Risk and hazard analysis can be effectively used during design reviews to provide valuable feedback to the design to avoid failures. This article discusses the types of risks, namely, real risk, statistical risk, predicted risk, and perceived risk. It describes the principle and technical methods of risk/hazard analysis practiced in the industry to identify possible hazards and the resources necessary to avoid or reduce risks. These methods include the failure mode and effect analysis, fault tree analysis, event tree analysis, risk/benefit analysis, safety analysis, and probabilistic estimates.

This article describes the methodology for performing a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA). It explains the methodology with the help of a hot water heater and provides a discussion on the role of FMEA in the design process. The article presents the analysis procedures and shows how proper planning, along with functional, interface, and detailed fault analyses, makes FMEA a process that facilitates the design throughout the product development cycle. It also discusses the use of fault equivalence to reduce the amount of labor required by the analysis. The article shows how fault trees are used to unify the analysis of failure modes caused by design errors, manufacturing and maintenance processes, materials, and so on, and to assess the probability of failure mode occurrence. It concludes with information on some of the approaches to automating the FMEA.

Any threat to personal safety should be regarded as a hazard and treated as such. This article discusses threats from several sources, such as kinematic/mechanical hazards, electrical hazards, energy hazards, human factors/ergonomic hazards, and environmental hazards. It describes hazard analysis in terms of failure modes and effects analysis, failure modes and criticality analysis, fault tree analysis, fault hazard analysis, and operating hazards analysis. The article examines fail-safe designs, such as fail-passive designs, fail-active designs, and fail-operational designs. It also provides information on various types of warnings, such as visual warning, auditory warnings, olfactory warnings, tactile warnings, and tastable warnings.

This article discusses the organization required at the outset of a failure investigation and provides a methodology with some organizational tools. It focuses on the use of problem-solving tools such as a fault tree analysis combined with critical thinking. The discussion covers nine steps to organize a good failure investigation. They are as follows: understand and negotiate goals of the investigation, obtain a clear understanding of the failure, identify all possible root causes, objectively evaluate the likelihood of each root cause, converge on the most likely root cause(s), objectively and clearly identify all possible corrective actions, objectively evaluate each corrective action, select optimal corrective action(s), and evaluate effectiveness of selected corrective action(s). Common problems detrimental to a failure investigation are also covered.

This article reviews the most common reasons for failures and the purpose of a failure investigation. It discusses the nine steps for the organization of a good failure investigation. The three basic tools that are helpful in any failure investigation, namely, a fault tree, a failure mode assessment chart, and a technical plan for resolution chart, are reviewed. The article briefly describes failure investigation pitfalls and concludes with information on the other common tools used for failure investigation and root cause determination.

Corrosion modeling is an essential benchmarking element for the selection and life prediction associated with the introduction of new materials or processes. These models are most naturally expressed in terms of differential equations or in other nonexplicit forms of mathematics. This article discusses the principles and applications of various models developed for understanding the corrosion mechanism. These models include mechanistic models, including Pourbaix model, thermophysical module, electrochemical module, and ion association model; risk-based models; and knowledge models. The risk-based model and knowledge models are illustrated with examples for better understanding. The article also describes boundary-element modeling and pitting corrosion fatigue models.