Risk priority number (RPN) is a commonly-used prioritization method in failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for systemic reliability and safety study. However, conventional RPN confronts wide criticisms, due to the neglect of the uncertainties of experts' opinions. It is important to handle the conflicts among experts' multi-opinions which could be described in imprecise, incomplete or crisp forms in lack of knowledge. In this paper, a novel method is proposed to alleviate and/or eliminate counter-intuitive behaviors against conflicts among multi-opinions under Dempster-Shafer theory. Firstly, the abnormity test for experts’ opinions is undertaken to identify and discard those distinct judgments. Then, an approach to determining the subjective weights of experts is proposed, which is used in weighted average for multi-opinions before calculating RPNs. Finally, the risk priority evaluation on main engine crankcase explosion failure on-board ship is implemented to verify the feasibility of the proposed approach.

风险优先级数（RPN）是故障模式和影响分析（FMEA）中用于系统可靠性和安全性研究的常用优先排序方法。然而，由于忽视了专家意见的不确定性，传统的RPN面临着广泛的批评。重要的是要处理专家的多观点之间的冲突，这些冲突可以在缺乏知识的情况下以不精确，不完整或清晰的形式描述。在本文中，提出了一种新的方法来缓解和/或消除在Dempster-Shafer理论下针对多观点之间的冲突的反直觉行为。首先，进行专家意见的异常检验，以识别和丢弃这些不同的判断。然后，提出了一种确定专家的主观权重的方法，在计算RPN之前，将其用于加权平均用于多观点。最后，对舰船主机曲轴箱爆炸故障进行风险优先评估，验证了该方法的可行性。