You are on page 1of 23
Chapter 4 Failures Modes and Effects Analysis » ofthe failures. In most such Sovoral failure analysts have categorized the n summaries, fow, sf any, failures are attributed to the wrong material choice. ‘The ‘usual purpose of such surveys ie to determine the frequency of failure mecha- nisms. Table 4.1 shows the frequency of failure mechanisms for failed ing component and aircraft components. As expected, the percents ifferent types of components, For example, none of the aircraft components failed by brittle fracture, while 16% of the engineering components experienced Drietle failueo. Failure modo and offect analysis (FMEA) was originally developed as a tool to review the reliability of systems and components. It bas been modified over ‘the yeats to include criticality analysis and failure hazard analysis to help de- ‘The objective of FMEA is to expose termine equipment safety requirements, all potential element failure modes to scrutiny, to classify and quantify their possible causes with their associated probability of occurrence, and to evaluate ‘heir impact on the overall system performance. Fallure mode and effect analysis can be catried oul at various levels of det ils. Table 4.1: Rrequeney of failure mechanism Porcentage of Tailwre Engineering Aircraft components components Corrosion BH 3 Fatigue 2 61 Brittle fracture 16 Overloed ul 18 High-temperature corrosion 7 18 Corrosion fatigue 6 8 Creep 3 Stross rupture 1 Wear, sbri 35 36 CHAPTER 4, FAILURES MODES AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS Failures can be postulated at the component-part level or at subsequent higher subsystem levels. The level of detail at which the analysis is eartied out is usually otermined by cost constraints and the reliability required of the system, ‘The more detailed the analysis, the greater will be the number of hazards considered, and the greater will be the cost and time required to carry out the analysis. Sometime a less detailed analysis eaztied out in time to change the design may, in the Jong run, be more useful than an in-depth analysis available after completion of ht design. The level of detail to which an ‘analysis should be carried can only be based on experience. 4.1 FMEA definitions ‘Thie section covers the basic definitions of FMEA, along with examples Grom different types of FMEA applications. ‘The definitions are presented in the sequence they are normally developed in an FMEA project (See Fig. 41). Figure 4.1: Geuerie FMA worksheet, Circled numbers reler to corresponding to the coming items 411 Item An “items the focus of the FMEA project. For a Design FMEA, this is the subsystem or component under analysis Examples of Items for Design FMBAs 1. Shatt 2. Oven bumer assembly 3. Hydraulic uid tank 4.1.2 Funetion A “function"is what the item or process is intended to do, ususally to a given standard of performance or requirement. For Design FMEAs, this is the primary purpose or design intent of the item, Funelions aze typically described in a verb noun format. Examples of Functions for Design FMEAs 1. Shaft: Provide mechanical transfer of xx rotational force while maintain- ing linear and angular stability. 4.1. FMEA DEFINITIONS a7 2, Oven burner assembly: Heat the burner plate to 160°F within 60 sec onds 3. Hydraulic fliud tank: Contain the XYZ hydraulic fluid in tank, with no external Ieakage per specification 4.1.3. Failure Mode ‘A “failure mode"is the manner in which the item or operation potentially fails to ‘moct or deliver the intended function and associated requirements. Depending oon the definition of failure established by the analysis team, failure modes may include failure to perform a function within defined limits, inadequate or poor performance of the function, intermittent performance of a function, and/or performing an unintended or undesired function, Examples of failure modes for Design FMEAs 1. Shaft: Shaft fractured 2, Oven burner assembly: Burner plate stays cold, Burner plate over bats, Burner plate slow heat ramp 3. Hydraulic fluid tank: Slow leak, Tenk rupture 41.4 Bffect [An “effects the consequence of the failure on the system or end user. Depend ing on the ground rules for the analysis, the team may define a single description of the effect on the top-level system and/or end user, or three levels of effects: Local effec. ‘The consequence of the failure on the item or adjacent items [Next Higher Level level assembly fect. The consequence of the failure on the next higher End Bifect, The consequence of the failure on the top-level system and/or end user "There can be more than one effect for each failure mode. Towever, in most applications the FMEA team will use the most serious of the end effects for the analysis, Examples of Effect for Design FMEAs 1. Shaft: Failure Mode: Shalt fractured, # Effect (Local: Shaft exy) « Effect (Next level: Grinder subsystem): Rock grinder teeth do not move No torque output (does not transfer en # Effect (End user): No rocks ate pulverized and product order is not filled 2. Oven burner assembly: Failure mode 1: Burner plate stays cold