OK, got the example from the

presentation given at Birmingham
22SEP2011.

presentations/fmea/fmea_pres.tex

@@ -551,6 +551,164 @@ We can use derived components to form `higher~level' functional groups.
 This creates an analysis hierarchy.
 \end{frame}
 
+
+\subsection{example}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example}
+We can take groups of components that perform a well defined task, and analyse their failure mode behaviour.
+We can call these 'functional groups'.
+
+If we analyse the failure mode behaviour of a functional group we can determine how it will fail, or its symptoms of failure.
+We can represent this by a 'derived component', where its failure modes are the symptoms of the functional group it was derived from.
+\end{frame}
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example}
+We can begin to analyse this by looking for functional groups.
+The resistors would together to perform a fairly common function in electronics, that of the potential divider.
+We can now take the failure modes for the resistors (OPEN and SHORT EN298) and see what effect each of these failures will have on the functional group
+\end{frame}
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Resistor and failure modes}
+Resistor and its failure modes represented as a directed graph.
+
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=200pt]{./resistor_failure_graph.png}
+ % resistor_failure_graph.png: 391x279 pixel, 93dpi, 10.68x7.62 cm, bb=0 0 303 216
+ \label{fig:resasfm}
+\end{figure}
+
+\end{frame}
+
+
+\subsubsection{Potential Divider}
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Failure mode analysis of Potential Divider}
+
+
+\begin{table}
+\begin{tabular}{|| l | l | c | c | l ||} \hline
+ \textbf{Failure Scenario} & &  \textbf{Pot Div Effect}  &   & \textbf{Symptom}          \\ 
+               \hline
+     FS1: R1 SHORT    &  & $LOW$   &  &  $PDLow$                \\ \hline
+    FS2: R1 OPEN      &  &  $HIGH$ &  &  $PDHigh$             \\ \hline
+     FS3: R2 SHORT    &  &  $HIGH$ &  &  $PDHigh$             \\ \hline
+     FS4: R2 OPEN     &  &  $LOW$  &  &  $PDLow$                        \\ \hline
+\hline
+\end{tabular}
+\end{table}
+
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=100pt,keepaspectratio=true]{./pd.png}
+ % pd.png: 361x241 pixel, 72dpi, 12.74x8.50 cm, bb=0 0 361 241
+\end{figure}
+\end{frame}
+
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Potential Divider as Derived Component}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=175pt]{./pd_failures_as_graph.png}
+ % pd_dc_failures_as_graph.png: 389x284 pixel, 93dpi, 10.63x7.76 cm, bb=0 0 301 220
+ \label{fig:pd}
+\end{figure}
+\end{frame}
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Potential Divider as Derived Component}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=200pt]{./pd_dc_failures_as_graph.png}
+ % pd_dc_failures_as_graph.png: 389x284 pixel, 93dpi, 10.63x7.76 cm, bb=0 0 301 220
+ \label{fig:pd}
+\end{figure}
+\end{frame}
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Potential Divider as Derived Component}
+
+We can now use this pre-analysed potential divider `derived~component'
+in a higher level design.
+
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=100pt]{./pd_dc_failures_as_graph.png}
+ % pd_dc_failures_as_graph.png: 389x284 pixel, 93dpi, 10.63x7.76 cm, bb=0 0 301 220
+ \label{fig:pd}
+\end{figure}
+\end{frame}
+
+\subsection{Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics{./mvampcircuit.png}
+ % mvampcircuit.png: 243x143 pixel, 72dpi, 8.57x5.04 cm, bb=0 0 243 143
+\end{figure}
+
+\end{frame}
+
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=300pt]{./non_inv_amp_fmea.png}
+ % non_inv_amp_fmea.png: 964x492 pixel, 96dpi, 25.50x13.02 cm, bb=0 0 723 369
+\end{figure}
+
+\end{frame}
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+% \begin{figure}
+%  \centering
+%  \includegraphics[width=200pt]{./opamp_failures_as_graph.png} // op amp failure modes
+%  % opamp_failures_as_graph.png: 329x440 pixel, 93dpi, 8.99x12.02 cm, bb=0 0 255 341
+% \end{figure}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=150pt]{./fg_opamp_pd_as_graph.png}
+ % fg_opamp_pd_as_graph.png: 750x826 pixel, 93dpi, 20.49x22.56 cm, bb=0 0 581 640
+\end{figure}
+\end{frame}
+
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=150pt]{./n_inv_dc.png}
+ % n_inv_dc.png: 296x326 pixel, 72dpi, 10.44x11.50 cm, bb=0 0 296 326
+\end{figure}
+
+\end{frame}
+
+
+
+\begin{frame}
+\frametitle{FMMD - Example - Non Inverting OP-AMP}
+\begin{figure}
+ \centering
+ \includegraphics[width=200pt]{./fmmd_exm_h.png}
+ % fmmd_exm_h.png: 376x241 pixel, 72dpi, 13.26x8.50 cm, bb=0 0 376 241
+\end{figure}
+
+
+\end{frame}
+
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{FMMD - Failure Mode Modular De-Composition}
 We can view the functional groups in FMMD as forming a hierarchy.
@@ -696,7 +854,7 @@ not all the components in the system.
 \textbf{traceability}
 Because each reasoning stage contains associations ($FailureMode \mapsto Sypmtom$)
 we can trace the `reasoning' from base level component failure mode to top level/system
-failure, by traversing the tree.
+failure, by traversing the tree/hierarchy. This is in effect documenting the framework of the reasoning.
 
 
 \end{frame}
@@ -722,7 +880,7 @@ missed in an analysis.
 
 
 
-
+\subsection{conclusion}
 \begin{frame}
 \frametitle{FMMD - Failure Mode Modular De-Composition}
 \textbf{Conclusion: FMMD}