uml description first draft

This commit is contained in:
Robin 2010-04-18 10:43:34 +01:00
parent 754b8c858a
commit db5b849ccc

View File

@ -15,6 +15,17 @@ for a given type of part can be obtained from standard literature\cite{mil1991}
\cite{mech}. %The failure modes for a given component $K$ form a set $F$.
Using these failure modes we can build a `failure model' from the bottom-up.
Traditional static fault analysis methods work from the top down.
They identify faults that can occur in a system, and then work down
to see how they could be caused. Some apply statistical tequniques to
determine the likelyhood of component failures causing specific system level errors (see Bayes theorem \ref{bayes}).
Another top down technique is ato apply cost benifit analysis
to determine which faults are the highest priority to fix\cite{FMEA}.
The aim of this study is to produce complete failure
models of safety critical systems from the bottom-up
starting, where possible with known component failure modes.
\subsection{Systems, functional groups, sub-systems and failure modes}
@ -102,13 +113,45 @@ Failure mode & of a `Failure Mode Group' \\ \hline
Base Component & Any bought in component, which \\
& hopefully has a known set of failure modes \\ \hline
\hline
\label{tab:def}
\end{tabular}
%\end{table}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\section{A UML Model of terms introduced}
The diagram in figure \ref{fig:fmmd_uml}
shows the relationships between the terms defined in table \ref{tab:def}.
We can start with the functional group. This is a minimal collection
of components that perform a simple given function.
For our audio separates rig, this could be
the compoents that supply power to the laser diode.
From the `Functional Group we can now collect
all the `failure modes of the `components, and
produce a `Failure Mode Group. This
has a reference to the `Functional Group, and is a collection
of `failure modes.
By analysing the effects of the failure modes in the `Failure Mode Group'
we can determine the failure mode behaviour of the functional group.
This failure mode behaviour is a collection of derived failure modes.
We can now consider the Functional group as a component now, because
we have a set of failure modes for it.
We can term this set of failure modes a sub-system.
Note that this is recursive. We can build functional groups using sub-systems
as components. This UML model naturally therefore, forms a hierarchy
of failure mode analysis, which has a one top level entry, that being the SYSTEM.
The TOP level entry will determine the failure modes
for the product/system under analysis.
We can refine this model a little by noticing that a system is merely the
top level sub-system. We can thus have System inherit sub-system.
A derived failure mode, is simply a failure mode at a higher level of analysis
it can therefore inherit `failure\_mode'.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=350pt,bb=0 0 680 500,keepaspectratio=true]{./fmmd_uml.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=350pt,bb=0 0 680 500,keepaspectratio=true]{component_failure_modes_definition/fmmd_uml.jpg}
% fmmd_uml.jpg: 680x500 pixel, 72dpi, 23.99x17.64 cm, bb=0 0 680 500
\caption{UML respresentation of Failure Mode Data types}
\label{fig:fmmd_uml}
@ -196,7 +239,7 @@ is therefore
$$ F = \Omega(K) \backslash OK $$
\subsection{Bayes Theorem}
\label{bayes}
Describe application - likely hood of faults being the cause of symptoms -
probablistic approach - no direct causation paths to the higher~abstraction fault mode.
Often for instance a component in a module within a module within a module etc
@ -213,7 +256,9 @@ to
%unitary~state set family.
\subsection{Tests of Hypotheses and Significance}
Linked in with Bayes theorem
Accident analysis
plane crashes and faults etc
In high reliability systems the fauls are often logged - strange occurances -
processors resetting - what are the common factors - P values -
for instance very high voltage spikes can reset micro controllers -