Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing

, Volume 29, Issue 8, pp 1803–1825 | Cite as

Risk measurement and prioritization of auto parts manufacturing processes based on process failure analysis, interval data envelopment analysis and grey relational analysis

  • Majid Baghery
  • Samuel Yousefi
  • Mustafa Jahangoshai RezaeeEmail author


Nowadays, decision-making process is faced with different challenges. There are many aspects that must be considered and planned, especially programs in the automotive industry that is associated with human vital factors are not structured. Therefore, managerial and engineering techniques should be used to solve the existing problems. In this regard, the process failure mode and effects nalysis (PFMEA) technique is one of the ways to assess the potential product or process failures and their effects, designs from the beginning to the end of the product life cycle, and identifies actions to eliminate the failures or reduce their effects. The well-known method for piriortizing these failures is risk priority number (RPN). Because the RPN has problems in prioritization of critical processes, a new approach is needed to remove these problems.Thus, in a real case study, first PFMEA technique has been implemented with the help of multidisciplinary teams for the parts of Peugeot 206, Peugeot 405 and Samand (three types of automobiles produced by Iran-khodro company) and affected factors have been obtained as an interval. Then, interval data envelopment analysis (DEA) have been used to prioritize and analyze all failures that are identified by the PFMEA technique for every part. Finally, by combining the results of the interval DEA and Grey relational analysis (GRA), the manufacturing processes are prioritized based on their criticality. Moreover, the proposed actions for all the items associated with each process are provided to prevent some potential failures. The results show that pouring and core making are the most crucial processes in this study, respectively. According to the proposed approach, the decision makers may determine critical processes and plan and do appropriate actions for removing failures or reducing their effects.


Process failure mode and effects analysis Risk measurement and prioritization Interval data envelopment analysis Interval grey relational analysis Automotive industry 


  1. Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chang, T. C., & Lin, S. J. (1999). Grey relation analysis of carbon dioxide emissions from industrial production and energy uses in Taiwan. Journal of Environmental Management, 56(4), 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chang, C. L., Liu, P. H., & Wei, C. C. (2001). Failure mode and effects analysis using grey theory. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 12(3), 211–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chang, D. S., & Paul Sun, K. L. (2009). Applying DEA to enhance assessment capability of FMEA. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 26(6), 629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, D. S., Chung, J. H., Sun, K. L., & Yang, F. C. (2012). A novel approach for evaluating the risk of health care failure modes. Journal of Medical Systems, 36(6), 3967–3974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang, K. H., Chang, Y. C., & Tsai, I. T. (2013). Enhancing FMEA assessment by integrating grey relational analysis and the decision making trial and evaluation laboratory approach. Engineering Failure Analysis, 31, 211–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, M. F., & Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Combining grey relation and TOPSIS concepts for selecting an expatriate host country. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40(13), 1473–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chin, K. S., Wang, Y. M., Poon, G. K. K., & Yang, J. B. (2009). Failure mode and effects analysis by data envelopment analysis. Decision Support Systems, 48(1), 246–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deng, J. L. (1989). Introduction to grey system theory. The Journal of Grey System, 1(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  11. Despotis, D. K., & Smirlis, Y. G. (2002). Data envelopment analysis with imprecise data. European Journal of Operational Research, 140(1), 24–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Emrouznejad, A., & De Witte, K. (2010). COOPER-framework: A unified process for non-parametric projects. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(3), 1573–1586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedman, L., & Sinuany-Stern, Z. (1998). Combining ranking scales and selecting variables in the DEA context: The case of industrial branches. Computers and Operations Research, 25(9), 781–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fung, C. P. (2003). Manufacturing process optimization for wear property of fiber-reinforced polybutylene terephthalate composites with grey relational analysis. Wear, 254(3), 298–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garcia, P. A., & Schirru, R. (2005). A fuzzy data envelopment analysis approach for FMEA. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 46(3), 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garcia, P. A. D. A., Junior, L., Curty, I., & Oliveira, M. A. (2013). A weight restricted DEA model for FMEA risk prioritization. Production, 23(3), 500–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Geum, Y., Cho, Y., & Park, Y. (2011). A systematic approach for diagnosing service failure: Service-specific FMEA and grey relational analysis approach. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 54(11), 3126–3142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Girginer, N., Köse, T., & Uçkun, N. (2015). Efficiency analysis of surgical services by combined use of data envelopment analysis and gray relational analysis. Journal of Medical Systems, 39(5), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. He, Z., Zhu, P. F., & Park, S. H. (2012). A robust desirability function method for multi-response surface optimization considering model uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 221(1), 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. He, Y., Chen, H., He, Z., Wang, G., & Zhou, L. (2014). Scaled prioritized aggregation operators and their applications to decision making. Soft Computing. doi: 10.1007/s00500-014-1562-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jenkins, L., & Anderson, M. (2003). A multivariate statistical approach to reducing the number of variables in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jolai, F., Jahangoshai-Rezaee, M., & Vazifeh, A. (2009). Multi-criteria decision making for assembly line balancing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 20(1), 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ju-Long, D. (1982). Control problems of grey systems. Systems and Control Letters, 1(5), 288–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kao, C., & Liu, S. T. (2000). Fuzzy efficiency measures in data envelopment analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 113(3), 427–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kuo, Y., Yang, T., & Huang, G. W. (2008). The use of grey relational analysis in solving multiple attribute decision-making problems. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 55(1), 80–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lin, S. J., Lu, I. J., & Lewis, C. (2007). Grey relation performance correlations among economics, energy use and carbon dioxide emission in Taiwan. Energy Policy, 35(3), 1948–1955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu, S., & Lin, Y. (2006). Grey information: Theory and practical applications. London: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  28. Liu, H. C., You, J. X., Fan, X. J., & Lin, Q. L. (2014). Failure mode and effects analysis using D numbers and grey relational projection method. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(10), 4670–4679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lovell, C. K., & Pastor, J. T. (1999). Radial DEA models without inputs or without outputs. European Journal of Operational Research, 118(1), 46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Oh, H. S., Moon, S. K., & Yoo, J. S. (2013). Service-oriented FMEA and grey relational analysis based approach to service reliability assessment. International Journal of Advancements in Computing Technology, 5(12), 225.Google Scholar
  31. Pillay, A., & Wang, J. (2003). Modified failure mode and effects analysis using approximate reasoning. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 79(1), 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rakesh, R., Jos, B. C., & Mathew, G. (2013). FMEA analysis for reducing breakdowns of a sub system in the life care product manufacturing industry. International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology, 2(2), 218–225.Google Scholar
  33. Ramanathan, R. (2003). An introduction to data envelopment analysis: A tool for performance measurement. New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Thivel, P. X., Bultel, Y., & Delpech, F. (2008). Risk analysis of a biomass combustion process using MOSAR and FMEA methods. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 151(1), 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Trafialek, J., & Kolanowski, W. (2014). Application of failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) for audit of HACCP system. Food Control, 44, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tzeng, G. H., & Huang, J. J. (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. New York: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  37. Wang, Y. M., Greatbanks, R., & Yang, J. B. (2005). Interval efficiency assessment using data envelopment analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 153(3), 347–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu, H. H. (2002). A comparative study of using grey relational analysis in multiple attribute decision making problems. Quality Engineering, 15(2), 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zimmermann, H. J. (2001). Fuzzy set theory—And its applications. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Management and AccountingAllameh Tabatabai UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Faculty of Industrial EngineeringUrmia University of TechnologyUrmiaIran

Personalised recommendations