Suspension lugs fabricated from AISI 4340 steel used to facilitate loading of bombs onto the underside of military aircraft could not sustain required loads during routine proof load testing. Three failed lugs underwent visual examination, chemical analysis, metallography, hardness testing, scanning electron microscopy, and energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy. It was determined that the failures were due to forging defects. Both forging laps and seams acted as stress concentrators when the lugs were loaded during proof testing.

This article provides an overview of metal additive manufacturing (AM) processes and describes sources of failures in metal AM parts. It focuses on metal AM product failures and potential solutions related to design considerations, metallurgical characteristics, production considerations, and quality assurance. The emphasis is on the design and metallurgical aspects for the two main types of metal AM processes: powder-bed fusion (PBF) and directed-energy deposition (DED). The article also describes the processes involved in binder jet sintering, provides information on the design and fabrication sources of failure, addresses the key factors in production and quality control, and explains failure analysis of AM parts.

This article examines the concept of fractography as applied to elastomeric rubbery materials. It considers four general categories of physical root failure causes: design defects, material defects, manufacturing defects, and service life anomalies. Examples of real-world failures of rubber articles, with numerous accompanying figures, are representative of the four root failure categories.

This article discusses the three legal theories on which a products liability lawsuit is based and the issues of hazard, risk, and danger in the context of liability. It describes manufacturing and design defects of various products. The article explains a design that is analyzed from the human factors viewpoint and details the preventive measures of the defects, with examples. It presents four paramount questions relating to the probability of injury which are asked even when one executes all possible preventive measures carefully and thoroughly.

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the cause of the ultrasonic signal attenuation noted during an inspection of a composite aircraft component. Although ultrasonics was able to identify the location of the defective areas, destructive analysis had to be utilized to determine the exact nature of the defect. The investigation describes how cross-sectioning, fractography, and chemical analysis were utilized to determine the type of defect responsible for the signal attenuation.

A commercial hybrid-iron golf club fractured during normal use. The club fractured through its cast aluminum alloy hosel. Optical analysis revealed casting pores through 20% of the hosel thickness. Mechanical properties were determined from characterization results, then used to construct a finite element model to analyze material performance under failure conditions. In addition, a full scale structural test was conducted to determine failure strength. It was concluded that the club failed not from ground impact but from a force reversal at the bottom of the downswing. Large moments generated during the downswing aggravated by manufacturing defects and stress concentration combined to create an overload condition.

A ductile iron T-hook hook was reported to have fractured in service. It was further reported that the hook had been subjected to a load that did not exceed 5900 kg (13,000 lb) at the time of fracture. No information was provided regarding the type of metal used to manufacture the hook. A failure analysis was requested to determine the cause of fracture. Two hooks were submitted for examination. Analysis (visual inspection, 2.7x light fractography, chemical analysis, 110x SEM fractography, 27x/110x/215x nital-etched micrographs) supported the conclusions that this component fractured in service as a consequence of ductile tensile overload. Evidence indicates that the fractured region was subjected to a load exceeding the capacity of the material. Because the information available from the service application indicated that the component had not been subjected to a stress that exceeded 5900 kg (13,000 lb), the observations made in this investigation suggested that either the load was underestimated or that the indicated load was applied at a more rapid rate (perhaps with a jerk), which would tend to increase the effective force of the load.

The purpose of this article is to assist the reader in understanding the role that an engineering expert witness plays in evaluating incidents related to product liability, so that he or she may become better acquainted with the role that an engineer plays in such litigation. The topics covered are admissibility of expert opinions, how to evaluate data, factual evidence, mandatory and voluntary standards, physical evidence, medical records, scientific literature, design decisions evaluation, environment of use, user's contribution, reports of opposing experts, report of findings, and deposition and trial testimonies.

Two slitting saw blades were delivered for the purpose of determining the cause of damage. One had cracked while the other one came from a prior sheet delivery, that had less tendency to crack formation according to the manufacturer. The blades were supposed to have been stamped out of a sheet made from a 55 kp/sq mm strength steel. The saw blades were used for separating steel profiles at high rotational speeds. The cracks in question were located at the base of the teeth, i.e. at the point of highest operating stress. Metallographic examination showed that all cracks were non-decarburized and were free of chromium deposits. Therefore they could not have existed before heat treatment and chrome plating. It was concluded that the damage was due neither to poor quality of the sheet nor to defective stamping or heat treatment, but had occurred later either during surface treatment or during operation.

Breech bolt assemblies from the Gatling guns used on fighter aircraft failed during firing tests. Metallography of the failed components revealed considerable decarburization which resulted in a loss of surface hardness. It was also determined that the maraging steel components were not in the nitrided condition as was required. This resulted in lower wear and fatigue resistance. These components also had a silicon content nearly double of that specified. The high silicon content lowered the notch tensile strength and toughness of the components.

Two large tension springs fractured during installation. The springs were manufactured from a grade 9254 chromium-silicon steel spring wire. The associated material specification allows wire in the cold-drawn or oil-tempered (quenched-and-tempered) condition. The specified wire tensile strength range was 1689 to 1793 MPa (245 to 260 ksi). The finished springs were to be shot peened for greater fatigue resistance. Investigation (visual inspection, 3x images, 2% nital etched 148x SEM images, chemical analysis, hardness testing, and EDS analysis) supported the conclusion that the springs failed during installation due to the presence of preexisting defects. Crack surfaces were found to be corroded and phosphate coated, indicating that the cracks occurred during manufacture. Installation, which presumably entailed some axial extension, resulted in ductile overload failure at the crack sites. Recommendations included evaluating the manufacturing steps to identify the process(es) wherein the cracking was likely occurring. It was further recommended that a suitable nondestructive method such as magnetic particle inspection be implemented.

The goal of using nondestructive evaluation (NDE) in conjunction with failure analysis is to obtain the most comprehensive set of data in order to characterize the details of the damage and determine the factors that allowed the damage to occur. The NDE results can be used to determine optimal areas upon which to focus for sectioning and metallography in order to further investigate the condition of the component. This article provides information on the inspection method available for failure analysis, including standard methods such as visual testing, penetrant testing, and magnetic particle testing. It covers the effects of various factors on the properties of the part that may impact failure analysis, describes the characterization of damage modes and crack sizes, and finally discusses the processes involved in application of NDE results to failure analysis.

This article is a compilation of terms related to analysis and prevention of engineering failures.

After several years' use, an eyebolt suffered brittle fracture in the first turn of the thread. The fracture started at the notch at the root of the thread. Neither localized material defect nor an old crack were present. The investigation showed that instead of the specified steel quality St 37-2 N, a steel with about 0.5% C had been used. The microstructure with the coarse ferrite network indicated that the forged eye bolt had been normalized either at too high a temperature or not at all. In any case the anneal at 900 deg C produced a considerably more finely grained structure. In addition, the nature of the fracture and the results of the notched bar impact tests showed that in spite of the high C-content, the eye bolt had become brittle as a result of aging.

A new supplier for aluminum die castings was being evaluated, and the castings failed to meet the durability test requirements. Specifically, the fatigue life of the castings was low. Initial inspection of the fatigue fracture surfaces revealed large-scale porosity visible to the naked eye. New castings with reduced porosity also failed the durability tests. The fatigue fracture surfaces of additional casting fragments were very rough and contained multiple ratchet marks along the inner fillet. These observations indicated the fatigue process was heavily influenced by the presence of surface imperfections. Improving the surface finish or choosing a stronger alloy, were more likely to improve part durability than reducing the porosity.

Two silica phenolic nozzle liners cracked during proof testing. The test consisted of pressuring the nozzles to 14.1 MPa (2050 psia) for 5 to 20 s. It was concluded that the failure was due to longitudinal cracking in the convergent exhaust-nozzle insulators, stemming from the use of silica phenolic tape produced from flawed materials that went undetected by the quality control tests, which at the time, assessed tape strength properties in the warp rather than the bias direction. Once the nozzle manufacturer and its suppliers identified the problem, they changed their quality control procedures and resumed production of nozzle liners with more tightly controlled fiber/fabric materials.

This article discusses technologies focused on processing plastic materials or producing direct tools used in plastics processing. The article focuses on extrusion and injection molding, covering applications, materials and their properties, equipment, processing details, part design guidelines, and special processes. It also covers the functions of the extruder, webline handling, mixing and compounding operations, and process troubleshooting. Thermoforming and mold design are covered. Various other technologies for polymer processing covered in this article are blow molding, rotational molding, compression molding, transfer molding, hand lay-up process, casting, and additive manufacturing.

A steering knuckle used on an earthmover failed in service. The component fractured into a flange portion and a shaft portion. The flange was 27.9 cm (11 in.) in diam around which there were 12 evenly spaced 16 mm diam bolt holes. The shaft was hollow with a 10.5 cm (4 in.) OD and a wall thickness of 17 mm. The steering knuckle was made of 4340 steel and heat treated to a hardness of about 415 HRB (yield strength of about 1069 MPa, or 155 ksi). The vehicle had been involved in a field accident six months before the steering knuckle failed. Several components, including portions of the frame, had been damaged and replaced, but there was no observed damage to the steering. Analysis supported the conclusion that the fracture was the result of the prior accident, the most likely explanation being that the shaft was bent and that continued use caused a crack to initiate and propagate to fracture. No evidence of a defective design, improper microstructure, high inclusion count, or other stress-raising condition was observed. No recommendations were made.

Because of the tough engineering environment of the railroad industry, fatigue is a primary mode of failure. The increased competitiveness in the industry has led to increased loads, reducing the safety factor with respect to fatigue life. Therefore, the existence of corrosion pitting and manufacturing defects has become more important. This article presents case histories that are intended as an overview of the unique types of failures encountered in the freight railroad industry. The discussion covers failures of axle journals, bearings, wheels, couplers, rails and rail welds, and track equipment.