Search Results for information

As a failure investigation progresses, the time arrives when the data and results of the various testing and analyses are compiled, compared, and interpreted. Data interpretation should be relatively straightforward for results that align well. However, interpretation can be challenging when results from various tests seem contradictory or inconclusive. Regardless, conclusions must eventually be drawn from the data. This article discusses the processes involved in reviewing data, formulating conclusions, failure analysis report preparation and writing, and providing recommendations and follow-up with appropriate personnel to prevent future failures.

This article focuses on the general methods and approaches from the perspective of a reconstruction analyst and includes discussions relevant to materials failure analysts at the incident scene. The elements of accident reconstruction are described. These have conceptual similarity with the principles for failure analysis of material incidents that are less complex than a large-scale accident. The article provides a brief review of some general concepts on the use of modeling which can be a very powerful tool for information pertaining to the reconstruction of an accident where the model can be a physical, mathematical, or logical representation of a physical system or process.

Failure analysis is the process used to determine the cause of a failure. There is no definitive method for performing a failure analysis, and the method chosen is dependent upon the type of failure, the availability of background information, the tools available to perform the analysis, and the skills of the analyst. The information outlined in this article focuses on the general methodology while allowing for case-specific techniques to be utilized along the way. It covers the causes of failure, why a failure analysis is performed, the failure analysis process, the planning of failure analysis investigation, recommendations to prevent the need for a failure analysis, the implementation of product reviews, and forensic standards.

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.

Failure analysis is generally defined as the investigation and analysis of parts or structures that have failed or appeared to have failed to perform their intended duty. Methods of field inspection and initial examination are also critical factors for both reconstruction analysts and materials failure analysts. This article focuses on the general methods and approaches from the perspective of a reconstruction analyst. It describes the elements of accident reconstruction, which have conceptual similarity with the principles for failure analysis of material incidents that are less complex than a large-scale accident. The approach presented is that the analysis and reconstruction is based on the physical evidence. The article provides a brief review of some general concepts on the use and limitations of advanced data acquisition tools and computer modeling. Legal implications of destructive testing are discussed in detail.

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.

This article focuses on failure analyses of aircraft components from a metallurgical and materials engineering standpoint, which considers the interdependence of processing, structure, properties, and performance of materials. It discusses methodologies for conducting aircraft investigations and inspections and emphasizes cases where metallurgical or materials contributions were causal to an accident event. The article highlights how the failure of a component or system can affect the associated systems and the overall aircraft. The case studies in this article provide examples of aircraft component and system-level failures that resulted from various factors, including operational stresses, environmental effects, improper maintenance/inspection/repair, construction and installation issues, manufacturing issues, and inadequate design.

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.

Three spur gears made from 8622 Ni-Cr-Mo alloy steel formed a straight-line train in a speed reducer on a rail-mounted overslung lumber carrier. The gears were submitted for nondestructive examination and evaluation, with no accompanying information or report. Two teeth on one of the gears were found to be pitted, one low on profile and the adjacent tooth high on profile. The mating gear had a similar characteristic, two adjacent teeth with evidence of pitting and the same difference in profile. It was correctly deduced that the pitting occurred because the gears were in a static position under a reverberating load for an extended period of time.

Failure analysis is a process that is performed to determine the causes or factors that have led to an undesired loss of functionality. This article describes some of the factors and conditions that might be considered when approaching a failure analysis problem. It focuses on the key principles, objectives, practices, and procedures of failure analysis. The article provides guidelines on the preparation of a protocol for a failure analysis. It also demonstrates the proper approaches to failure analysis.

Failure analysis is a process that is performed in order to determine the causes or factors that have led to an undesired loss of functionality. This article is intended to demonstrate proper approaches to failure analysis work. The goal of the proper approach is to allow the most useful and relevant information to be obtained. The discussion covers the principles and approaches in failure analysis work, objectives and scopes of failure analysis, the planning stages for failure analysis, the preparation of a protocol for a failure analysis, practices used by failure analysts, and procedures of failure analysis.

This article covers the three most popular techniques used to characterize the very outermost layers of solid surfaces: Auger electron spectroscopy (AES), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (TOF-SIMS). Some of the more important attributes are listed for preliminary insight into the strengths and limitations of these techniques for chemical characterization of surfaces. The article describes the basic theory behind each of the different techniques, the types of data produced from each, and some typical applications. Also discussed are the different types of samples that can be analyzed and the special sample-handling procedures that must be implemented when preparing to do failure analysis using these surface-sensitive techniques. Data obtained from different material defects are presented for each of the techniques. The examples presented highlight the typical data sets and strengths of each technique.

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.

A large fan assembly deformed and broke at multiple locations. The user wanted to know whether the bearing pillow block fracture caused the fan blade assembly to crack, or whether a fan blade assembly fracture caused the pillow block to crack. Close inspection of the entire length of the crack showed the crack probably grew quite a while before it was large enough to cause the final catastrophic event. No evidence of fatigue cracks was visible on the broken pillow blocks. In the absence of some other contradictory information, the usual conclusion would be to presume that the fatigue crack predated the single overload crack.