JR PR! Wonderful!
This commit is contained in:
parent
99e8ead6f7
commit
499de53920
@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ This chapter introduces Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA).
|
|||||||
%and then
|
%and then
|
||||||
It starts with a generic conceptual overview of the process.
|
It starts with a generic conceptual overview of the process.
|
||||||
It then looks at the stages of the FMEA process in greater detail, starting with
|
It then looks at the stages of the FMEA process in greater detail, starting with
|
||||||
how we determine the failure modes associated with components.
|
how to determine the failure modes associated with components.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
Two common electrical components, the resistor and the operational amplifier
|
Two common electrical components, the resistor and the operational amplifier
|
||||||
are examined in the context of two sources of information that define failure modes.
|
are examined in the context of two sources of information that define failure modes.
|
||||||
@ -34,10 +34,8 @@ By using UML
|
|||||||
the entities needed to implement FMEA
|
the entities needed to implement FMEA
|
||||||
are defined.
|
are defined.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
The act
|
The act of defining relationships between the data objects in FMEA raises questions about the nature of the process
|
||||||
of defining relationships between the data objects
|
and allows analysis of its strengths and weaknesses.
|
||||||
in FMEA raises questions about the nature of the process
|
|
||||||
and allows us to analytically discuss its strengths and weaknesses.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -65,7 +63,7 @@ a brain-storming session
|
|||||||
%in product design,
|
%in product design,
|
||||||
to formal submission as part of safety critical certification.
|
to formal submission as part of safety critical certification.
|
||||||
FMEA is a manual, % and therefore
|
FMEA is a manual, % and therefore
|
||||||
time intensive process. To reduce the amount of manual work to perform,
|
time intensive process. To reduce the amount of manual work performed,
|
||||||
software packages~\cite{931423, 1778436820050601} and analysis strategies have
|
software packages~\cite{931423, 1778436820050601} and analysis strategies have
|
||||||
been developed~\cite{incrementalfmea, automatingFMEA1281774}.
|
been developed~\cite{incrementalfmea, automatingFMEA1281774}.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@ -93,7 +91,7 @@ function that they perform.
|
|||||||
\fmeagloss
|
\fmeagloss
|
||||||
\section{FMEA Process}
|
\section{FMEA Process}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We begin FMEA with the basic, or starting components.
|
The initial stage of the FMEA process is with the basic, or starting components.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
These components are the sort bought in or considered as pre-assembled modules.
|
These components are the sort bought in or considered as pre-assembled modules.
|
||||||
These are termed {\bcs}; they are considered ``atomic'' i.e. they are not broken down further.
|
These are termed {\bcs}; they are considered ``atomic'' i.e. they are not broken down further.
|
||||||
@ -126,7 +124,7 @@ In practise, each entry of an FMEA analysis of a {\bc} {\fm}
|
|||||||
would typically be one line in a spreadsheet.
|
would typically be one line in a spreadsheet.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
The analysis to symptom relationship is generally % considered
|
The analysis to symptom relationship is generally % considered
|
||||||
one-to-one, however here (see figure~\ref{fig:component_fm_rel_ana}), we allow for the possibility
|
one-to-one, however here (see figure~\ref{fig:component_fm_rel_ana}), allowance is made for the possibility
|
||||||
of more than one failure symptom.
|
of more than one failure symptom.
|
||||||
%DIAGRAM of reasoning and Symptoms.
|
%DIAGRAM of reasoning and Symptoms.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -152,7 +150,7 @@ In order to apply any form of FMEA the ways in which
|
|||||||
the {\bcs}\footnote{A good introduction to hardware and software failure modes may be found in~\cite{sccs}[pp.114-124].} %used
|
the {\bcs}\footnote{A good introduction to hardware and software failure modes may be found in~\cite{sccs}[pp.114-124].} %used
|
||||||
can fail must be clearly defined.
|
can fail must be clearly defined.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
In practise, this part of the process is guided by
|
In practice, this part of the process is guided by %%% PRACTICE NOUN Practice makes perfect.------------------- PRACTISE --- VERB I practise the piano.
|
||||||
the particular standard
|
the particular standard
|
||||||
which is being conformed to. %we are seeking to conform.% to.
|
which is being conformed to. %we are seeking to conform.% to.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@ -160,10 +158,22 @@ Standards may differ in their definitions for the {\fms} of {\bcs}.
|
|||||||
The reasons for these differences are examined below using two example components.
|
The reasons for these differences are examined below using two example components.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
Typically, when choosing components for a design, engineers will look at manufacturers' data sheets
|
%%%%%%%%%% DATA SHEETS and FAILURE MODES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
Typically, when choosing components for a design, engineers will look at manufacturers' data~sheets
|
||||||
which describe functionality, physical dimensions,
|
which describe functionality, physical dimensions,
|
||||||
environmental ranges, tolerances and by `reading~between~the~lines'
|
environmental ranges, tolerances.
|
||||||
in some cases can indicate how a component may fail/misbehave.
|
%
|
||||||
|
It is rare for a data~sheet to list failure modes.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
Data~sheets after all are a sales tool as well as being a usage guide and technical description.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
However, `reading~between~the~lines' or noting what is not~stated,
|
||||||
|
can in some cases indicate how a component could fail/misbehave.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
%under given conditions.
|
%under given conditions.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
How %base
|
How %base
|
||||||
@ -242,12 +252,14 @@ and examined against two sources of {\fm} information. % define their failure mo
|
|||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
These definitions for a given generic component may not always agree.
|
These definitions for a given generic component may not always agree.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
The reasons why some {\fms}
|
The reasons why, some {\fms}
|
||||||
can be found in one source but not in the others and vice versa, are discussed.
|
can be found in one source, but not in the others and vice versa, are discussed.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
Finally the failure modes determined %for these components
|
Finally, the failure modes determined %for these components
|
||||||
from the FMD-91~\cite{fmd91} reference source and from the guidelines of the
|
from the FMD-91~\cite{fmd91} reference source and from the guidelines of the
|
||||||
European burner standard EN298~\cite{en298} are compared and contrasted.
|
European burner standard EN298~\cite{en298}, are compared and contrasted.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\clearpage
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{Failure mode determination for generic resistor.}
|
\subsection{Failure mode determination for generic resistor.}
|
||||||
\label{sec:resistorfm}
|
\label{sec:resistorfm}
|
||||||
@ -289,11 +301,11 @@ as listed below:
|
|||||||
\item Lead damage 1.9\% $\mapsto$ OPEN.
|
\item Lead damage 1.9\% $\mapsto$ OPEN.
|
||||||
\end{itemize}
|
\end{itemize}
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
Note that the main causes of resistor value drift are overloading. % of components.
|
Note, that the main cause of resistor value drift is overloading. % of components.
|
||||||
This is borne out in the FMD-91~\cite{fmd91}[232] entry for a resistor network where the failure
|
This is borne out in the FMD-91~\cite{fmd91}[232] entry for a resistor network where the failure
|
||||||
modes do not include drift.
|
modes do not include drift.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
If it is ensured that our resistors will not be exposed to overload conditions, the
|
If it is ensured that resistors will not be exposed to overload conditions, the
|
||||||
probability of drift (sometimes called parameter change) %occurring
|
probability of drift (sometimes called parameter change) %occurring
|
||||||
is significantly reduced, enough for some standards to exclude it~\cite{en298,en230}.
|
is significantly reduced, enough for some standards to exclude it~\cite{en298,en230}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -301,7 +313,7 @@ is significantly reduced, enough for some standards to exclude it~\cite{en298,en
|
|||||||
\paragraph{Resistor failure modes according to EN298.}
|
\paragraph{Resistor failure modes according to EN298.}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
EN298, the European gas burner safety standard,
|
EN298, the European gas burner safety standard,
|
||||||
tends to be give failure modes more directly
|
tends to give failure modes that are more directly
|
||||||
usable for performing FMEA than FMD-91.
|
usable for performing FMEA than FMD-91.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
The certification process for EN298 requires that a full FMEA be undertaken, examining all failure modes
|
The certification process for EN298 requires that a full FMEA be undertaken, examining all failure modes
|
||||||
@ -345,8 +357,10 @@ limit of resolution in any failure analysis methodology.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsubsection{Resistor Failure Modes}
|
\subsubsection{Resistor Failure Modes}
|
||||||
\label{sec:res_fms}
|
\label{sec:res_fms}
|
||||||
The differences in resistor failure modes between FMD-91 and EN298 are that FMD-91 would
|
The difference in resistor failure modes between FMD-91 and EN298 is that FMD-91 would
|
||||||
include the failure mode DRIFT. EN298 does not include this, mainly because it imposes circuit design constraints
|
include the failure mode DRIFT.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
EN298 does not include this, mainly because it imposes circuit design constraints
|
||||||
that effectively side step that problem.
|
that effectively side step that problem.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
For this study the conservative view from EN298 is taken, and the failure
|
For this study the conservative view from EN298 is taken, and the failure
|
||||||
@ -355,17 +369,15 @@ to return a set of failure modes,
|
|||||||
i.e.
|
i.e.
|
||||||
\label{ros}
|
\label{ros}
|
||||||
$$ fm(R) = \{ OPEN, SHORT \} . $$
|
$$ fm(R) = \{ OPEN, SHORT \} . $$
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
% Mention tolerance here
|
% Mention tolerance here
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
% hmmmmmm
|
% hmmmmmm
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
\subsection{Failure modes determination for generic operational amplifier}
|
\subsection{Failure modes determination for a generic operational amplifier}
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The operational amplifier (op-amp) %is a differential amplifier and
|
The operational amplifier (op-amp) %is a differential amplifier and
|
||||||
is very widely used in nearly all fields of modern analogue electronics.
|
is very widely used in nearly all fields of modern analogue electronics.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@ -380,14 +392,12 @@ components types not specifically listed in it.
|
|||||||
Operational amplifiers are typically packaged in dual or quad configurations---meaning
|
Operational amplifiers are typically packaged in dual or quad configurations---meaning
|
||||||
that a chip will typically contain two or four amplifiers.
|
that a chip will typically contain two or four amplifiers.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
For the purpose of example for EN298, %we look at
|
The failure modes determined from the FMD-91 entries are presented and then
|
||||||
a typical op-amp designed for instrumentation and measurement, the dual packaged version of the LM358~\cite{lm358}
|
the failure mode determination procedure of EN298
|
||||||
(see figure~\ref{fig:lm258}) is examined.
|
is applied to a typical op-amp designed for instrumentation and measurement, the dual packaged version of the LM358~\cite{lm358}
|
||||||
|
(see figure~\ref{fig:lm258}).
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
With the results from both sources of {\fm} definition %
|
The results from both sources of {\fm} definition are then compared.
|
||||||
%we compare
|
|
||||||
the failure mode definitions for FMD-91 and EN298
|
|
||||||
relating to operational amplifiers are compared.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Failure Modes of an Op-Amp according to FMD-91.}
|
\paragraph{Failure Modes of an Op-Amp according to FMD-91.}
|
||||||
\fmodegloss
|
\fmodegloss
|
||||||
@ -400,7 +410,7 @@ For Op-Amp failures modes, FMD-91\cite{fmd91}{3-116] states,
|
|||||||
\item Opened $V_+$ open 6.3\%
|
\item Opened $V_+$ open 6.3\%
|
||||||
\end{itemize}
|
\end{itemize}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Again these are mostly internal causes of failure, more of interest to the component manufacturer
|
These are mostly internal causes of failure, more of interest to the component manufacturer
|
||||||
than a test engineer % designer
|
than a test engineer % designer
|
||||||
looking for the symptoms of failure.
|
looking for the symptoms of failure.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
@ -437,29 +447,30 @@ of the Op-Amp applied to it, and the output will be forced HIGH or LOW.
|
|||||||
This failure cause maps to $HIGH$ or $LOW$.
|
This failure cause maps to $HIGH$ or $LOW$.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Collecting Op-Amp failure modes from FMD-91.}
|
\paragraph{Collecting Op-Amp failure modes from FMD-91.}
|
||||||
An Op-Amps' failure mode behaviour, under FMD-91 definitions will have the following {\fms}.
|
An Op-Amp's failure mode behaviour, under FMD-91 definitions will have the following {\fms}:
|
||||||
\begin{equation}
|
\begin{equation}
|
||||||
\label{eqn:opampfms}
|
\label{eqn:opampfms}
|
||||||
fm(OpAmp) = \{ HIGH, LOW, NOOP, LOW_{slew} \}
|
fm(OpAmp) = \{ HIGH, LOW, NOOP, LOW_{slew} \} .
|
||||||
\end{equation}
|
\end{equation}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Failure Modes of an Op-Amp according to EN298.}
|
\paragraph{Failure Modes of an Op-Amp according to EN298.}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
EN298 does not specifically define OP\_AMPS failure modes; these can be determined
|
EN298 does not specifically define op-amp failure modes; these can be determined
|
||||||
by following a procedure for `integrated~circuits' outlined in
|
by following a procedure for `integrated~circuits' outlined in
|
||||||
annex~A~\cite{en298}[A.1 note e].
|
annex~A~\cite{en298}[A.1 note e].
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
This demands that all open connections, and shorts between adjacent pins be considered as failure scenarios.
|
This demands that all open connections, and shorts between adjacent pins be considered as failure scenarios.
|
||||||
We examine these failure scenarios on the dual packaged $LM358$~\cite{lm358} %\mu741$
|
%
|
||||||
and determine its {\fms} in table ~\ref{tbl:lm358}.
|
In table ~\ref{tbl:lm358} these failure scenarios on the dual packaged $LM358$~\cite{lm358} %\mu741$
|
||||||
|
are examined and from this its {\fms} are determined.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
% Collecting the op-amp failure modes from table ~\ref{tbl:lm358} we obtain the same {\fms}
|
% Collecting the op-amp failure modes from table ~\ref{tbl:lm358} we obtain the same {\fms}
|
||||||
% that we got from FMD-91, listed in equation~\ref{eqn:opampfms}, except for
|
% that we got from FMD-91, listed in equation~\ref{eqn:opampfms}, except for
|
||||||
% $LOW_{slew}$.
|
% $LOW_{slew}$.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
Collecting the op-amp failure modes from table ~\ref{tbl:lm358} the same {\fms}
|
Collating the op-amp failure modes from table ~\ref{tbl:lm358} the same {\fms}
|
||||||
that we got from FMD-91 are obtained---listed in equation~\ref{eqn:opampfms}---except for
|
from FMD-91 are obtained---listed in equation~\ref{eqn:opampfms}---except for
|
||||||
$LOW_{slew}$.
|
$LOW_{slew}$.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -539,13 +550,13 @@ $LOW_{slew}$.
|
|||||||
\subsubsection{Failure modes of an Op-Amp}
|
\subsubsection{Failure modes of an Op-Amp}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\label{sec:opamp_fms}
|
\label{sec:opamp_fms}
|
||||||
For the purpose of the examples to follow, the op-amp will
|
For the purpose of the examples to follow in this document, op-amp's
|
||||||
have the following failure modes:-
|
are assigned the following failure modes:
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
$$ fm(OPAMP) = \{ LOW, HIGH, NOOP, LOW_{slew} \} . $$
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
$$ fm(OPAMP) = \{ LOW, HIGH, NOOP, LOW_{slew} \} $$
|
\subsection{Comparing the component failure mode sources: EN298 vs FMD-91}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{Comparing the component failure mode sources}
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The EN298 pinouts failure mode technique cannot reveal failure modes due to internal failures,
|
The EN298 pinouts failure mode technique cannot reveal failure modes due to internal failures,
|
||||||
@ -625,11 +636,16 @@ be used throughout the FMEA and FMMD process.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\section{FMEA worked example: milli-volt reader.}
|
\section{FMEA worked example: milli-volt reader.}
|
||||||
FMEA is a bottom-up procedure which starts with the failure modes of the low level components of a system, an example
|
%
|
||||||
analysis will serve to demonstrate it in practise.
|
FMEA is a bottom-up procedure which starts with the failure modes of the low level components of a system.
|
||||||
Example: Let us consider a system, in this case a simple milli-volt reader, consisting
|
%
|
||||||
|
An example analysis will serve to demonstrate it in practice.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
Consider a system of a simple milli-volt reader, consisting
|
||||||
of instrumentation amplifiers connected to a micro-processor
|
of instrumentation amplifiers connected to a micro-processor
|
||||||
that reports its readings via RS-232.
|
that reports its readings via RS-232.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
\begin{figure}
|
\begin{figure}
|
||||||
\centering
|
\centering
|
||||||
\includegraphics[width=175pt]{./CH2_FMEA/mvamp.png}
|
\includegraphics[width=175pt]{./CH2_FMEA/mvamp.png}
|
||||||
@ -643,10 +659,9 @@ that reports its readings via RS-232.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{FMEA Example: Milli-volt reader}
|
\subsection{FMEA Example: Milli-volt reader}
|
||||||
Let us perform an FMEA and consider how one of its resistors failing could affect
|
%
|
||||||
it.
|
Undertaking an FMEA on the milli-volt reader to consider how one of its resistors failing could affect
|
||||||
%For the sake of example
|
it and choosing the resistor R1 in the OP-AMP gain circuitry:
|
||||||
Let us choose resistor R1 in the OP-AMP gain circuitry.
|
|
||||||
% \begin{figure}
|
% \begin{figure}
|
||||||
% \centering
|
% \centering
|
||||||
% \includegraphics[width=175pt]{./mvamp.png}
|
% \includegraphics[width=175pt]{./mvamp.png}
|
||||||
@ -662,31 +677,33 @@ Let us choose resistor R1 in the OP-AMP gain circuitry.
|
|||||||
% % mvamp.png: 561x403 pixel, 72dpi, 19.79x14.22 cm, bb=0 0 561 403
|
% % mvamp.png: 561x403 pixel, 72dpi, 19.79x14.22 cm, bb=0 0 561 403
|
||||||
% \end{figure}
|
% \end{figure}
|
||||||
\begin{itemize}
|
\begin{itemize}
|
||||||
\item \textbf{F - Failures of given component} The resistor (R1) could fail by going OPEN or SHORT (EN298 definition).
|
\item \textbf{F - Failures of given component} The resistor (R1) could fail by going OPEN or SHORT (EN298 definition),
|
||||||
\item \textbf{M - Failure Mode} Consider the component failure mode SHORT
|
\item \textbf{M - Failure Mode} Consider the component failure mode SHORT,
|
||||||
\item \textbf{E - Effects} This will drive the minus input LOW causing a HIGH OUTPUT/READING
|
\item \textbf{E - Effects} This will drive the minus input LOW causing a HIGH OUTPUT/READING,
|
||||||
\item \textbf{A - Analysis} The reading will be out of the normal range, i.e. will have an erroneous milli-volt reading
|
\item \textbf{A - Analysis} The reading will be out of the normal range, i.e. will have an erroneous milli-volt reading.
|
||||||
\end{itemize}
|
\end{itemize}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\fmeagloss
|
\fmeagloss
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The analysis above has given a result for % one failure %scenario i.e.
|
||||||
|
one single component failure mode.
|
||||||
|
A complete FMEA report, would have to contain an entry
|
||||||
|
for each failure mode of all the components in the system under investigation.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
In theory it would be necessary to look at the failure~mode
|
||||||
|
in relation to the entire circuit.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
Intuition has been used to determine the probable
|
||||||
|
effect of this failure mode.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
For instance it has been assumed that the resistor R1 going SHORT
|
||||||
|
will not affect the ADC, the Microprocessor or the UART.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||||
%%%%%%%%%%%% WE removal project ends here today 08SEP2013 %%%%%%%%
|
%%%%%%%%%%%% WE removal project ends here today 08SEP2013 %%%%%%%%
|
||||||
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The analysis above has given us a result for % one failure %scenario i.e.
|
|
||||||
one single component failure mode.
|
|
||||||
A complete FMEA report would have to contain an entry
|
|
||||||
for each failure mode of all the components in the system under investigation.
|
|
||||||
%
|
|
||||||
In theory we have had to look at the failure~mode
|
|
||||||
in relation to the entire circuit.
|
|
||||||
%
|
|
||||||
We have used intuition to determine the probable
|
|
||||||
effect of this failure mode.
|
|
||||||
%
|
|
||||||
For instance we have assumed that the resistor R1 going SHORT
|
|
||||||
will not affect the ADC, the Microprocessor or the UART.
|
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
We have taken the {\bc} {\fm} R1 SHORT and then followed the failure reasoning path through to a putative system level symptom.
|
We have taken the {\bc} {\fm} R1 SHORT and then followed the failure reasoning path through to a putative system level symptom.
|
||||||
We have not looked in detail at any side effects of this {\fm}.
|
We have not looked in detail at any side effects of this {\fm}.
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user