Failure mode effect analysis procedure

One of the procedures used to determine which sensors are needed to sense process conditions and protect the process is called a Failure Mode Effect Analysis—FMEA. Every device in the process is checked for its various modes of failure. A search is then made to assure that there is a redundancy that keeps an identified source or condition from developing for each potential failure mode. The degree of required redundancy depends on the severity of the source as previously described. Table 14-2 lists failure modes for various devices commonly used in production facilities. 

Most of the strategies devoted to managing risk in projects at the design stage target variability. One very popular tool is known as six-sigma (Pande and Holpp, 2001). Companies also make use of failure mode effects analysis (Stamatis, 2003), which is a procedure originated at NASA in which potential failures are analyzed and measures to... 

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis. The system design activity usually emphasizes the attainment of performance objectives in a timely and cost-efficient fashion. The failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) procedure considers the system from a failure point of view to determine how the product might fail. The terms design failure mode and effects analysis (DFMEA) and failure mode effects and criticaUty analysis (EMECA) also are used. This EMEA technique is used to identify and eliminate potential failure modes early in the design cycle, and its success is well documented (3,4). 

Perhaps the key to detcrnuiiiiig die consequences of an accident is die study of accident mininiization/prcvendon. This topic receives extensive treatment in Section 17.2. The estimation (not calculadon) of consequences is treated in Section 17.3, which is followed by evacuation procedures (Section 17.4). The next section e.xaniiiies failure modes, effects and critical analysis (FMECA). The cluipter concludes with vulnerability analysis (Section 17.6) and event tree analysis (Section 17.7). 

US MIL-STD-1629A-1984. Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis. 

SAE ARP926, 1967. Design Analysis Procedure for Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). Society for Automotive Engineers. 

U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), 1980, Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis, MIL-STD-1629A, U.S. Department of Defense, Washington, D.C., November 1980. 

In 1985, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) initiated a project to produce the Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures. This document, prepared by Battelle, includes many system safety analysis tools. Even though frequently identified as hazard and operability (HazOp) programs, the methods being developed by the petrochemical industry to use preliminary hazard analyses, fault trees, failure modes, effects, and criticality analyses, as well as similar techniques to identify, analyze, and control risks systematically, look very much like system safety efforts tailored for the petrochemical industry (Goldwaite 1985). 

The remainder of this chapter will discuss HAZOP and what-if techniques in detail and illustrate specific examples of how they are applied. Chapter 7 will address fault tree analysis and Chapter 8 will discuss failure modes effects and criticality analysis. An excellent reference manual for these techniques is the Guidelines for Hazard Evaluation Procedures, published by the American Institute for Chemical Engineers CCPS (2008). 

Procedures for performing a failure mode effects and criticality analysis. 

The purpose of this study is to answer following question can the LARA method be used as a holistic risk management technique in different academic environments and what are the main differences when comparing to the results obtained by industrial risk analysis techniques In order to answer these questions, risk analyses of different procedures were performed using LARA, Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), and HAZOP. The experiments andyzed are standard operations performed at University of Pardubice and at EPFL. The main differences of the results using the different methods will be pointed out and compared. 

MIL-P-1629 Procedures for Performing a failure mode, effects and Criticality analysis. Department of Defense (US)... 

Failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) is an extended version of FMEA. More clearly, when FMEA is extended to group or categorize each failure effect with respect to its level of severity (this includes documenting catastrophic and critical failures), then it (i.e., FMEA) is called FMECA. It was developed by the National Aeronautics and Astronautics Administration (NASA) for assuring the required reliability of space systems. A military standard titled "Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis" was developed by the U.S. Department of Defense in the 1970s [20]. 

The original standard for FMEA is MIL-STD-1629A, Procedures for Performing a Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis, 1980. A more recent standard is SAE/ARP-5580, Recommended FMEA Practices for Non-Automobile Applications, July 2001. Another more recent standard is SAE Standard J-1739, Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Design (Design FMEA) and Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in Manufacturing and Assembly Processes (Process FMEA) and Effects Analysis for Machinery (Machinery FMEA), August 2002. 

RCM sometimes referred to as Preventive Maintenance Optimisation (PMO) has become popular in recent years within several industries. The concept has been discussed and elalx>rated by several authors (Worledge (1993), Rausand (1998), Sherwin (1999)). RCM is a procedure for determining maintenance strategies based on reliability techniques and encompasses well-known analysis methods such as Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA). RCM procedure takes into account the prime objectives of a maintenance programme ... 

Most hazard identification procedures have the capabiUty of providing information related to the scenario. This includes the safety review, what-if analysis, hazard and operabiUty studies (HAZOP), failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), and fault tree analysis. Using these procedures is the best approach to identifying these scenarios. 

Failure Mode and Ejfect Analysis (FMEA) This is a systematic study of the causes of failures and their effects. All causes or modes of failure are considered for each element of a system, and then all possible outcomes or effects are recorded. This method is usually used in combination with fault tree analysis, a quantitative technique. FMEA is a comphcated procedure, usually carried out by experienced risk analysts. 

The FMEA approach is a bottom-up approach, looking at component failures and establishing their effect on the system. An alternative approach is to use a top-down approach such as Fault Tree Analysis to postulate system failure modes and establish which processes, procedures, or activities are likely to cause such failures. 

In the FMECA procedure [2,3,256], an exhaustive list of the equipment is first made. Every item on the list is then reviewed for possible ways in which it can fail (the failure modes are open, closed, leaks, plugged, on, off, etc.). The effects of each failure mode are then recorded and a criticality ranking of every item of equipment is calculated. A limitation of this procedure is that combinations of failures which may cause an incident are not really identified. Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) is the same procedure without the criticality analysis. 

Several qualitative approaches can be used to identify hazardous reaction scenarios, including process hazard analysis, checklists, chemical interaction matrices, and an experience-based review. CCPS (1995a p. 176) describes nine hazard evaluation procedures that can be used to identify hazardous reaction scenarios-checklists, Dow fire and explosion indices, preliminary hazard analysis, what-if analysis, failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), HAZOP study, fault tree analysis, human error analysis, and quantitative risk analysis. 

---