Merge branch 'master' of dev:/home/robin/git/thesis
This commit is contained in:
commit
d84f7ee067
@ -185,7 +185,13 @@ $$ dtc(F) = TC $$
|
|||||||
The function \textbf{chosen} means that the failure modes for a particular test case have been chosen by
|
The function \textbf{chosen} means that the failure modes for a particular test case have been chosen by
|
||||||
a human operator and are additional to those chosen by the automated process (i.e they are special case test cases involving multiple failure modes)
|
a human operator and are additional to those chosen by the automated process (i.e they are special case test cases involving multiple failure modes)
|
||||||
The function \textbf{unitarystate} means that all test cases can have no pairs of failure modes sourced from the component.
|
The function \textbf{unitarystate} means that all test cases can have no pairs of failure modes sourced from the component.
|
||||||
|
\ifthenelse {\boolean{paper}}
|
||||||
|
{
|
||||||
|
%% perhaps ref a paper here XXXXX
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
{
|
||||||
This is discussed in section \ref{unitarystate}.
|
This is discussed in section \ref{unitarystate}.
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
%%
|
%%
|
||||||
%% Algorithm 2
|
%% Algorithm 2
|
||||||
%%
|
%%
|
||||||
@ -368,7 +374,7 @@ These results are the failure modes of the functional group.
|
|||||||
%%
|
%%
|
||||||
%This stage analyses the results from bottom-up FMEA analysis ($R$), and collects
|
%This stage analyses the results from bottom-up FMEA analysis ($R$), and collects
|
||||||
%results that, from the perspective of the functional~group, have the same failure symptom.
|
%results that, from the perspective of the functional~group, have the same failure symptom.
|
||||||
This stage collects results into `Symptom' sets.
|
This stage collects results into `symptom' sets.
|
||||||
Each result from the preceding stage is examined and collected
|
Each result from the preceding stage is examined and collected
|
||||||
into common symptom sets.
|
into common symptom sets.
|
||||||
That is to say, each result in a symptom set, from the perspective of the functional group
|
That is to say, each result in a symptom set, from the perspective of the functional group
|
||||||
@ -438,7 +444,7 @@ Component failure modes must be mutually exclusive.
|
|||||||
That is to say only one specific failure mode may be active at any time.
|
That is to say only one specific failure mode may be active at any time.
|
||||||
This condition/property has been termed unitary state failure mode.
|
This condition/property has been termed unitary state failure mode.
|
||||||
Ensuring that no result belongs to more than
|
Ensuring that no result belongs to more than
|
||||||
one Symptom set, enforces this, for the derived
|
one symptom set, enforces this, for the derived
|
||||||
component created in the next stage.
|
component created in the next stage.
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
|
@ -5,14 +5,16 @@
|
|||||||
\section{Background:\\ FMMD outline}
|
\section{Background:\\ FMMD outline}
|
||||||
The symptom abstraction process described here, is a core process in the
|
The symptom abstraction process described here, is a core process in the
|
||||||
%Failure Mode Modular De-Composition
|
%Failure Mode Modular De-Composition
|
||||||
FMMD modelling technique. FMMD builds a hierarchy of failure mode behaviours from the bottom up.
|
FMMD modelling methodology. FMMD builds a hierarchy of failure mode behaviours from the bottom up.
|
||||||
To start with collections of base components are chosen to form functional~groups, which are analysed
|
To start with collections of base components are chosen to form functional~groups, which are analysed
|
||||||
w.r.t. its failure mode behaviour.
|
w.r.t. its failure mode behaviour.
|
||||||
These functional groups
|
These functional groups
|
||||||
can then be treated as components in their own right.
|
can then be treated as components in their own right.
|
||||||
These higher level, or derived compoenents,
|
%
|
||||||
|
These higher level, or derived components,
|
||||||
can be used to build derived components at higher levels of abstraction, and ultimately
|
can be used to build derived components at higher levels of abstraction, and ultimately
|
||||||
are used to build an FMMD fault model hierarchy of the system modelled.
|
are used to build an FMMD fault model hierarchy of the system modelled.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
Intermediate FMMD structures may be re-used in other designs, and
|
Intermediate FMMD structures may be re-used in other designs, and
|
||||||
re-used in repeated sections of a design (consider a system
|
re-used in repeated sections of a design (consider a system
|
||||||
with several safety critical digital inputs for instance).
|
with several safety critical digital inputs, for instance).
|
||||||
|
@ -29,21 +29,20 @@ The goal of the process is to produce a set of failure modes from the perspectiv
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Environmental Conditions or Applied States}
|
\paragraph{Environmental Conditions or Applied States}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Each test case must be considered in the light of any applied states or
|
Each test case must be considered in the for the case of each applied states or
|
||||||
environmental conditions that it may be exposed to.
|
environmental conditions that it may be exposed to. In this way all
|
||||||
|
failure mode behaviour due to the test case conditions will be examined.
|
||||||
A {\fg} may, in the case of an electronic circuit have
|
|
||||||
applied states. For instance test modes, shutdown or lockout modes etc.
|
|
||||||
which are inputs to the circuit.
|
|
||||||
In this case each test case from the {\fg} must be analysed with
|
|
||||||
respect to all these states.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A mechanical device may be required to work in different
|
|
||||||
temperature or pressure ranges for instance and its failure mode behaviour may
|
|
||||||
change due to enviromental factors.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
%%- A {\fg} may, in the case of an electronic circuit have
|
||||||
|
%%- applied states. For instance test modes, shutdown or lockout modes etc.
|
||||||
|
%%- which are inputs to the circuit.
|
||||||
|
%%- In this case each test case from the {\fg} must be analysed with
|
||||||
|
%%- respect to all these states.
|
||||||
|
%%-
|
||||||
|
%%- A mechanical device may be required to work in different
|
||||||
|
%%- temperature or pressure ranges for instance and its failure mode behaviour may
|
||||||
|
%%- change due to enviromental factors.
|
||||||
|
%%-
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Symptom Identification}
|
\paragraph{Symptom Identification}
|
||||||
When all `test~cases' have been analysed, a second phase can be actioned. % applied.
|
When all `test~cases' have been analysed, a second phase can be actioned. % applied.
|
||||||
@ -294,8 +293,8 @@ This generalises the function $\bowtie$ and allows us to build
|
|||||||
hierarchical failure mode models.
|
hierarchical failure mode models.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Where a {\fg} is composed of derived components, for sake of example
|
Where a {\fg} is composed of derived components, for sake of example
|
||||||
where $DC_1, DC_2, DC_3 $ are {\dc}'s and $DCFM$ is a set of failure modes thus
|
where $DC_1, DC_2, DC_3 $ are {\dc}s and $DCFM$ is a set of failure modes thus
|
||||||
$FG = \{ DC_1, DC_2, DC_3 \}$ and $DCFM = FM(FG)$
|
$FG = \{ DC_1, DC_2, DC_3 \}$ and $DCFM = FM(FG)$.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We can apply the symptom abstraction process $\bowtie$
|
We can apply the symptom abstraction process $\bowtie$
|
||||||
to the failure mode set $DCFM$.
|
to the failure mode set $DCFM$.
|
||||||
@ -303,7 +302,7 @@ to the failure mode set $DCFM$.
|
|||||||
The case
|
The case
|
||||||
where a {\fg} has been created from {\dcs}
|
where a {\fg} has been created from {\dcs}
|
||||||
using function `$\bowtie$' leads us to
|
using function `$\bowtie$' leads us to
|
||||||
{\dc}'s at a higher level of fault abstraction.
|
{\dc}s at a higher level of fault abstraction.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
$$
|
$$
|
||||||
%\bowtie : SubSystemComponentFaultModes \rightarrow DerivedComponent
|
%\bowtie : SubSystemComponentFaultModes \rightarrow DerivedComponent
|
||||||
|
@ -34,19 +34,28 @@ The goal of the process is to produce a set of failure modes from the perspectiv
|
|||||||
Each test case must be considered in the light of any applied states or
|
Each test case must be considered in the light of any applied states or
|
||||||
environmental conditions that it may be exposed to.
|
environmental conditions that it may be exposed to.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\paragraph{Electronics}
|
||||||
A {\fg} may, in the case of an electronic circuit have
|
A {\fg} may, in the case of an electronic circuit have
|
||||||
applied states. For instance test modes, shutdown or lockout modes etc.
|
applied states. For instance test modes, shutdown or lockout modes etc.
|
||||||
which are inputs to the circuit.
|
which are inputs to the circuit.
|
||||||
In this case each test case from the {\fg} must be analysed with
|
In this case each test case from the {\fg} must be analysed with
|
||||||
respect to all these states.
|
respect to all these states.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\paragraph{Mechanical}
|
||||||
A mechanical device may be required to work in different
|
A mechanical device may be required to work in different
|
||||||
temperature or pressure ranges for instance and its failure mode behaviour may
|
temperature or pressure ranges for instance and its failure mode behaviour may
|
||||||
change due to enviromental factors.
|
change due to enviromental factors.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\paragraph{Software}
|
||||||
|
A software function may have an applied state, where it must modify
|
||||||
|
its general behaviour.
|
||||||
|
For instance some states in an embedded real time system
|
||||||
|
may require special error or emergency handling behaviour.
|
||||||
|
This could be in the form of global variable which could indicate a system condition
|
||||||
|
such as NORMAL\_OPERATION, GRACEFUL\_DEGRADATION \cite{en61508}[SECTION XX] LOCKOUT or SHUTDOWN
|
||||||
|
for instance.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
\subsection{Symptom Identification / collection}
|
||||||
\paragraph{Symptom Identification}
|
|
||||||
When all `test~cases' have been analysed, a second phase is applied.
|
When all `test~cases' have been analysed, a second phase is applied.
|
||||||
%
|
%
|
||||||
This looks at the results of the `test~cases' as failure modes from the perspective of
|
This looks at the results of the `test~cases' as failure modes from the perspective of
|
||||||
|
@ -10,16 +10,18 @@ software~inspections and project~management quality reviews are applied \cite{sc
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Static testing is also applied. This is theoretical analysis of the design of the product from the safety
|
Static testing is also applied. This is theoretical analysis of the design of the product from the safety
|
||||||
perspective.
|
perspective.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
Three main methodologies are currently used,
|
Three main methodologies are currently used,
|
||||||
Statistical failure models, FMEA (Failure mode Effects Analysis) and FTA (Fault Tree Analysis).
|
Statistical failure models, FMEA (Failure mode Effects Analysis) and FTA (Fault Tree Analysis).
|
||||||
The FMMD process is a static modelling methodology, aimed primarily as design verification for
|
The FMMD process is a static modelling methodology, aimed primarily for design verification of
|
||||||
safety critical systems.
|
safety critical systems.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
However, FMMD also provides the mathematical framework
|
However, FMMD also provides the mathematical framework
|
||||||
to assist in the production of the three traditional methods of static analysis.
|
to assist in the production of the three traditional methods of static analysis.
|
||||||
From the model created by the FMMD methodology, statistical, FTA and FMEA models
|
From the model created by the FMMD methodology, statistical, FTA and FMEA models
|
||||||
can be derived.
|
can be derived.
|
||||||
FMMD can model electrical, mechanical and software using a common notation,
|
FMMD can model electrical, mechanical and software using a common notation,
|
||||||
and can thus model an entire electro mechanical software controlled system.
|
and can thus model an entire electro-mechanical software controlled system.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{Top Down or \\ natural trouble shooting}
|
\subsection{Top Down or \\ natural trouble shooting}
|
||||||
It is interesting here to look at the `natural' trouble shooting process.
|
It is interesting here to look at the `natural' trouble shooting process.
|
||||||
@ -69,7 +71,7 @@ The term sub-system will be used alongside both {\fg} and {\dc} where necessary.
|
|||||||
A top down fault analysis system will take a system and divide it into
|
A top down fault analysis system will take a system and divide it into
|
||||||
several sub-systems, and determine the safety dependencies
|
several sub-systems, and determine the safety dependencies
|
||||||
of the System on those sub-systems. In the case of large complicated
|
of the System on those sub-systems. In the case of large complicated
|
||||||
Systems, the sub-systems themselves may be broken down into simpler sub-systems.
|
systems, the sub-systems themselves may be broken down into simpler sub-systems.
|
||||||
A top down hierarchy is shown in figure \ref{fig:tdh}.
|
A top down hierarchy is shown in figure \ref{fig:tdh}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection{FMMD - Bottom~up Analysis}
|
\subsection{FMMD - Bottom~up Analysis}
|
||||||
@ -78,8 +80,10 @@ it instead works from the bottom up.
|
|||||||
Starting with a collection of base~components that form
|
Starting with a collection of base~components that form
|
||||||
a simple functional group, the effect of all component error modes are
|
a simple functional group, the effect of all component error modes are
|
||||||
examined, as to their effect on the functional group.
|
examined, as to their effect on the functional group.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
The effects on the functional group can then be collected as common symptoms,
|
The effects on the functional group can then be collected as common symptoms,
|
||||||
and now we may treat the functional group as a component as it has a known set of failure modes.
|
and now we may treat the functional group as a component, as it has a known set of failure modes.
|
||||||
|
%
|
||||||
By reusing the `components' derived from functional~groups an entire
|
By reusing the `components' derived from functional~groups an entire
|
||||||
hierarichal failure mode of the system can be built.
|
hierarichal failure mode of the system can be built.
|
||||||
By working from the bottom up, we can trace all possible sources
|
By working from the bottom up, we can trace all possible sources
|
||||||
@ -108,10 +112,10 @@ of the components.
|
|||||||
It is helpful here to define the terms, `system', `functional~group', `component', `base~component', `symptom' and `derived~component/sub-system'.
|
It is helpful here to define the terms, `system', `functional~group', `component', `base~component', `symptom' and `derived~component/sub-system'.
|
||||||
These are listed in table~\ref{tab:symexdef}.
|
These are listed in table~\ref{tab:symexdef}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A System, is any coherent entity that would be sold as a product. % safety critical product.
|
A system, is any coherent entity that would be sold as a product. % safety critical product.
|
||||||
A sub-system is a system that is part of some larger system.
|
A sub-system is a system that is part of some larger system.
|
||||||
For instance a stereo amplifier separate is a sub-system. The
|
For instance a stereo amplifier separate is a sub-system. The
|
||||||
whole Sound System, consists perhaps of the following `sub-systems':
|
whole sound system, consists perhaps of the following `sub-systems':
|
||||||
CD-player, tuner, amplifier~separate, loudspeakers and ipod~interface.
|
CD-player, tuner, amplifier~separate, loudspeakers and ipod~interface.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
%Thinking like this is a top~down analysis approach
|
%Thinking like this is a top~down analysis approach
|
||||||
@ -187,8 +191,8 @@ Sub-system & A part of a system, \\
|
|||||||
& derived~components may by derived \\
|
& derived~components may by derived \\
|
||||||
& from derived components \\
|
& from derived components \\
|
||||||
& Constraint: This object must have a defined set of failure~modes \\ \hline
|
& Constraint: This object must have a defined set of failure~modes \\ \hline
|
||||||
Failure mode & A way in which a System, \\
|
Failure mode & A way in which a system, \\
|
||||||
& Sub-system or component can fail \\ \hline
|
& sub-system or component can fail \\ \hline
|
||||||
Functional Group & A collection of sub-systems and/or \\
|
Functional Group & A collection of sub-systems and/or \\
|
||||||
& components that interact to \\
|
& components that interact to \\
|
||||||
& perform a specific function \\ \hline
|
& perform a specific function \\ \hline
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user