Safety Risk Management in Production Process: A case study in the automotive supplier industry

Document Type : Original Article


Industrial Engineering, University of Technology Golpayegan, Golpayegan, Iran


This paper deals with the study of reliability measures of a complex engineering system consisting three subsystems namely L, M, and N in series configuration. The subsystem-L has three units working under 1-out-of-3: G; policy, the subsystem-M has two units working under 1-out-of-2: G policy and the subsystem-N has one unit working under 1-out-of-1: G; policy. Moreover, the system may face catastrophic failure at any time t. The failure rates of units of all subsystems are constant and assumed to follow the exponential distribution however, their repair supports two types of distribution namely general distribution and Gumbel-Hougaard family copula distribution. The system is analyzed by using the supplementary variable technique, Laplace transformation and Gumbel-Hougaard family of copula to derive the differential equations and to obtain important reliability characteristics such as availability of the system, reliability of the system, MTTF, and profit analysis. The numerical results for reliability, availability, MTTF, and profit function are obtained by taking particular values of various parameters and repair cost using maple. Tables and figures demonstrate the computed results and conclude that copula repair is more effective repair policy for better performance of repairable systems. It gives a new aspect to scientific community to adopt multi-dimension repair in form of copula. Furthermore, the results of the model are beneficial for system engineers and designers, reliability and maintenance managers.


Main Subjects

[1]   Yousefi, S., Alizadeh, A., Hayati, J. and Baghery, M., “HSE risk prioritization using robust DEA-FMEA approach with undesirable outputs: A study of automotive parts industry in Iran,” Safety Science, 144-158, 2018.
[2]   Guo, Q., Sheng, K., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Yang, h., and Miao, R., “Research on Element Importance of Shafting Installation Based on QFD and FMEA,” Procedia Engineering, 677-685, 2017.
[3]   Wang, W., Liu, X., Qin, Yo., And Fu, Y., “A risk evaluation and prioritization method for FMEA with prospect theory and Choquet integral,” Safety Science, 152-163, 2018.
[4]   Peeters, J.F.W., Basten, R.J.I., and Tinga, T., “Improving failure analysis efficiency by combining FTA and FMEA in a recursive manner,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 172, 36-44, 2017.
[5]   Su, C. T. L., Hung C. T., Po, W., and Yang, T., “Improving the reliability of electronic paper display using FMEA and Taguchi methods,” A case study: Microelectronics Reliability, 1369-1377, 2014.
[6]   Chen, L., and Deng, Y., “A new failure mode and effects analysis model using Dempster–Shafer evidence theory and grey relational projection method,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 13-20, 2018.
[7]   Yang, C. S., Weiming, C., and Qiangqiang, G. B., “A practical solution for HVAC prognostics: Failure mode and effects analysis in building maintenance,” Journal of Building Engineering, 26-32, 2018.
[8]   Silva, M., Mendo De G., Paula Henriques, A., Thiago, P. S., Camara C. L., Seixas, C. A. P., “A multidimensional approach to information security risk management using FMEA and fuzzy theory,” International Journal of Information Management, 733–740, 2014.
[9]   Mangeli, M. S., Hosseinzadeh A., and Saljooghi F., “Improvement of risk assessment in the FMEA using nonlinear model, revised fuzzy TOPSIS, and support vector machine,” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 209-216, 2019.
[10]  Sprearifico, C. R., Davide R. C., “A state-of-the-art review of FMEA/FMECA including patents,” computer science review, 19-28, 2017.
[11]  Kudláč, Š. Š., Vladimíra M. J., “Using the Saaty Method and the FMEA Method for Evaluation of Constraints in Logistics Chain,” Procedia Engineering, 749-755, 2017.
[12]  Villarini, M. C., Vittorio A., Lucrezia I. V., “Optimization of photovoltaic maintenance plan by means of a FMEA approach based on real data,” Energy Conversion and Management, 1-12, 2017.
[13]  Whiteley, Michael D., Jackson, S. L., “Failure Mode and Effect Analysis, and Fault Tree Analysis of Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Fuel Cells,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 1187-1202, 2015.
[14]  Varzakas, T., “HACCP and ISO22000: Risk Assessment in Conjunction with Other Food Safety Tools Such as FMEA, Ishikawa Diagrams and Pareto,” Encyclopedia of Food and Health, 295-302, 2016.
[15]  Sayyadi Tooranloo, H., Ayatollah, Arezoo S., and Alboghobish, S., “Evaluating knowledge management failure factors using intuitionistic fuzzy FMEA approach,” Knowledge and Information Systems, 183-205, 2018.
[16]  Liu, Hu C.  Y., Jian X. Y., Xiao Y. S., and Meng M., “A novel approach for failure mode and effects analysis using combination weighting and fuzzy VIKOR method,” Applied Soft Computing, 579-588, 2014.
[17]  Omidvar, M., Nirumand, F., “An extended VIKOR method based on entropy measure for the failure modes risk assessment – A case study of the geothermal power plant (GPP),” Safety Science, 160-172, 2016.
[18]  Carbone, Thomas A., Tippett, Donald D., “Project Risk Management Using the Project Risk FMEA,” Engineering Management Journal, 16 (4), 28-35, 2015.
[19]  Bazdar, A., and Taheri, N., “Bayesian customer risk model based on their operational characteristics in order to formulate a successful strategy for keeping customers,” Sharif Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, reference number 65-1/367/971012, 2020.
[20]  Helm Seresht, P., and Del Pishe, E., “Occupational health,” Chehr Publications, Third Edition, Tehran, 1388.
[21]  Ghazaei, S., “Diseases and work complications,” University of Tehran Press, Tehran, 1377.
[22]  Golmohammadi, H., “Fire,” Atlas press, 1369.
Volume 3, Issue 1
January 2020
Pages 85-95
  • Receive Date: 01 August 2020
  • Revise Date: 05 October 2020
  • Accept Date: 11 October 2020
  • First Publish Date: 11 October 2020