There are many reasons why plastic materials should not be considered for an application. It is the responsibility of the design/materials engineer to recognize when the expected demands are outside of what the plastic can provide during the expected life-time of the product. This article reviews the numerous considerations that are equally important to help ensure that part failure does not occur. It provides a quick review of thermoplastic and thermoset plastics. The article focuses primarily on thermoset materials that at room temperature are below their glass transition temperature. It describes the motivation for material selection and the goal of the material selection process. The use of material datasheets for material selection as well as the processes involved in plastic material selection and post material selection is also covered.

Manufacturing process selection is a critical step in plastic product design. The article provides an overview of the functional requirements that a part must fulfil before process selection is attempted. A brief discussion on the effects of individual thermoplastic and thermosetting processes on plastic parts and the material properties is presented. The article presents process effects on molecular orientation. It also illustrates the thinking that goes into the selection of processes for size, shape, and design factors. Finally, the article describes how various processes handle reinforcement.

This article presents the benefits of selecting plastics for products to be manufactured. It discusses the four key considerations for plastic part design: material, process, tooling, and design. The article provides a detailed discussion of the development sequence for plastic parts. The basis for the development sequence is twofold: first, to create the best solution for the application, and second, to minimize potential project risks through careful and thoughtful work habits.

A plastic bracket exhibited relatively brittle material properties, which ultimately led to catastrophic failure. The part had been injection molded from a medium-viscosity polycarbonate resin and had been in service for a short duration prior to the failure. Investigation (visual inspection and analysis using micro-FTIR in the ATR mode) revealed the spectrum showed changes in the relative intensities of several bands, as compared to the results representing the base material. A spectral subtraction was performed, and the results produced a good match with diphenyl carbonate, which is a common breakdown product produced during the decomposition of polycarbonate. The conclusion was that the most likely cause of the molecular degradation was improper drying and/or exposure to excessive heat during the injection molding process that in turn caused the material degradation.

Materials selection is an important engineering function in both the design and failure analysis of components. This article briefly reviews the general aspects of materials selection as a concern in proactive failure prevention during design and as a possible root cause of failed parts. It discusses the overall concept of design and describes the role of the materials engineer in the design and materials selection process. The article highlights the significance of materials selection in both the prevention and analysis of failures.

A broken aircraft crankshaft and a severely damaged main brass bearing were examined to determine whether engine failure was initiated in the bearing or in the crankshaft. The steel crankshaft failure was a classical fatigue fracture. The bearing had been subjected to extremely high temperatures, as indicated by melting in the brass components and the extreme distortion in the rollers. Microscopic examination on the crankshaft material showed it to be a good quality steel. On the other hand, the chromium plate was thick, porous, and cracked in many places, including the point of the main fatigue crack. It was concluded that the over-all failure was initiated in the crankshaft, and the failure of the bearing resulted from that failure.

Materials selection is closely related to the objectives of failure analysis and prevention. This article briefly reviews the general aspects of materials selection as a concern in both proactive failure prevention during design and as a possible root cause of failed parts. Coverage is more conceptual, with general discussions on the following topics: design and failure prevention, materials selection in design, materials selection for failure prevention, and materials selection and failure analysis. Because materials selection is just one part of the design process, the overall concept of design is discussed. The article also describes the role of the materials engineer in the design and materials selection process. It provides information on the significance of materials selection in both the prevention and analysis of failures.

The fracture cause had to be determined in a three-cylinder crankshaft made of chrome steel 34Cr4 (Material No. 1.7033) according to DIN 17200. The fracture occurred after only 150 h of operation. The fracture was of the bend fatigue type which originated in the fillet of the main bearing and ran across the jaw almost to the opposite fillet of the adjoining connecting rod bearing. The fillet was well rounded and smoothly machined. Thus, no reason for the fracture of the crankshaft could be found externally. No material defects were discernible in the origin or anywhere else. No cause for the crank fracture could be established from material testing. Probably the load was too high for the strength of the crank. Tensile strength could have been increased for the same material by tempering at lower temperature. Additionally, the resistance against high bend fatigue stresses or torsion fatigue stresses could have been increased substantially by including the fillet in the case hardening process.

One of the two AISI 4340 steel pitch horn bolts from the main rotor hub assembly failed while in service. Optical microscope revealed evidence of corrosion pitting in regions adjacent to the fracture. Fractographic examination utilizing a scanning electron microscope revealed multiple crack origins which assumed a “thumbnail” shape and displayed surface morphologies which resulted from intergranular decohesion. Many of the crack sites initiated from corrosion pits. Energy dispersive spectroscope performed on areas within the crack initiation site showed the presence of chlorides. The failure was attributed to stress-corrosion cracking. Short- and long-term recommendations to prevent future failures are given.

This article provides background information needed by design engineers to create part designs optimized for plastics and plastic manufacturing processes. It describes the four essential elements of plastic part development, namely, material, process, tooling, and design, and provides general design rules for the plastic forming processes covered. It also discusses the steps involved in design validation and verification.

This article provides assistance to a failure analyst in broadening the initial scope of the investigation of a physical engineering failure in order to identify the root cause of a problem. The engineering design process, including task clarification, conceptual design, embodiment design, and detail design, is reviewed. The article discusses the design process at the personal and project levels but takes into consideration the effects of some higher level influences and interfaces often found to contribute to engineering failures.

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 intent of this article is to assist the failure analyst in understanding the underlying engineering design process embodied in a failed component or system. It begins with a description of the mode of failure. This is followed by a section providing information on the root cause of failure. Next, the article discusses the steps involved in the engineering design process and explains the importance of considering the engineering design process. Information on failure modes and effects analysis is also provided. The article ends with a discussion on the consequence of management actions on failures.

This article focuses primarily on what an analyst should know about applying X-ray diffraction (XRD) residual stress measurement techniques to failure analysis. Discussions are extended to the description of ways in which XRD can be applied to the characterization of residual stresses in a component or assembly. The article describes the steps required to calibrate instrumentation and to validate stress measurement results. It presents a practical approach to sample selection and specimen preparation, measurement location selection, and measurement depth selection, as well as an outline on measurement validation. The article also provides information on stress-corrosion cracking and corrosion fatigue. The importance of residual stress in fatigue is described with examples. The article explains the effects of heat treatment and manufacturing processes on residual stress. It concludes with a section on the XRD stress measurements in multiphase materials and composites and in locations of stress concentration.

A bearing cup in a drive shaft assembly on an automobile was found to have failed. A detailed analysis was conducted using the QC story approach, which begins by proposing several possible failure scenarios then following them to determine the main root cause. A number of alternative solutions were identified and then validated based on chemical analysis, endurance and hardness tests, and microstructural examination. The investigation revealed that carbonitriding can effectively eliminate the type of failure encountered because it prevents through hardening of the bearing cup assembly.

Although field corrosion tests had indicated that type 316L stainless steel would be a suitable material for neutralization tanks, the vessels suffered severe corrosion when placed in service. Welded coupons of type 316L had been tested along with similar Alloy 20Cb® (UNS NO8020) specimens in a lead-lined tank equipped with copper coils that had served in this function prior to construction of the new tanks. Both materials exhibited virtually no corrosion and no preferential weld attack. Type 316L was selected for the project. The subsequent corrosion was the result of the borderline passivity of type 316L in hot dilute sulfuric acid (about 0.1%). Inaccuracy of the testing was attributed to the presence of cupric ions in the lead-lined vessel fluids, which had been released by corrosion of the copper coils. Careful control of both temperature and pH was recommended to reduce the corrosion to an acceptable limit.

One of five underground drain lines intended to carry a highly acidic effluent from a chemical-processing plant to distant holding tanks failed in just a few months. Each line was made of 304L stainless steel pipe 73 mm (2 in.) in diam with a 5 mm (0.203 in.) wall thickness. Lengths of pipe were joined by shielded metal arc welding. Soundness of the welded joints was determined by water back-pressure testing after several lengths of pipe had been installed and joined. Before completion of the pipeline, a pressure drop was observed during back-pressure testing. An extreme depression in the backfill revealed the site of failure. Analysis (visual inspection, electrical conductivity, and soil analysis) supported the conclusions that the failure had resulted from galvanic corrosion at a point where the corrosivity of the soil was substantially greater than the average, resulting in a voltage decrease near the point of failure of about 1.3 to 1.7 V. Recommendations included that the pipelines be asphalt coated and enclosed in a concrete trough with a concrete cover. Also, magnesium anodes, connected electrically to each line, should be installed at periodic intervals along their entire length to provide cathodic protection.

This case study demonstrates that Alloy 601 (UNS N06601) is susceptible to strain-age cracking. The observation illustrates the potential importance of post weld heat treatment to the successful utilization of this alloy in certain applications.

A brass elbow that formed one termination of a steam heating coil failed adjacent to the brazed connection after ten years of service. Chemical analysis showed that the elbow was made from a 60-40 CuZn brass containing 3% lead and 1% tin, a typical alloy used for the manufacture of components by the hot stamping process. Microscopic examination indicated failure from dezincification. The fact that the screwed end was not affected indicated that the trouble was not caused by the condensate, which flowed through the elbow, but originated from the water heated in the vessel. The helical mode of the cracking was probably due to the torsional stresses which would be imposed on the elbow by thermally induced movements of the coil in service.

Several cadmium-plated carbon steel socket head cap screws that were part of a slide valve assembly on a regenerator line in a petrochemical plant failed during initial loading. Metallographic and XDS chemical analysis in conjunction with SEM examination of one failed and one unfailed cap screw indicated that the screws had failed by hydrogen embrittlement. The plating process was the likely source of the hydrogen. It was recommended that the remainder of the cap screws from the same lot as the failed screws be baked at approximately 190 deg C (375 deg F) for 24 h.