Layzell, J and Ledbetter, S (1998) FMEA applied to cladding systems: reducing the risk of failure. Building Research & Information, 26(6), pp. 351-357. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a systematic and analytical quality planning tool for identifying and addressing what potentially could go wrong with a product or process. The project 'Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) in the cladding industry' describes the FMEA technique, investigates failures of cladding on a system, component and process level, and maps the cladding supply chain and cladding-related decision making. The level of knowledge of failures and the fragmented industry structure prevents rigorous use of FMEA exemplified by other industries. However, a simplified form of FMEA can be performed based on the research findings to prioritize and inform decision-making and facilitate site inspection/supervision.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cladding; decision-making; failure; feedback loop; fmea; risk analysis |
| Index terms: | maps, supervision, decision-making, failure mode and effects analysis, cladding, risk analysis, inspection, feedback loop |
| Subjects: | spatial and geospatial analysis, quality assurance, building materials, environmental hazards, decision analysis, reliability engineering, control systems |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Sustainability, Quality Management, Project Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here