Volume 22, Issue 1 (Apr - May 2018)                   J Qazvin Univ Med Sci 2018, 22(1): 42-51 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Gholamnia R, Matin A, Atari S. Comparison of failure mode and effect analysis and functional resonance in press shop. J Qazvin Univ Med Sci. 2018; 22 (1) :42-51
URL: http://journal.qums.ac.ir/article-1-2490-en.html
1- Department of Health Sciences, School of Health, Safety and Environment, Shahid Beheshti university of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , gholamnia@sbmu.ac.ir
2- Department of Health Sciences, School of Health, Safety and Environment, Shahid Beheshti university of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- School of Health, Safety and Environment, Shahid Beheshti university of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (2903 Views)
Background: Machines, especially pressing machines, have a huge contribution to the incidence of occupational accidents and their costs.
Objectives: The purpose of this descriptive-analytical study was to evaluate the risk of pressing operations. For this purpose, two traditional and new methods of risk assessment were used.
Methods: This study was carried out in a press workshop of one of the automobile production factories in 2017. Risk assessment was performed in two ways: Failure modes (FM) and effects analyzes (EA) and functional resonance analysis method (FRAM) based on extended resilience engineering. After identifying the six aspects of the operation of pressing, their variability and exacerbation were determined.
Findings: From 72 potential breakdowns, twenty mode in one of the risk factors of the risk priority number (severity, probability and detection rates) were equal or greater than five, and other failure modes identified were normal and not require new corrective actions. Fifteen functions were also identified for press operations, which seven operations including planning, mapping, raw material supply, forklift lifting, stamping, census, and delivery of preformed parts were resonating.
Conclusion: Considering the focus of the method of FM and EA on technical issues and the visibility of this method, as well as the overall and organizational view, the FRAM, the simultaneous use of these two methods, significantly contributes to improving the safety of the system makes.
Full-Text [PDF 180 kb]   (670 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Occupational Health Engineering

1. Cooper R, Foster M. Sociotechnical systems. Am Psychol 1971; 26(5): 467-74. [DOI]
2. Benner L. Accident investigations: Multi linear events sequencing methods. J Safety Res 1975; 7(2): 67-73.
3. Hollnagel E. An application of the functional resonance analysis method (FRAM) to risk assessment of organizational change. Available at: Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten.se, Updated in: 2013.
4. Hollnagel E. FRAM, the functional resonance analysis method: modelling complex socio-technical systems. 1st ed Farnham (UK): Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.; 2012 .22-3
5. Bjerga T, Aven T, Zio E. Uncertainty treatment in risk analysis of complex systems: the cases of STAMP and FRAM. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 2016; 156: 203-9. [DOI]
6. Frost B, Mo JP. System hazard analysis of a complex socio-technical system: the functional resonance analysis method in hazard identification In Proceeding of Australian System Safety Conference, Melbourne Australia 2014; 28-30.
7. Toroody AB, Abaei MM, Gholamnia R. Conceptual compression discussion on a multi-linear (FTA) and systematic (FRAM) method in an offshore operation's accident modeling. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 2016; 22(4): 532-40. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2016. 1157399. [PubMed]
8. Stamatis DH. Failure mode and effect analysis: FMEA from theory to execution 2nd ed. Milwaukee (WI) ASQ Quality Press; 2003. 17-18
9. Liu H-C, Liu L, Liu N. Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: a literature review. Expert Syst Appl 2013; 40(2): 828-38. [DOI]
10. Hollnagel E, Pruchnicki S, Woltjer R, Etcher S, editors. Analysis of comair flight 5191 with the functional resonance accident model. In 8th International Symposium of the Australian Aviation Psychology Association 2008 Apr; 8.
11. Patriarca R, Di Gravio G, Costantino F, Tronci M. The Functional Resonance Analysis Method for a systemic risk based environmental auditing in a sinter plant: a semi-quantitative approach. Environ Impact Asses 2017; 63: 72-86. [DOI]
12. Albery S, Borys D, Tepe S. Advantages for risk assessment: Evaluating learnings from question sets inspired by the FRAM and the risk matrix in a manufacturing environment. Safety Sci 2016; 89: 180-9. [DOI]
13. Shirali GA, Ebrahimipour V, Mohammad Salahi L. Proactive risk assessment to identify emergent risks using Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM): a case study in an oil process unit. Iran Occup Health 2013; 10(6): 33-46.
14. Amorim AG, Pereira CM. Improvisation at workplace and accident causation-an exploratory study. Procedia Manuf 2015; 3: 1804-11. [DOI]
15. Woltjer R. Resilience assessment based on models of functional resonance. Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Resilience Engineering; 2008; 9.
16. Patriarca R, Di Gravio G, Costantino F. A Monte Carlo evolution of the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM) to assess performance variability in complex systems. Saf Sci 2017; 91: 49-60. [DOI]
17. Rosa LV, Haddad AN, de Carvalho PVR. Assessing risk in sustainable construction using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). Cognition, Technology & Work 2015; 17(4): 559-73. [DOI]
18. Sujan MA, Felici M. Combining failure mode and functional resonance analyses in healthcare settings. Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security 2012: 364-75. [DOI]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

© 2020 All Rights Reserved | The Journal of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb