Science MalaysiaPenangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations