See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328901597

Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a

Computer Integrated Manufacturing (CIM) Conveyor Belt

Article  in  Engineering, Technology and Applied Science Research · June 2018

DOI: 10.48084/etasr.2043

CITATIONS READS

6 736

6 authors, including:

Isam A.Q Badawi Imran Ali Chaudhry

University of Hail University of Hail
24 PUBLICATIONS   74 CITATIONS    48 PUBLICATIONS   694 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Naim Ben Ali

University of Hail
56 PUBLICATIONS   472 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Rapid Prototyping Technology Roadmapping For Smes: Issues, Challenges & A Pragmatic Implementation Approach View project

photonic quasicrystals View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Naim Ben Ali on 31 March 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 8, No. 3, 2018, 3023-3027 3023

Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality

Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer Integrated
Manufacturing (CIM) Conveyor Belt

Isam A.Q. Elbadawi Mohamed Arafat Ashmawy Wan Ahmad Yusmawiza

Industrial Engineering Department Mechanical Engineering Department Industrial Engineering Department
University of Hail University of Hail, Saudi Arabia and University of Hail
Hail, Saudi Arabia Suez University, Suez, Egypt Hail, Saudi Arabia
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Imran Ali Chaudhry Naim Ben Ali Ayyaz Ahmad

Industrial Engineering Department Industrial Engineering Department Industrial Engineering Department
University of Hail University of Hail University of Hail
Hail, Saudi Arabia Hail, Saudi Arabia Hail, Saudi Arabia
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Abstract—Fault finding and failure predicting techniques in paper starts with a brief historical overview of FMECA and the
manufacturing and production systems often involve forecasting current international standards followed by a discussion of the
failures, their effects, and occurrences. The majority of these core concept and implementation procedures of FMECA.
techniques predict failures that may appear during the regular Finally, the paper illustrates the application of FMECA on the
system production time. However, they do not estimate the CIM conveyor in the mechanical engineering workshop at
failure modes and they require extensive source code UoH. A significant number of studies on the reliability and the
instrumentation. In this study, we suggest an approach for related risks of manufacturing plants have been conducted.
predicting failure occurrences and modes during system Consequently policies for risk management, maintenance
production time intervals at the University of Hail (UoH). The
policies, and suggestions for improving the production process
aim of this project is to implement failure mode effect and
criticality analysis (FMECA) on computer integrated
have been developed. A number of these studies aimed at
manufacturing (CIM) conveyors to determine the effect of minimizing the downtime rate and improving the equipment’s
various failures on the CIM conveyor belt by ranking and availability and reliability. Furthermore, in order to improve the
prioritizing each failure according to its risk priority number system efficiency with an optimized resource amount and to
(RPN). We incorporated the results of FMECA in the minimize the probability of system failure, several maintenance
development of formal specifications of fail-safe CIM conveyor strategies were implemented, various approaches and
belt systems. The results show that the highest RPN values are maintenance planning models were developed, and many
for motor over current failure (450), conveyor chase of vibration technical manufacturing specifications were listed. However, a
(400), belt run off at the head pulley (200), accumulated dirt comprehensive approach which tackles the potential causes and
(180), and Bowed belt (150). The study concludes that performing effects is yet to be developed [1].
FMECA is highly effective in improving CIM conveyor belt
reliability and safety in the mechanical engineering workshop at
II. FAILURE MODE EFFECT ANALYSIS (FMEA)
UoH.

Keywords-reliability; failure mode effect criticality analysis; A. FMEA

maintenance Every machine or system used in the manufacturing
industry might fail to work properly. The failure may be caused
I. INTRODUCTION by machines, materials, measurements, manpower, methods,
and/or environmental factors. Failure prediction methods have
Anticipating potential failure occurrences during conveyor been used by leading production and manufacturing firms to
productive time is important to achieve system pliability and to control and minimize the impacts of failures on the cost of the
overcome unexpected and dangerous failure consequences. As product defect and the operational risk of manufacturing
machining tool systems become increasingly more processes. A significant number of industrial firms and
complicated, the further development of system scale and research organizations dedicated considerable efforts to analyze
functions, increases the probability of system failure. This failure modes and their effects on manufacturing and

www.etasr.com El Badawi et al.: Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 8, No. 3, 2018, 3023-3027 3024

production systems. An important model was developed by the RPN=S×O×D (1)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in
which they used a number of reliability practices in several As shown in Table I, the highest RPN value is 1000 which
space programs such as Viking, Galileo, Apollo, and Voyager indicates the most dangerous failure and the lowest RPN value
to analyze the failure mode behavior of their systems [2]. is 1 which indicates an unnoticeable failure, a failure that
According to NASA, FMEA is a proactive quality tool for would be solved before the customer notices.
evaluating potential failure modes and their causes. FMEA
helps in prioritizing the failure modes, recommending TABLE I. RPN SCALE
corrective measures for the avoidance of catastrophic failures
How Severe
and, therefore, improving the quality of the manufacturing and would the
How likely is it to How detectable What is the
production processes. The objectives of FMEA include happen? is the problem? RPN?
impact be?
understanding the criticalities and dependencies of all types of
systems as well as facilitating the evaluation of process Increase the

strategy
Reduce the
manipulation options to achieve high level of system reliability. severity of
Reduce the failure detection rate of
rate failure during the
failure effects
failure process
B. Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)
FMECA methodology is an advanced level of FMEA Severity Risk Occurrence Detectability
RPN=S×O×D
designed to assess the risk associated with all failure modes. (S) (O) (D)
The objective of FMECA is to design maintenance procedures Serious safety More
Very Absolute
required to eliminate points of failures as well as any High: uncertainty: Most
10 hazards without than 1 in 1000
failure cannot detect the dangerous
catastrophic or critical consequence of such failures. The warning 2
evitable problem
fundamental purpose is to initiate actions that reduce the Hazard with Very
likelihood of failure in the process. In 1965, the American 9 1 in 3 Very remote 729
warning high
aerospace manufacturer, Grumman, developed FMECA to 8 Very high 1 in 8 High Remote 512
identify the potential failures of the manipulation system of the 7 High 1 in 20 High Very low 343
flight vehicles powered by jet engine. The severity (S), 6 Moderate 1 in 80 Moderate Low 216
occurrence (O) and detectability (D) of the failure effect can be 5 Low 1 in 400 Moderate Moderate 125
analyzed and quantified to evaluate the risk associated with the 4 Very low
1 in
Moderate Highly moderate 64
potential problems identified through the analysis. 2000
1 in
3 Minor Low High 27
 Severity. A value of 1 stands for an extremely low severity 15000
while a value of 10 stands for an extremely high severity as 2 Very minor
1 in
Low Very high 8
shown in Table I. 150000
No one
 Occurrence is related to number of the preventive actions Remote: would
taken for the respective potential failure causes. The Rare Almost Certain: notice:
None- No
assessment of the probability for the occurrence of a event, no (Automation), failure
effect: 1 in
1 data of current system 1 would be
potential failure cause is carried out while considering all customer might 1500000
such certainly detects solved
listed preventive actions. A value of 10 is assigned, if it is not notice it
failure in the failure before the
likely that the potential failure cause will occur. A value of the past customer
1 is assigned for a very improbable potential failure cause. notices
Thus, the O assessment makes a statement concerning the
quantity of defective components remaining in an entire
C. FMECA Standards
batch of a certain product [3] (see Table I).
There is a number of published guidelines and standards for
 Detection is correlated to the actions taken to detect the the requirements and recommended reporting format of
respective potential failure causes. A value of 10 is assigned FMEAs and FMECAs [4]. Some of the main published
if no detection actions are mentioned whatsoever. A value standards for this type of analysis include SAE J1739and MIL-
of 1 is assigned, if the probability for the detection of the STD-1629A. In addition, many industries and companies have
failure before the delivery to the customer is very high. developed their own procedures to meet the specific
Thus, the D assessment makes a statement concerning the requirements of their products or processes [5].
quantity of undetected, defect components in an entire
batch of a certain product as shown in Table I.  MIL-STD 1629 - Procedures for performing failure mode
and effect analysis.
In FMECA, risk is assessed with a value called risk priority
number (RPN). RPN value is the quantitative measure in  IEC 60812 - Procedures for failure mode and effect analysis
FMECA and is used to compare, analyze, and prioritize (FMEA).
failures. These are important in order to suggest proper
 BS 5760-5 - Guide to failure modes, effects and criticality
solutions and corrective maintenance procedures. RPN is
analysis (FMEA and FMECA).
calculated by multiplying Severity, Occurrence, and
Detectability as shown in (1).

www.etasr.com El Badawi et al.: Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 8, No. 3, 2018, 3023-3027 3025

 SAE ARP 5580 - Recommended failure modes and effects III. STUDY OBJECTIVES
analysis (FMEA) practices for non-automobile applications This study employed FMECA techniques to minimize the
[6]. failure mode of the CIM conveyor in the mechanical
 SAE J1739 - Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis engineering workshop at the UoH. The study aims at providing
in design (Design FMEA) and potential failure mode and CIM users with a general background about the techniques
effects analysis in manufacturing and assembly processes available for failure effects analysis and their maintainability
(Process FMEA) and effects analysis for machinery analysis, reliability prediction and safety analysis. This paper
(Machinery FMEA) [7]. proposes a risk based maintenance method, which relies on
regular and automatic update of risk analyses of the equipment
D. Benefits of FMECA including the equipment failure history. The method provides
up-to-date information about the equipment’s risks.
FMECA allows:
 High degree of complexity. IV. PREVIOUS WORK
 Uniform quantification of risk. Authors in [8], presented risk in early design phase (RED)
as a new method to introduce information about dysfunction
 Results to be correlated directly with actual risks. during design phase of functionalities based on the following
 Easy modeling of the effect of various methods of points:
mitigation/detection on risk.  The storage of breakdown events, (system breakdown
 Implementation of a well-documented record of database)
improvements from corrective actions.  Matrix linking parts and functions, (system components
 Acquiring information useful in developing test programs function and relationship)
and in-line monitoring criteria.  Translation of parts breakdown into risks of functional
 Obtaining historical information useful in analyzing failure and database update. Risk pooling of system
potential product failures during the manufacturing process. breakdown and system components failure.
Later, they added an inspection module to improve
 Obtaining new ideas for improvements in similar designs or
maintenance operations schedule and to minimize failure risk
processes.
by developing an optimal inspection strategy. They also
pointed out the impact of the risk formalism on the assessment
E. Types of FMECA of occurrence, consequences and then the judgment of risk
FMECA can be classified into three main types as shown in level. These results highlight the need for improving the quality
Figure 1. of risk analyses.
In [9], authors made a synthesis of 25 risk based
maintenance (RBM) methods, presented their steps and
described their main drawbacks. In particular they presented
Khan and Haddara’s RBM process. They provided detailed
description of each step as well as the factors affecting the
quality of risk analysis evaluations. Three major factors and
their related contributors were highlighted. Authors in [10]
used the FMEA method to study the reliability of a wind
turbine (WT) system, using a proprietary software reliability
analysis tool. They compared the quantitative results of an
FMEA and reliability field data from real wind turbine systems
and their assemblies. Their results may be useful for future WT
designs. Authors in [11] argue that a proper use of process
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) could be of a
great importance for the automotive industry. Authors in [12]
described the application of FMECA in Toshiba bulb
factory in Monfiya, Egypt. They found that FMECA is an
efficient technique for reducing the chances of catastrophic
failures. The application of FMECA also helped to
increase the reliability and availability of the machines in the
factory. Authors in [13] devised an effective tool for solving
the problems related to the quality of the manufacturing
process through the application of FMECA. They identified
and eliminated the problems they encountered during the
Fig. 1. FMECA types manufacturing process of a cylinder head in an internal

www.etasr.com El Badawi et al.: Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 8, No. 3, 2018, 3023-3027 3026

combustion engine. However, the value of introducing FMECA C. Ishakawa Fishbone Analysis
to evaluate the reliability and to improve the maintenance The CIM conveyor belt was monitored for a total of 45
process of the CIM conveyor belt in an academic setting is still hours (3 hours a week over the period of 15 weeks). 100
under-researched. Thus, this study fills an important gap in this failures were detected and categorized through Ishakawa
field. fishbone analysis. The study found that the material type and
property have the highest effect on the conveyor belt failures,
V. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY while the method has the lowest. We investigated the list of
conveyor belt failures in the Ishakawa fishbone and categorized
A. Conveyor Belt them into a technical classification list as shown in Figure 5.
The conveyor system is part of the learning production We found that 45% of failures were caused by the belt of the
system used in the workshops of the Mechanical Engineering conveyor and 2 percent by the robot alignments as shown in
department at the University of Hail. The conveyor consists of Figure 5.
a feed belt and a rotary table. When students practice hands-on
processing, the feed belt transports objects placed on its left
end from the CIM robot to the right side of the assembly
station. The belt has a bar code reader and photo-electric cells,
which signal when an object arrives at its ends. Controlling the
motion of conveyor belt is synchronized with a CIM robot and
may be switched on and off: it has to be ON while waiting for a
new object and has to be switched OFF when an object is at the
end of the belt. The conveyor belt is used as a means to
transport material from one station to another. A description of
the conveyor belt is illustrated in Figure 2, and a brief of list of
the specifications is provided in Table II. The conveyor belt
either runs empty (while waiting for an object to be placed on
it) or transports an object.

TABLE II. CONVEYOR BELT SPECIFICATIONS

Parameter Value Unit

Motor drive 2.5 HP
Belt width 40 cm
Assembly line length 6.4 m
Belt speed 29 cm/s
Assembly line height 87 cm
Control pad height 130 cm
Distance between each work station 1.5 m
Fig. 3. FMECA framework

Fig. 2. Conveyor belt diagram and dimensions

Fig. 4. Conveyor belt failures Ishakawa fishbone

B. Utilizing FMECA
The methodology of this study utilizes FMECA according
to the following sequence: FMECA scope, FMECA analysis,
FMECA ranking, FMECA RPN calculations, FMECA
verification, FMECA report . A detailed framework is
illustrated in Figure 3. Data were collected and organized in a
fishbone diagram as shown in Figure 4.The failure modes and
their causes were identified for the conveyor belt. The three
key indices (Severity, Occurrence and Detection) we reassessed
and their analysis was carried out with the help of FMECA
Worksheet. Finally, the necessary corrective actions were
recommended.
Fig. 5. Failures distribution.

www.etasr.com El Badawi et al.: Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer …
 Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 8, No. 3, 2018, 3023-3027 3027

D. Risk Priority Number (RPN) VI. CONCLUSION

The failure modes and their causes were identified for each In this study the researchers designed a potential FMECA
of the three key indices (Severity, Occurrence and Detection). framework for the CIM conveyor belt as an analytical
We investigated 150 failures of the conveyor, and then technique utilized primarily to ensure that the mechanisms of
categorized them into two groups: potential failure modes and their associated causes and effects
have been considered and addressed. The researchers
1) Belt failures demonstrated that FMECA is sufficient to derive a reliable
The results summarized in FMECA Worksheet in Table III conveyor belt safely failure mode system by reducing the risk
revealed that the RPN was the highest (RPN=200) for belt runs of failures. They proposed a FMECA framework to facilitate
off at the head pulley, mainly owing to the degree of severity of the ability to build and a plan for a preventive maintenance and
the failure in disrupting the entire conveyor belt motion. Hence, corrective action. This increased the belt’s efficiency and
extra attention should be given to the corrective measures for reliability. The study developed a list of potential failure modes
the belt runs off at the head pulley to eliminate the failure. The and ranked them according to their effect on the conveyor belt.
next priority should be given to the bowed belt (RPN=150),
mainly because of its criticality affecting belt efficiency. For ACKNOWLEDGMENT
the excessive belt stretch (RPN=64) and belt slip (RPN=30) This research is supported by the deanship of academic
their effect is less than the previous two failures, but found to research at University of Hail by a grant for project number
be the correlated to the head pulley alignments. (0150191).

2) Motor failures
REFERENCES
From Table IV it can be seen that the severity and [1] R. K. Mobley, Maintenance Engineering Handbook, McGraw-Hill
occurrence of the motor over current and motor vibration are Professional, 2001
very high. The data revealed that both failures are critically [2] NASA, Apollo gray team lunar landing design final report, 2007
affecting the CIM conveyor belt efficiency. Figure 6 shows that [3] Reliability Analysis Center, Failure mode effects and criticality analysis
the motor over current RPN is 450 and it is the highest value, (FMECA), Reliability Analysis Center, Rome, NY, 1993
and the motor vibration RPN is 400. [4] MIL-STD-1929A, Procedure for performing a failure mode effects and
criticality analysis (FMECA), Washington, DC, 1980
TABLE III. RPN CONVEYOR BELT RESULTS
[5] SAE International, J1739, Potential failure mode and effects analysis in
design (Design FMEA), potential failure mode and effects analysis in
S O D manufacturing and assembly processes (Process FMEA), SAE
Failure Mode RPN International, 2009
(1-10) (1-10) (1-10)
Belt slip 10 1 3 30 [6] U.S. Department of Defence, MIL-HDBK-217F, Reliability prediction
Belt runs off at the head pulley 10 4 5 200 of electronic equipment, 1991
Excessive belt stretch 8 4 2 64 [7] Naval Surface Warfare Center, Handbook of reliability prediction
Bowed belt 6 5 5 150 procedures for mechanical equipment, Naval Surface Warfare Center,
Carderock Division, W. Bethesda, Maryland, 2011
TABLE IV. RPN MOTOR FAILURE RESULTS [8] I. Y. Tumer, R. B. Stone, “Mapping Function to Failure Mode During
Component Development”; Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 14,
S O D No. 1, pp. 25-33, 2003
Motor Failures RPN
(1-10) (1-10) (1-10)
[9] N. S. Arunraj, J. Maiti, “Risk-based maintenance Techniques and
Over-Current 9 10 5 450 applications”, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 142, No. 3, pp. 653-
Low Resistance 8 3 1 24 661, 2007
Over heating 6 1 9 54
[10] H Arabian-Hoseynabadi, H. Oraee, P. J. Tavner “Failure Modes and
Dirt 9 4 5 180
Effects Analysis (FMEA) for wind turbines”, International Journal of
Moisture 6 5 1 30 Electrical Power & Energy Systems, Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 817-824, 2010
Vibration 10 10 4 400
[11] H. C. Liu, L. Liu, N. Liu, “Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode
and effects analysis: A literature review”, Expert Systems with
Applications, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 828-838, 2013
[12] T. M. El-Dogdog, A. M. El-Assal, I. H. Abdel-Aziz, A. A. El-Betar,
“Implementation of FMECA and Fishbone Techniques in Reliability
Centered Maintenance Planning”, International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 11, pp.
18801-18811, 2016
[13] T. S. Parsana, M. T. Patel, “A Case Study: A Process FMEA Tool to
Enhance Quality and Efficiency of Manufacturing Industry”,
International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management
Science, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 145-152, 2014

Fig. 6. RPN motor failures distribution

www.etasr.com El Badawi et al.: Application of Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) to a Computer …

View publication stats