Failure Analysis: Insights from Model‐Based Systems Engineering

ABSTRACT Processes for system failure analysis (for example, FMEA) are structured, well‐documented, and supported by tools. Nevertheless, we hear complaints that FMEA work feels (1) too labor intensive to encourage engagement, (2) somewhat arbitrary in identifying issues, (3) overly sensitive to the skills and background of the performing team, and (4) not building enough confidence of fully identifying the risks of system failure. In fairness to experts in the process, perhaps such complaints come from those less experienced — but even so, we should care how to describe this process to encourage better technical and experience outcomes. This paper shows how model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) answers these challenges by deeper and novel integration with requirements and design. Just as MBSE powered the requirements discovery process past its earlier, more subjective performance, so also can MBSE accelerate understanding and performance of failure risk analysis — as a discipline deeply connected within the systems engineering process.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Insight
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/inst.12508
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.66
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Failure Analysis: Insights from Model‐Based Systems Engineering

William D. Schindel
2 citations
Insight
Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
0.66
article

Failure Analysis: Insights from Model‐Based Systems Engineering

William D. Schindel
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT Processes for system failure analysis (for example, FMEA) are structured, well‐documented, and supported by tools. Nevertheless, we hear complaints that FMEA work feels (1) too labor intensive to encourage engagement, (2) somewhat arbitrary in identifying issues, (3) overly sensitive to the skills and background of the performing team, and (4) not building enough confidence of fully identifying the risks of system failure. In fairness to experts in the process, perhaps such complaints come from those less experienced — but even so, we should care how to describe this process to encourage better technical and experience outcomes. This paper shows how model‐based systems engineering (MBSE) answers these challenges by deeper and novel integration with requirements and design. Just as MBSE powered the requirements discovery process past its earlier, more subjective performance, so also can MBSE accelerate understanding and performance of failure risk analysis — as a discipline deeply connected within the systems engineering process.

InsightVol. 27(5)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 30%
Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
0.66
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.