IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v14y2023i5d10.1007_s13198-023-01981-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Failure mode and effects analysis for submersible pump component using proportionate risk assessment model: a case study in the power plant of Agartala

Author

Listed:
  • Pushparenu Bhattacharjee

    (NIT Agartala)

  • Syed Abou Iltaf Hussain

    (Chandigarh University)

  • V. Dey

    (NIT Agartala)

  • U. K. Mandal

    (NIT Agartala)

Abstract

The comprehensive intention of the present study is to propose a robust mathematical model for Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA) for submersible pump components. FMEA helps discover potential failures existing within the design of a product, process, or system of components. In this paper, a novel Multi-criteria decision-making method named as Proportionate Risk Assessment Model (PRASM) is proposed to evaluate the most susceptible potential failure modes (PFMs) for the submersible pump. The PRASM method selects the most susceptible PFM by assessing the amount of risk associated with it. This approach is the first of its kind that considers the individual importance of each PFM, as well as exclusive contribution of risk attributes during FMEA evaluation. Decision makers rate the different PFMs concerning the criteria using linguistic terms which are then converted into a non-linear triangular interval-valued fuzzy number $$\left( {NTrIVFN} \right)$$ NTrIVFN . It is a special case of interval-valued fuzzy numbers with non-linear membership functions. This paper also scrutinizes the impact of non-linear membership functions in the process of decision-making. Moreover, ranking is done using the centroid method which is extended for $$NTrIVFN$$ NTrIVFN . Furthermore, the proposed approach with $$NTrIVFN$$ NTrIVFN rating is endorsed with a case study involving failures in components of submersible pumps used in a power plant.

Suggested Citation

  • Pushparenu Bhattacharjee & Syed Abou Iltaf Hussain & V. Dey & U. K. Mandal, 2023. "Failure mode and effects analysis for submersible pump component using proportionate risk assessment model: a case study in the power plant of Agartala," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(5), pages 1778-1798, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:14:y:2023:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-023-01981-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-023-01981-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-023-01981-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-023-01981-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liao, Huchang & Wu, Xingli, 2020. "DNMA: A double normalization-based multiple aggregation method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Jian-qiang Wang & Zhi-qiu Han & Hong-yu Zhang, 2014. "Multi-criteria Group Decision-Making Method Based on Intuitionistic Interval Fuzzy Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 715-733, July.
    3. Carpitella, Silvia & Certa, Antonella & Izquierdo, Joaquín & La Fata, Concetta Manuela, 2018. "A combined multi-criteria approach to support FMECA analyses: A real-world case," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 394-402.
    4. Wan, Shu-Ping & Li, Deng-Feng, 2013. "Fuzzy LINMAP approach to heterogeneous MADM considering comparisons of alternatives with hesitation degrees," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 925-940.
    5. Benítez-Fernández, Amalia & Ruiz, Francisco, 2020. "A Meta-Goal Programming approach to cardinal preferences aggregation in multicriteria problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    7. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    8. Cuiping Wei & Yuzhong Zhang, 2015. "Entropy Measures for Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Their Application in Group Decision-Making," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2015, pages 1-13, January.
    9. Hu-Chen Liu & Yi-Zeng Chen & Jian-Xin You & Hui Li, 2016. "Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy digraph and matrix approach," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 805-816, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lo, Huai-Wei & Liou, James J.H. & Huang, Chun-Nen & Chuang, Yen-Ching, 2019. "A novel failure mode and effect analysis model for machine tool risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 173-183.
    2. Ilyas Mzougui & Zoubir El Felsoufi, 2021. "A modified method to improve failure analysis," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 12(2), pages 231-244, April.
    3. James J. H. Liou & Perry C. Y. Liu & Huai-Wei Lo, 2020. "A Failure Mode Assessment Model Based on Neutrosophic Logic for Switched-Mode Power Supply Risk Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    6. Wu, Xingli & Liao, Huchang, 2021. "Modeling personalized cognition of customers in online shopping," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    7. Ravindra Singh Saluja & Varinder Singh, 2023. "Attribute-based characterization, coding, and selection of joining processes using a novel MADM approach," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 60(2), pages 616-655, June.
    8. Junli Zhang & Guoteng Wang & Zheng Xu & Zheren Zhang, 2022. "A Comprehensive Evaluation Method and Strengthening Measures for AC/DC Hybrid Power Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Hamzeh Soltanali & Mehdi Khojastehpour & Siamak Kheybari, 2023. "Evaluating the critical success factors for maintenance management in agro-industries using multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 949-968, June.
    10. Yossi Hadad & Baruch Keren & Dima Alberg, 2023. "An Expert System for Ranking and Matching Electric Vehicles to Customer Specifications and Requirements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, May.
    11. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    12. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    13. Negin Salimi & Jafar Rezaei, 2016. "Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1911-1938, December.
    14. Chun-Chieh Tseng & Jun-Yi Zeng & Min-Liang Hsieh & Chih-Hung Hsu, 2022. "Analysis of Innovation Drivers of New and Old Kinetic Energy Conversion Using a Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Model in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Chinese Case," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(20), pages 1-25, October.
    15. Tavana, Madjid & Khalili Nasr, Arash & Mina, Hassan & Michnik, Jerzy, 2022. "A private sustainable partner selection model for green public-private partnerships and regional economic development," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    16. Akbari, Sina & Escobedo, Adolfo R., 2023. "Beyond kemeny rank aggregation: A parameterizable-penalty framework for robust ranking aggregation with ties," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    17. Jairo Ortega & Sarbast Moslem & János Tóth & Tamás Péter & Juan Palaguachi & Mario Paguay, 2020. "Using Best Worst Method for Sustainable Park and Ride Facility Location," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Vineet Kaushik & Ashwani Kumar & Himanshu Gupta & Gaurav Dixit, 2022. "Modelling and prioritizing the factors for online apparel return using BWM approach," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 843-873, September.
    19. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2022. "An extended best–worst multiple reference point method: application in the assessment of non-life insurance companies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 5323-5362, November.
    20. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.

    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:spr:ijsaem:v:14:y:2023:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-023-01981-6. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.