IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijrsaf/v10y2016i1p1-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-criteria failure mode effects and criticality analysis method: a comparative case study on aircraft braking system

Author

Listed:
  • Yung-Tsan Jou
  • Kang-Hung Yang
  • Ming-Li Liao
  • Cheng-Shih Liaw

Abstract

The Department of the USA's Army published technical manual TM 5-698-4 to create a new failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) method, since the formal military specifications and standards MIL-STD-1629A was cancelled. However, the design processes of the two-phase product do not take the most appropriate corrective measures to eliminate the product risks in the first design phase. Thus, the risk priority number (RPN) and criticality analysis (CA) methods have serious flaws from a technical perspective which are still widely used and misleading in the related FMECA handbook and instruction manual. This paper uses the maximal entropy ordered weighted geometric averaging (ME-OWGA) operator to obtain the optimal weighting vector, which calculates FMECA values in one-phase and moreover circumvents the difficulties of mathematical operators. A fighter aircraft braking system is used as a case study to illustrate the proposed method, which compares the proposed approach with the RPN and CA methods. The results indicate that the proposed method can efficiently shorten the design process and more accurately calculate than MIL-STD-1629A, TM 5-698-4, FMECA handbook and other equivalent instruction manuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Yung-Tsan Jou & Kang-Hung Yang & Ming-Li Liao & Cheng-Shih Liaw, 2016. "Multi-criteria failure mode effects and criticality analysis method: a comparative case study on aircraft braking system," International Journal of Reliability and Safety, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijrsaf:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:1-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=76338
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijrsaf:v:10:y:2016:i:1:p:1-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=98 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.