Study and Improvement of the FMECA in a Production Way

  • Ilyas MzouguiEmail author
  • Zoubir El Felsoufi
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 912)


Failure mode and effect and criticity analysis is a tool highly used for the identification and the elimination of the failures. He has been used in the first time by the national aeronautics and space agency on 1977. He has been created as a development methodology. Since that, many works have been established to improve it some of them use probabilistic methods. Some others use the Multi criteria decision making. But as we know, there is any works that try to solve the interdepency problem in this tool. This is what we will try to do in this article.


FMECA Interdependency DSM 


  1. 1.
    Author, F.: Article title. Journal 2(5), 99–110 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Keller, A.Z., Kara-Zaitri, C.: Further applications of fuzzy logic to reliability assessment and safety analysis. Microelectron. Reliab. 29(3), 399–404 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sant’Anna, A.P., Martins, E.F., Lima, G.B.A., da Fonseca, R.A.: Beta distributed preferences in the comparison of failure modes. Proc. Comput. Sci. 55, 862–869 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jia Chen, C.: Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 114, 1–9 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braglia, M., Bevilacqua, M.: Fuzzy modeling and analytic hierarchy processing as a means to quantify risk levels associated with failure modes in production systems (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chin, K.-S., Wang, Y.-M., Poon, G.K.K., Yang, J.-B.: Failure mode and effects analysis using a group-based evidential reasoning approach. Comput. Oper. Res. 36(6), 1768–1779 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kutlu, A.C., Ekmekçioğlu, M.: Fuzzy failure modes and effects analysis by using fuzzy TOPSIS-based fuzzy AHP. Expert. Syst. Appl. 39(1), 61–67 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Peeters, J.F.W., Basten, R.J.I., Tinga, T.: Improving failure analysis efficiency by combining FTA and FMEA in a recursive manner. Reliability engineering & system safety 172, 36–44 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Braglia, M., Bevilacqua, M.: The analytic hierarchy process applied to maintenance strategy selection. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 70(1), 71–83 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saaty, T.L.: A note on the AHP and expected value theory. Socio Econ. Plan. Sci. 20(6), 397–398 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hu, A.H., Hsu, C.-W., Kuo, T.-C., Wu, W.-C.: Risk evaluation of green components to hazardous substance using FMEA and FAHP. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 7142–7147 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Braglia, M., Frosolini, M., Montanari, R.: Fuzzy TOPSIS approach for failure mode, effects and criticality analysis. Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 19, 425–443 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, L.-E., Liu, H.-C., Quan, M.-Y.: Evaluating the risk of failure modes with a hybrid MCDM model under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environments. Comput. Ind. Eng. 102, 175–185 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yassine, A.A.: An introduction to modeling and analyzing complex product development processes using the design structure matrix (DSM) method. Urbana 51(9), 1–17 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tang, D., Zhu, R., Tang, J., Xu, R., He, R.: Product design knowledge management based on design structure. Adv. Eng. Inform. 24(2), 159–166 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Danilovic, M., Browning, T.R.: Managing complex product development projects with design structure matrices and domain mapping matrices. Int. J. Proj. Manage. 25(3), 300–314 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Browning, T.: Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 48(3), 292–306 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith, R.P., Morrow, J.A.: Product development process modeling. Des. Stud. 20(3), 237–261 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eppinger, S.D., et al.: A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development. J. Eng. Des. 6, 1–13 (1994)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saridakis, K.M., Dentsoras, A.J.: Integration of fuzzy logic, genetic algorithms and neural networks in collaborative parametric design. Adv. Eng. Inform. 20(4), 379–399 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Sciences and TechnologiesTangierMorocco

Personalised recommendations