doh CH4

submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex

@@ -1476,6 +1476,8 @@ potential strategies are listed below:
  \item Look at components forward of the {\fm} in the signal path,
  \item Look at all components in the signal path,
  \item Look at all components in the signal path including those one connection removed,
+% dependency tree is a logical construct.
+ \item Look at all components within pre-determined dependency models~\cite{cbds}[Ch.5],
  \item Look at all components in the system (i.e. XFMEA).
 \end{itemize}
 No current variant of FMEA gives any guidelines for which, or how many components to check for a given {\fm}.

submission_thesis/CH4_FMMD/copy.tex

@@ -1460,6 +1460,16 @@ in the base components. Coupled with MTTF statistics for the base components
 this allows prediction of statistical failure rates for system level failures (this is 
 described in greater detail in section~\ref{sec:determine_fms}).
 %
+The connections from a given system~failure can be used to determine the 
+components that are necessary to function correctly to avoid its occurrence.
+%
+%
+% NO dependency trees are logical contructs, I dont think FMMD helps here
+% Thus dependency trees~\cite{cbds}[Ch.5] can be derived from
+% FMMD models by collecting system failure modes in terms of their 
+% system level application (i.e. if system level failures $\alpha,beta$ or $\gamma$ occur function $\omega$ 
+% of the system will be impaired, and )
+% %
 We can also use the FMMD model to derive information
 to assist in creating related models such as FTA~\cite{nucfta,nasafta},
 traditional FMEA, FMECA~\cite{safeware}[p.344], FMEDA~\cite{scsh}, diagnostics schemas~\cite{dbamafta}