A quick "old man" rant:
Bicycle wise: I have one in my barn that I admit I haven't used in quite a few years. I'm not worried about corrosion should I decide to have the bike "restored' or rebuilt, all it really should be new tires. The last thing I would think about is the frame actually failing due to internal corrosion.
General: An Ohio "ride" at a state fair. The is sides of the ride's arms. There was no way to inspect them. Over the years the rides arms did, in fact, rust snd corrode. tFinally an arm broke, a person was killed.
DFEMA should address each of these. If, for example, the likelyhood of a bike frame failure would be anywhere near "common" or potentially a potential cause of a serious injury, it should be in the design
FMEA.
Even using historical data for failure rate (this never has never happened), potential failures should, in my opinion, be part of a
DFMEA. True, in the Ohio fair ride case, I can understand that the original designers didn't consider this as a potential failure mode. It surely will be now. I also read that the ride's manufacturer has recalled all of the rides to cut in an inspection port.