arrrghhhhh..... so muh work....
This commit is contained in:
parent
06bd918d54
commit
fc89b68499
13
mybib.bib
13
mybib.bib
@ -269,6 +269,19 @@ Database
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@article{sanjeev,
|
||||
author = {Sanjeev Kumar Appicharla},
|
||||
title = {Analysis and modelling of space shuttle challenger accident using management oversight and risk tree(MORT)},
|
||||
journal = {7th IET System Safety Conference 2012},
|
||||
publisher = {IEEE},
|
||||
issn = {},
|
||||
url = {},
|
||||
doi = {},
|
||||
keywords = {System approach to safety, groupthink bias, technology standards, safety critical decision making},
|
||||
year = {2012},
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@article{SMR:SMR580,
|
||||
author = {Bachmann, Volker and Messnarz, Richard},
|
||||
title = {Improving safety and availability of complex systems by using an integrated design approach in development},
|
||||
|
@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
|
||||
|
||||
%%% CHAPTER 2
|
||||
\label{sec:chap2}
|
||||
|
||||
The generic and statistical European Safety Standard, EN61508:6\cite{en61508}[B.6.6]
|
||||
describes Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) as:
|
||||
@ -141,16 +143,28 @@ approach in looking for system failures.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Theoretical Concepts in FMEA}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{The unacceptability of a single component failure causing a catastrophe}
|
||||
|
||||
FMEA, due to its inductive bottom-up approach, is very good
|
||||
at finding potential single component failures that could have catastrophic implications.
|
||||
% NEED SOME NICE HISTORICAL REFS HERE
|
||||
FMEA, due to its inductive bottom-up approach, is good
|
||||
at mapping potential single component failures to system level faults/events.
|
||||
Used in the design phase of a project FMEA is an invaluable tool
|
||||
for unearthing these failure scenarios.
|
||||
It is less useful for determining catastrophic events for multiple
|
||||
for unearthing potential failure scenarios.
|
||||
FMEA is always performed in the context of the use of the equipment.
|
||||
This, put in terms of philosophy, is the subjective and the objective.
|
||||
We can using objective reasoning trace a component level failure to a system level event,
|
||||
but only in
|
||||
the subjective sense can we determine its severity.
|
||||
Failure mode analysis on the leaks possible from the O ring on the space shuttle
|
||||
did not link this failure to the catastrophic failure of the spacecraft~\cite{challenger,sanjeev}.
|
||||
It is less useful for determining events for multiple
|
||||
simultaneous\footnote{Multiple simultaneous failures are taken to mean failure that occur within the same detection period.} failures.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Failure modes, dectectable and undetectable}
|
||||
Often the effects of a failure mode may be easy to detect, and our equipment can react by raising an alarm or compensating for the resulting fault.
|
||||
Some failure modes may cause undetectable failure, for instance a component that causes
|
||||
a measured reading to change could have dire consequences yet not be obvious.
|
||||
In fault diagnosis failures are said to be observable and unobservable.
|
||||
|
||||
\paragraph{Impracticality of Field Data for modern systems}
|
||||
|
||||
Modern electronic components, are generally very reliable, and the systems built from them
|
||||
|
@ -33,29 +33,30 @@ a variety of typical embedded system components including analogue/digital and e
|
||||
%
|
||||
%This is followed by several example FMMD analyses,
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item The first example applies FMMD to an operational amplifier inverting amplifier (see section~\ref{sec:invamp})
|
||||
\item The first example applies FMMD to an operational amplifier inverting amplifier (see section~\ref{sec:invamp}),
|
||||
%using an op-amp and two resistors;
|
||||
this demonstrates how the re-use of a potential divider {\dc} from section~\ref{subsec:potdiv}.
|
||||
this demonstrates re-use of a potential divider {\dc} from section~\ref{subsec:potdiv}.
|
||||
This inverting amplifier is analysed again, but this time with a different
|
||||
composition of {\fgs}. The two approaches, i.e. choice of membership for {\fgs}, are then discussed.
|
||||
\item Section~\ref{sec:diffamp} analyses a circuit where two op-amps are used
|
||||
to create a differencing amplifier.
|
||||
Building on the two approaches from section~\ref{sec:invamp}, re-use of the non-inverting amplifier {\dc} from section~\ref{sec:invamp}
|
||||
is discussed in the context of this circuit,
|
||||
where its re-use is appropriate in the first stage and
|
||||
is examined,
|
||||
where re-use is appropriate in the first stage and
|
||||
not in the second.
|
||||
\item Section~\ref{sec:fivepolelp} analyses a Sallen-Key based five pole low pass filter.
|
||||
This demonstrates re-use the first Sallen-Key analysis, %encountered as a {\dc}
|
||||
It demonstrates re-use the first Sallen-Key analysis, %encountered as a {\dc}
|
||||
increasing test efficiency. This example also serves to show a deep hierarchy of {\dcs}.
|
||||
\item Section~\ref{sec:bubba} shows FMMD applied to a
|
||||
loop topology---using a `Bubba' oscillator---demonstrating how FMMD id different to fault diagnosis techniques.
|
||||
loop topology---using a `Bubba' oscillator---demonstrating how FMMD differs from fault diagnosis techniques.
|
||||
%which uses
|
||||
%four op-amp stages with supporting components.
|
||||
Two analysis strategies are employed, one using
|
||||
initially identified {\fgs} and the second using a more complex hierarchy of {\fgs} and {\dcs}, showing
|
||||
initially identified {\fgs} and the second using a more complex hierarchy of %{\fgs} and
|
||||
{\dcs} showing
|
||||
that a finer grained/more de-composed approach offers more re-use possibilities in future analysis tasks.
|
||||
\item Section~\ref{sec:sigmadelta} demonstrates FMMD can be applied to mixed analogue and digital circuitry
|
||||
using a sigma delta ADC.
|
||||
by analysing a sigma delta ADC.
|
||||
%shows FMMD analysing the sigma delta
|
||||
%analogue to digital converter---again with a circular signal path---which operates on both
|
||||
%analogue and digital signals.
|
||||
|
@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
%%% CHAPTER 6
|
||||
\label{sec:chap6}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Software and Hardware Failure Mode Concepts}
|
||||
\label{sec:elecsw}
|
||||
@ -798,7 +800,9 @@ $$fm (micro-controller) =\{ PROM\_FAULT, RAM\_FAULT, CPU\_FAULT, ALU\_FAULT, CLO
|
||||
|
||||
We must start from the bottom-up with the software, and consider the hardware elements
|
||||
used (if any) by each software function.
|
||||
Starting at the bottom
|
||||
Starting at the bottom we form a {\fg} with
|
||||
the function read\_ADC.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user