From 56ec258b7231a26658c4b8d4b36bd71f242bf1a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin Clark Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 10:22:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] going for a ride on the downs.... --- submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex b/submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex index b5f223d..f6a073b 100644 --- a/submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex +++ b/submission_thesis/CH2_FMEA/copy.tex @@ -1447,8 +1447,9 @@ system failure, the processes are intertwined with the basic analysis itself. Each {\fm} entry in an FMEA report should have a reasoning or comments field. This should provide a guide to someone re-examining, or trying to re-use results on a similar project. -However, as with the components that we should check against a {\fm}, there are no guidelines for documenting -the reasoning stages for an FMEA entry. +However, %, as with the components that we should check against a {\fm}, +%there are no guidelines for documenting +the depth of description for reasoning stages in FMEA entries is in practise variable. %FMEA does not stipulat which Ideally each FMEA entry would contain a reasoning description for each component the {\fm} is checked against,