0
Research Papers: Design Theory and Methodology

An Experimental Study on the Influence That Failure Number, Specialization, and Controls Have on Confidence in Predicting System Failures1

[+] Author and Article Information
Somaiah Thimmaiah

Mechanical Engineering,
Clemson University,
Clemson, SC 29634-0921
e-mail: sthimma@clemson.edu

Keith Phelan

Mechanical Engineering,
Clemson University,
Clemson, SC 29634-0921
e-mail: ktphela@clemson.edu

Joshua D. Summers

Professor
Mechanical Engineering,
Clemson University,
Clemson, SC 29634-0921
e-mail: jsummer@clemson.edu

2Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Theory and Methodology Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received June 18, 2015; final manuscript received August 31, 2016; published online November 11, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Irem Tumer.

J. Mech. Des 139(1), 011102 (Nov 11, 2016) (12 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1426; doi: 10.1115/1.4034789 History: Received June 18, 2015; Revised August 31, 2016

Design reviews are typically used for three types of design activities: (1) identifying errors, (2) assessing the impact of the errors, and (3) suggesting solutions for the errors. This experimental study focuses on understanding the second issue as it relates to the number of errors considered, the existence of controls, and the level of domain familiarity of the assessor. A set of design failures and associated controls developed for a completed industry sponsored project is used as the experimental design problem. Nondomain generalists (students from an undergraduate psychology class), domain generalists (first year engineering students), and domain specialists (graduate mechanical engineering students) are provided a set of failure modes and asked to provide their own opinion or confidence on whether the system would still successfully achieve the stated objectives. The confidence level for all domain populations decreased significantly as the number of design errors increased (largest p-value = 0.0793), and this decrease in confidence is more significant as the number of design errors increases. The impact on confidence is lower when solutions (controls) are provided to prevent the errors (largest p-value = 0.0334) as the confidence decreased faster for domain general engineers as compared to domain specialists (p = < 0.0001). The domain specialists showed higher confidence in making decisions than domain generalists and nondomain generalists as the design errors increase.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Topics: Design , Errors , Failure , Testing
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Example of FMEA worksheet for a pressurized mud box seal testing system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Tent ballast testing (equipment) setup: (a) iconic schematic of test setup and (b) implemented schematic of test setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Assessment of confidence (%) of system success for each design error

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Example of error/failure mode worksheet (scenario 2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Confidence level comparison between different domain populations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Histogram of student confidence responses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Effect of controls on all domain populations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Confidence versus design errors for DG with and without controls

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Confidence versus design errors for NDG with and without controls

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Confidence versus design errors for DS with and without controls

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In