Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Numerous other phenomenological failure criteria can be found in the engineering literature. The degree of success of these criteria in predicting failure has been limited. Some popular failure criteria for various type of materials are: criteria based on invariants of the Cauchy stress tensor; the Tresca or maximum shear stress failure criterion
Failure Reporting (FR). The failures and the faults related to a system, a piece of equipment, a piece of software or a process are formally reported through a standard form (Defect Report, Failure Report). Analysis (A). Perform analysis in order to identify the root cause of failure. Corrective Actions (CA).
The Christensen failure criterion is a material failure theory for isotropic materials that attempts to span the range from ductile to brittle materials. [1] It has a two-property form calibrated by the uniaxial tensile and compressive strengths T ( σ T ) {\displaystyle \left(\sigma _{T}\right)} and C ( σ C ) {\displaystyle \left(\sigma _{C ...
graph with an example of steps in a failure mode and effects analysis. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA; often written with "failure modes" in plural) is the process of reviewing as many components, assemblies, and subsystems as possible to identify potential failure modes in a system and their causes and effects.
The Tsai–Wu failure criterion is a phenomenological material failure theory which is widely used for anisotropic composite materials which have different strengths in tension and compression. [1] The Tsai-Wu criterion predicts failure when the failure index in a laminate reaches 1.
The first piece of information added in an FMEDA is the quantitative failure data (failure rates and the distribution of failure modes) for all components being analyzed. The second piece of information added to an FMEDA is the probability of the system or subsystem to detect internal failures via automatic on-line diagnostics.
A device or system must meet the requirements for both categories to achieve a given SIL. The SIL requirements for hardware safety integrity are based on a probabilistic analysis of the device. In order to achieve a given SIL, the device must meet targets for the maximum probability of dangerous failure and a minimum safe failure fraction.
More recent work in the area of physics of failure has been focused on predicting the time to failure of new materials (i.e., lead-free solder, [18] [19] high-K dielectric [20]), software programs, [21] using the algorithms for prognostic purposes, [22] and integrating physics of failure predictions into system-level reliability calculations. [23]