臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

RPN 是FMEA 用以分析潛在風險問題優先順序的排序方法。在傳統的RPN 中，
每個失效模式均視為獨&;#63991;個體進&;#64008;優先排序，並沒考慮其交互關&;#63898;的因果關係也有可能影響排序的優先順序，即相同的失效模式可能由&;#63847;同的失效原因造成，或者是&;#63847;同的失效模式卻是由相同的失效示原因造成。本文以Ｗ公司某產品的到貨&;#63847;&;#63868;(Dead on Arrival，DOA)與製程失效模式與效應分析(Process FMEA，簡稱PFMEA)之間的關&;#63895;。分析後發現其DOA 的主要&;#63847;&;#63868;項目曾出現於該產品的PFMEA 的表單中，但卻因其風險優先排序因素而被忽&;#63862;造成損失。但是，如果把失效模式與失效原因的關&;#63898;性納入PFMEA 的排序考&;#63870;，取代傳統RPN 的計算方法&;#63789;進&;#64008;重新排&;#63900;次序，將可改善及&;#64009;低到貨&;#63847;&;#63868;的情形，藉以增加 PFMEA 對新產品導入的效&;#64023;影響。

The RPN methodology is a technique for analyzing the risk associated with potential problems identified in the FMEA. In the convential RPN, it is regarding the failure mode as independent and does not consider the correlation among failure mode and caused of failure, which may impact the priority rank setting due to ignores those
secenarios that same failure modes are caused by the different reasons or different failure modes are casued by the same reasons. This thesis studies the correlation between DOA (Dead on Arrival) and Process PFMEA by one of the product history data in Company W. After mapping the DOA major defects and their releated PFMEA potential failure modes, found those major defects had been recorded into the PFMEA form before, however, it is neglected and caused the loss due to their low risk ranking. However, if it applies the correlation among failure mode and caused of failures into consideration and replacing the convential RPN to recalculate the priority ranking, it can improve and reduce the DOA and raise the PFMEA benefit for new product introduction.

中文摘要 ............................................... ii 
英文摘要 ............................................... iii 
誌 謝 ............................................... iv 
表目錄 ................................................. vii 
圖目錄 ................................................. viii 
第一章 緒論 ........................................... 1 
1.1 研究背景與動機 ..................................... 1 
1.2 研究目的 ........................................... 3 
1.3 研究架構 ........................................... 3 
第二章 文獻回顧........................................ 5 
2.1 失效模式與效應分析 ................................. 5 
2.1.1 失效模式與效應分析的沿革及演變 ................... 5 
2.1.2 失效模式與效應分析種類............................ 6 
2.1.3 失效模式與效應分析程序 ........................... 7 
2.2 傳統風險優先數值方法 ............................... 8 
2.2.1 傳統風險優先數值方法 ............................. 8 
2.2.2 傳統RPN 的缺點 ................................... 10 
2.3 失效模式及效益與修訂RPN 的研究 ..................... 12 
第三章研究方法 ......................................... 15 
3.1 問題分析 ........................................... 15 
3.2 排序方法的選擇 ..................................... 15 
3.3 分析排序結果與DOA 的關連比較 ....................... 17 
第四章實例驗證 ......................................... 18 
4.1 個案公司簡介 ....................................... 18 
4.2 個案公司之開發作業流程簡介 ......................... 18 
4.3 個案公司PFMEA 流程簡介 ............................. 22 
4.4 個案研究 ........................................... 26 
4.5 TOPSIS 的結果 ...................................... 35 
4.6 STDRPN 的結果 ...................................... 35 
4.7 結果分析 ........................................... 38 
4.8 結論 ............................................... 40 
第五章結論與建議 ....................................... 42 
5.1 結論 ............................................... 42 
5.2 貢獻 ............................................... 42 
5.3 未來研究方向 ....................................... 43 
參考文獻 ............................................... 44 
附錄1 .................................................. 46 
附錄2 .................................................. 48

[1]李育才(2011)應用於失效模式與效應分析之創新風險評估技術。國立交通大
學工業工程與管理學士碩士論文。
[2] Pillay, A.. and Wang, J.(2003) Modified failure mode and effects analysis using approximate reasoning, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,79, 69~85
[3]Sankar, N., and Prabhu, B. (2001). Modified approach for prioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 18(3), 324-335.
[4]Bowles,J.(2003). An assessment of RPN prioritization in a failure modes effects and criticality analysis. Proceeding Annual Reliability and Maintainability symposium, 380-386
[5]Bowles, John B. and Peláez, C. Enrique. (1995) Fuzzy logic prioritization of failure in a system failure mode, effects and critically analysis, Reliability Engineering & system Safety, 50(2), 203-213
[6] Braglia,M., Frosolini,M., and Montanari, R.(2003). Fuzzy TOPSIS approach for failure mode, effects and criticality analysis. Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 19(5),425-443.
[7]Yang,Z. , Bonsall,S., and Wang,J.(2008),Fuzzy Rule-Based Bayesian Reasoning Approach for Prioritization of failures in FMEA, IEEE Transactions on Reliability,57(3),517-528
[8]Yang,Z, et.al (2010),A new Failure Mode and effects Analysis Model of CNC Machine Tool using Fuzzy Theory, Proceeding of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation,582-587
[9]Chang,K.H. and Cheng,C.H.(2011). Evaluating the risk of failure using the fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL method. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(2), 113-129
[10] Braglia, M. (2000). MAFMA:multi-attribute failure mode analysis.
45 International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,17(9), 1017~1033.
[11]Wang.J., Ruxton,T., & Labrie, C.R. (1995). Design for safety of engineering systems with multiple failure state variables. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 50(3), 271-284
[12]Seyed-Hosseini, S., Safaei, N., and Asgharpour, M. (2006) Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 91(8), 872-881
[13] W Company C-flow procedure
[14] W Company PFMEA implementation procedure