2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.439
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using TRIZ to Invent Failures – Concept and Application to go Beyond Traditional FMEA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…FMEA is an approach that helps identify and prioritize potential failures in equipment, systems or processes, becoming a logical system that prioritizes potential failures and provides recommendations for preventive actions (Kardec et al, 2002). Thurnes et al (2015) corroborate defining the FMEA as the most established tool for risk analysis and prevention of various engineering failures. In addition, the FMEA allows identifying and prioritizing potential failures in equipment, systems or processes, aiming to anticipate known or potential failure modes and recommend corrective actions to eliminate or compensate for the effects of failures (Lafraia, 2001).…”
Section: Fmea Conceptualizationmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…FMEA is an approach that helps identify and prioritize potential failures in equipment, systems or processes, becoming a logical system that prioritizes potential failures and provides recommendations for preventive actions (Kardec et al, 2002). Thurnes et al (2015) corroborate defining the FMEA as the most established tool for risk analysis and prevention of various engineering failures. In addition, the FMEA allows identifying and prioritizing potential failures in equipment, systems or processes, aiming to anticipate known or potential failure modes and recommend corrective actions to eliminate or compensate for the effects of failures (Lafraia, 2001).…”
Section: Fmea Conceptualizationmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…It usually takes time to perform the FMEA well. In order to overcome the fact that FMEA is limited to normal expectations of occurring failures, some of the researches propose to combine FMEA with AFD (anticipatory failure determination) and/or AHP (analytical hierarchy processes) (Thurnes et al 2015;Mzougui and Felsoufi 2019;Kulcsár et al 2020). Additionally, some studies propose hybrid models, for example with fuzzy methods (Fuzzy Preference Programming, Fuzzy Cognitive Maps and others) as was proposed by (Baykasoglu and Gölcük 2017).…”
Section: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (Fmea)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The anticipatory failure determination method was developed by Zlotin and Zusman [26]. It is based on the concepts that were called "subversion analysis" in earlier TRIZ work by Zlotin, Zusman, Altshuller, and Filatov [27,28] and Kaplan [29].…”
Section: Anticipatory Failure Determinationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ungvari [30] compared AFD with FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) and noted that AFD differed from traditional failure analysis in transforming the idea of preventing failure into inventing and creating failures. Proseanic et al [26] applied AFD to the analysis of the car engine, noticed that using AFD significantly reduced the time of brainstorming and increased the efficiency of the team. In addition, Chybowski et al [32] applied three elements of the AFD method (AFD-1, AFD-2, and AFD-3) at the concept formulation stage of a system's development for improving the technology readiness level.…”
Section: Anticipatory Failure Determinationmentioning
confidence: 99%