Fig. 1 Example of a simple checklist and report for a simple part(cracking of a brace) Table 4 Structured decision-making and problem-solving methods for larger scale investigations Method Most useful in this type of analysis FMEA Used during design of component and the processes that are used to manufacture it Allows a structured approach to figuring out the consequences of failures of single features on a component or single steps in a processing sequence Decision analysis method for problem solving in complex systems and prioritizing Fault tree analyis An analysis method that provides a systematic description of the combinations of possible occurrences in a system that can result in failure It is a graphical representation of the boolean logic that relates to the output (top)event. Failure wheels Helpful in evaluating failures from a combination of factors or damage mechanism (see the article "Determination and classification of damage in this volume There are many approaches. Most of this work has been done in the nuclear and analysis chemical industries, in response to disastrous failures. It is also being used by medical administrators and many other fields. Commercial These exist for a variety of functions, including tracking the course of an investigation software tools and suggesting a course of action for the background data collection In many cases, particularly when litigation is or may be involved, it is preferable to define and document how the decision about the scope of the investigation is reached. Sometimes in litigation projects, there is eluctance to create documentation due to a fear that it may be used to create a negative perception regarding the conduct of the investigation. Such fears must be balanced against the potential negative perception created if the investigator cannot later describe exactly what was done, why it was done, and what findings were determined. At the very least, for situations involving loss of life, human injury, or large economic damage, the professional analyst takes action to document the test plan and what type of information is expected from each stel If the investigation is relevant only to those within a particular organization, such as an in-process failure sending a simple memo summarizing the test plan to those responsible for the product may be all that is necessary. In many investigations, especially during those of parts in process at a manufacturing plant, analysis of a similar part may be useful. Often the term control part is used This term implies that the similar part is free from any of the imperfections that might have contributed to the"failure. Often, however, very little is known about the reliability of the particular part supplied as a control. It may never have been in service. For this reason, it is often preferable to use a term such as exemplar component or comparison specimen As previously noted, a list of possible tests can be useful to ensure that nothing is unintentionally left out Beginners looking at the finished reports of experienced analysts might think that the experienced practitioners followed a list of steps. Some of them may have followed a list, and analytical service groups may try to sell their clients a package, which includes all the tests that they can perform. However, checklists only summarize and, like an executive summary, do not address all the detailed considerations of an investigation. One example of a relatively simple report summary is in Fig. 1. An example of a relatively limited test plan for a minor failure of a machine component due to fracture of a shaft is given in Table 5. This same table could serve for a much larger investigation. Instead of spending one or two hours on each activity, the analyst might spend three or ten or more hours on some of the activities, making sure that the locations evaluated are representative of the whole or characterizing the degree of variation from location to location Table 5 Example of a test protocol for a failure of minor economic importance Activity Purpose/objective Time frame Visual inspection and Determine general environment and condition of As soon as possible after photography of machine machine; determine whether crack was due to one failure and surroundings, subject or more load cycles, look for evidence of heat or shaft, and mating parts corrosion damage; find crack origin(s) Properly protect and place Prevent destruction of evidence As soon as possible after subject components in a initial inspection
Fig. 1 Example of a simple checklist and report for a simple part (cracking of a brace) Table 4 Structured decision-making and problem-solving methods for larger scale investigations Method Most useful in this type of analysis FMEA Used during design of component and the processes that are used to manufacture it. Allows a structured approach to figuring out the consequences of failures of single features on a component or single steps in a processing sequence Kepner Trego Decision analysis method for problem solving in complex systems and prioritizing Fault tree analyis An analysis method that provides a systematic description of the combinations of possible occurrences in a system that can result in failure. It is a graphical representation of the Boolean logic that relates to the output (top) event. Failure wheels Helpful in evaluating failures from a combination of factors or damage mechanism (see the article “Determination and Classification of Damage” in this Volume). Root cause analysis There are many approaches. Most of this work has been done in the nuclear and chemical industries, in response to disastrous failures. It is also being used by medical administrators, and many other fields. Commercial software tools These exist for a variety of functions, including tracking the course of an investigation and suggesting a course of action for the background data collection. In many cases, particularly when litigation is or may be involved, it is preferable to define and document how the decision about the scope of the investigation is reached. Sometimes in litigation projects, there is a reluctance to create documentation due to a fear that it may be used to create a negative perception regarding the conduct of the investigation. Such fears must be balanced against the potential negative perception created if the investigator cannot later describe exactly what was done, why it was done, and what findings were determined. At the very least, for situations involving loss of life, human injury, or large economic damage, the professional analyst takes action to document the test plan and what type of information is expected from each step. If the investigation is relevant only to those within a particular organization, such as an in-process failure, sending a simple memo summarizing the test plan to those responsible for the product may be all that is necessary. In many investigations, especially during those of parts in process at a manufacturing plant, analysis of a similar part may be useful. Often the term control part is used. This term implies that the similar part is free from any of the imperfections that might have contributed to the “failure.” Often, however, very little is known about the reliability of the particular part supplied as a control. It may never have been in service. For this reason, it is often preferable to use a term such as exemplar component or comparison specimen. As previously noted, a list of possible tests can be useful to ensure that nothing is unintentionally left out. Beginners looking at the finished reports of experienced analysts might think that the experienced practitioners followed a list of steps. Some of them may have followed a list, and analytical service groups may try to sell their clients a package, which includes all the tests that they can perform. However, checklists only summarize, and, like an executive summary, do not address all the detailed considerations of an investigation. One example of a relatively simple report summary is in Fig. 1. An example of a relatively limited test plan for a minor failure of a machine component due to fracture of a shaft is given in Table 5. This same table could serve for a much larger investigation. Instead of spending one or two hours on each activity, the analyst might spend three or ten or more hours on some of the activities, making sure that the locations evaluated are representative of the whole or characterizing the degree of variation from location to location. Table 5 Example of a test protocol for a failure of minor economic importance Activity Purpose/objective Time Frame Visual inspection and photography of machine and surroundings, subject shaft, and mating parts Determine general environment and condition of machine; determine whether crack was due to one or more load cycles, look for evidence of heat or corrosion damage; find crack origin(s) As soon as possible after failure Properly protect and place subject components in a Prevent destruction of evidence As soon as possible after initial inspection
rotected area Closer inspection of Confirm that crack was due to one or more load Before subsequent broken part. Selection of cycles; look for more subtle evidence of heat or destructive testing test locations corrosion damage, find crack origin(s); take better photos than may be possible outside of the lab allow the investigation to proceed Ultrasonic testing Document presence or absence and size and Before subsequent orientation of secondary cracks destructive testing Cut specimens Provide small specimens for destructive testing After all nondestructive testing near crack origin is complete Scanning electron Look for evidence of usual or unusual crack Before metallography microscopy(SEM) paths, manufacturing imperfections, or service Optical metallography Determine whether microstructure is consistent After scanning electron with expectations based on crack path evidence microscopy(SEM) Hardness or micro- Determine whether hardness values are consistent After optical metallography indentation hardness with apparent microstructure testing Composition verification Confirm that proper alloy is used If specimen is from a different location than crack origin, any time after nondestructive testing is Tensile test Confirm that mechanical properties are within If specimen is from a the expected ranges different location than crack origin, any time after nondestructive testing is An"Open-Mind/Open-Toolbox Approach. In order to cover a broad perspective on legitimate approaches to failure analysis, it should also be pointed out that some people obtain useful results in an efficient manner without referring to a list of test and evaluation procedures. Rather, keeping an open and inquisitive mind may allow the analyst to formulate a series of questions. In order to answer the questions, obviously, tests must be performed, and they must be performed in an appropriate order(from least destructive to more destructive) Formulating a series of questions based on the analyst's personal knowledge and ignorance is a good way to start to try to understand how the subject of the investigation failed. One step that should never be skipped without a good reason is the written list of activities and their associated specific purposes This approach is termed the open-mind/open-toolbox approach. It can be a flexible approach, and, when used by a competent analyst, is often the most efficient approach. Legal requirements for preservation of evidence may preclude use of this flexible approach in cases where physical or financial injury results from a failure However, it can be the most useful and appropriate approach for failures that occur during routine quality control or prototype or durability tests(where no third parties are injured), or when multiple exemplars of apparently similar failures are available. Even if the analyst is involved in a formal investigation with a protocol that is not very open to negotiation, he or she may still find the open-mind/open-toolbox approach to be a useful exercise before finalizing the investigation protocol a key element to understanding the open-mind/open-toolbox approach is realizing that a conceptual framework is, in an important sense, an investigative tool (Table 6). For example, understanding that the orientation of a fracture surface can indicate how the part was loaded allows one to insist that the protocol include the resources for a proper macrofractographic evaluation in a failure that was due to fracture. Fractography offers the conceptual basis for performing the visual examination. Someone familiar with the power of macrofractography would not leave this step out in any fracture-related failure. In the open-mind/open-toolbox approach, an investigative or analytical activity is selected because its cost in terms of money and time is likely to be favorably balanced by the information it provides(where information here is loosely defined as"useful data as distinct from just data). Information is not provided by the test alone. Information comes from the Thefileisdownloadedfromwww.bzfxw.com
protected area Closer inspection of broken part. Selection of test locations Confirm that crack was due to one or more load cycles; look for more subtle evidence of heat or corrosion damage; find crack origin(s); take better photos than may be possible outside of the lab; allow the investigation to proceed Before subsequent destructive testing Ultrasonic testing Document presence or absence and size and orientation of secondary cracks Before subsequent destructive testing Cut specimens Provide small specimens for destructive testing After all nondestructive testing near crack origin is complete Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) Look for evidence of usual or unusual crack paths, manufacturing imperfections, or service damage Before metallography Optical metallography Determine whether microstructure is consistent with expectations based on crack path evidence After scanning electron microscopy (SEM) Hardness or microindentation hardness testing Determine whether hardness values are consistent with apparent microstructure After optical metallography Composition verification Confirm that proper alloy is used If specimen is from a different location than crack origin, any time after nondestructive testing is complete Tensile test Confirm that mechanical properties are within the expected ranges If specimen is from a different location than crack origin, any time after nondestructive testing is complete An “Open-Mind/Open-Toolbox” Approach. In order to cover a broad perspective on legitimate approaches to failure analysis, it should also be pointed out that some people obtain useful results in an efficient manner without referring to a list of test and evaluation procedures. Rather, keeping an open and inquisitive mind may allow the analyst to formulate a series of questions. In order to answer the questions, obviously, tests must be performed, and they must be performed in an appropriate order (from least destructive to more destructive). Formulating a series of questions based on the analyst's personal knowledge and ignorance is a good way to start to try to understand how the subject of the investigation failed. One step that should never be skipped without a good reason is the written list of activities and their associated specific purposes. This approach is termed the open-mind/open-toolbox approach. It can be a flexible approach, and, when used by a competent analyst, is often the most efficient approach. Legal requirements for preservation of evidence may preclude use of this flexible approach in cases where physical or financial injury results from a failure. However, it can be the most useful and appropriate approach for failures that occur during routine quality control or prototype or durability tests (where no third parties are injured), or when multiple exemplars of apparently similar failures are available. Even if the analyst is involved in a formal investigation with a protocol that is not very open to negotiation, he or she may still find the open-mind/open-toolbox approach to be a useful exercise before finalizing the investigation protocol. A key element to understanding the open-mind/open-toolbox approach is realizing that a conceptual framework is, in an important sense, an investigative tool (Table 6). For example, understanding that the orientation of a fracture surface can indicate how the part was loaded allows one to insist that the protocol include the resources for a proper macrofractographic evaluation in a failure that was due to fracture. Fractography offers the conceptual basis for performing the visual examination. Someone familiar with the power of macrofractography would not leave this step out in any fracture-related failure. In the open-mind/open-toolbox approach, an investigative or analytical activity is selected because its cost in terms of money and time is likely to be favorably balanced by the information it provides (where information here is loosely defined as “useful data,” as distinct from just data). Information is not provided by the test alone. Information comes from the The file is downloaded from www.bzfxw.com
interpretation or evaluation of data. The tools of failure analysis are not just test machines and analytical instruments. The tools of failure analysis include test machines and analytical instruments and also conceptual tools. Conceptual tools that are essential in determining the cause of any given failure may vary. They include various pattern recognition skills (in the interpretation of macrofractographs, microfractographs, and metallographic images) and engineering and scientific knowledge based on physical metallurgy, polymer physics, solid-state physics, stress analysis, chemistry, and many other fields Table 6 Elements of the failure analyst's toolbox Use Mind cturing, storing and retrieving knowledge; planning investigation; conducting interviews: reviewing and integrating data and information Visual examination of subject components, the scene, the appearance of witnesses Communication skills Critical in investigation planning and interviewing of"witnesses, or even the person requesting an investigation Magnification tools(magnifying Detailed visual examination of subject components. Look for"witness glasses, binocular microscopes, marks"from impact events, evidence of abusive machining, burn close-up camera lenses, etc.) marks, corrosion or wear evidence, anything unusual, etc I The science and art of i Provides understanding of the sequence of a fracture event. Gives macrofractography information about relative stress levels and orientation of the loads and stresses Visual examination of The experienced corrosion specialist can often gain important clues environmental damage, about the damaging environmental factor from the appearance of the including corrosion corrosion product. Visual examination of wear The experienced wear specialist can often gain important clues about damage the type of wear, from both the appearance of the worn component and any adherent material Camera with macro(close-up) Document the appearance of the object before destructive testing lenses, appropriate lighting Documenting each step of destructive testing with photographs is sources sometimes required for litigation support work Nondestructive testing methods Including radiography, magnetic particle inspection, eddy current testing, dye penetrant inspection and other methods. Cracks, porosity and unsoundness of various types may be able to be detected withour cutting the part Microfractrography and other Microfractography may simply be used to add weight to a macro scale techniques with SEM, including determination of ductile or brittle behavior. Evidence for distinguishing localized chemical analysis intergranular from cleavage fracture is most easily obtained by this method. Fine characteristics of ductile dimples can reveal additional information not available with macroanalysis Fatigue striations can sometimes be measured with the seM. Energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS)or wavelength-dispersive spectroscopy (WDs) microchemical potential corrosion accelerants or products. Microfractography girl analysis is a powerful tool for microphase evaluation and evaluation additional information about the microstructure Metallography Evaluate microstructure, crack path, relation of preferred corrosion attack sites to microstructural phases; check for conformance to specification for some heat treated parts, etc. Mechanical tests Get measurements of actual strength values of various types. Useful to compare with specified values. Note: specified values are often based on ined from a fragment of a Composition analysis Determine if elements present in material used correspond with what is expected for the specified material. Note: may be difficult to obt
interpretation or evaluation of data. The tools of failure analysis are not just test machines and analytical instruments. The tools of failure analysis include test machines and analytical instruments and also conceptual tools. Conceptual tools that are essential in determining the cause of any given failure may vary. They include various pattern recognition skills (in the interpretation of macrofractographs, microfractographs, and metallographic images) and engineering and scientific knowledge based on physical metallurgy, polymer physics, solid-state physics, stress analysis, chemistry, and many other fields. Table 6 Elements of the failure analyst's toolbox Tool Use Mind Structuring, storing and retrieving knowledge; planning investigation; conducting interviews; reviewing and integrating data and information Eyes Visual examination of subject components, the scene, the appearance of witnesses Communication skills Critical in investigation planning and interviewing of “witnesses,” or even the person requesting an investigation. Magnification tools (magnifying glasses, binocular microscopes, close-up camera lenses, etc.) Detailed visual examination of subject components. Look for “witness marks” from impact events, evidence of abusive machining, burn marks, corrosion or wear evidence, anything unusual, etc. The science and art of macrofractography Provides understanding of the sequence of a fracture event. Gives information about relative stress levels and orientation of the loads and stresses. Visual examination of environmental damage, including corrosion The experienced corrosion specialist can often gain important clues about the damaging environmental factor from the appearance of the corrosion product. Visual examination of wear damage The experienced wear specialist can often gain important clues about the type of wear, from both the appearance of the worn component and any adherent material. Camera with macro (close-up) lenses, appropriate lighting sources Document the appearance of the object before destructive testing. Documenting each step of destructive testing with photographs is sometimes required for litigation support work. Nondestructive testing methods Including radiography, magnetic particle inspection, eddy current testing, dye penetrant inspection and other methods. Cracks, porosity, and unsoundness of various types may be able to be detected without cutting the part. Microfractrography and other techniques with SEM, including localized chemical analysis Microfractography may simply be used to add weight to a macro scale determination of ductile or brittle behavior. Evidence for distinguishing intergranular from cleavage fracture is most easily obtained by this method. Fine characteristics of ductile dimples can reveal additional information not available with macroanalysis. Fatigue striations can sometimes be measured with the SEM. Energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) or wavelength-dispersive spectroscopy (WDS) microchemical analysis is a powerful tool for microphase evaluation and evaluation of potential corrosion accelerants or products. Microfractography gives additional information about the microstructure. Metallography Evaluate microstructure, crack path, relation of preferred corrosion attack sites to microstructural phases; check for conformance to specification for some heat treated parts, etc. Mechanical tests Get measurements of actual strength values of various types. Useful to compare with specified values. Note: specified values are often based on different test geometry than can be obtained from a fragment of a “failed” component. Composition analysis Determine if elements present in material used correspond with what is expected for the specified material. Note: May be difficult to obtain
accurate values for carbon, for example, on carburized steel Understanding how the failure happened is also a big part of understanding why the failure happened Understanding why the failure happened is often a key objective of the analysis. It can be a big problem to wait until the end of the investigation, when one has a pile of test results obtained from a predetermined set of activities, to try to formulate opinions about how or why the failure has occurred. If it is not suspected that something could have happened, one is less likely to do the tests that could show whether it did or did not happen. Something as subtle as making the measurements 0.1 mm(0.004 in ) away from the preferred site may cause a fact to remain concealed There is no such thing as a quality investigation that is performed in ignorance of how the object is supposed to function and how it can malfunction. Knowledge of high-stress locations and operating conditions is critical to being able to draw useful and credible conclusions. While it is clearly important not to jump to conclusions before the testing is completed, it is also highly impractical in most cases to perform a competent analysis in the total absence of speculations about the manner and cause(s)of the ailure This is an important point, because many people believe that the failure analyst should operate" blindly"in order to avoid clouding his or her judgement. However, data may be interpreted in widely varying ways by different people, or even by the same person at different times or in different circumstances. This must be recognized in the overall context of how the failure happened and how the various participants (including the analyst) are acting. Clearly, the likely and alternative findings columns of Table 3 may be viewed differently by various participants, depending on the overall situation of how a failure might have happened The Failure Analysis Process: An Overview Debbie Aliya, Aliya Analytica Practices and Procedures The practices(and tools previously discussed, Table 6)that may be used by failure analysts are of many types and represent continuously developing knowledge of how to work in many diverse areas, including Selecting a test Selecting a specimen for a test Setting up a photograph to highlight a particular type of fracture feature Conducting an interview with a friendly person who wants to know what went wrong Conducting an interview with a defensive person who thinks that he or she may be blamed for the failur Analysis of a particular alloy or stress system or component type Like any activity requiring skills and knowledge, the"practice of practices"is also a lifetime effort, and probably most difficult, as it requires the ability to see around one's own mental filters The procedures of failure analysis are perhaps the easiest to define of the lists reviewed so far in this article Procedures are relatively straightforward sets of instructions intended to provide guidance in performing a particular action. a procedure to make and polish a micromount from a specimen, which has already been selected according to the principles of failure analysis and in accordance with the approach of the investigator, is quite straightforward. A procedure to measure the thickness of a piece of sheet metal is not difficult Procedures like these are easy to write and relatively easy to follow, after proper training. However, the importance of competent and careful technician work in failure analysis can hardly be overestimated. A sloppy technician who leaves scratches in micromounts can be excused if all that is needed is a grain size or a total case depth. If the desired datum is the crack path at the origin of the crack or the depth of a corrosion pit, careful attention to detail and pride of craftsmanship are necessities. General procedures for each of the hysical analysis steps in failure analysis are given in articles in the Section on"Tools and Techniques in Failure Analysis"in this Volume. Detailed procedures regarding equipment operation may be found in the equipment manuals Thefileisdownloadedfromwww.bzfxw.com
accurate values for carbon, for example, on carburized steel Understanding how the failure happened is also a big part of understanding why the failure happened. Understanding why the failure happened is often a key objective of the analysis. It can be a big problem to wait until the end of the investigation, when one has a pile of test results obtained from a predetermined set of activities, to try to formulate opinions about how or why the failure has occurred. If it is not suspected that something could have happened, one is less likely to do the tests that could show whether it did or did not happen. Something as subtle as making the measurements 0.1 mm (0.004 in.) away from the preferred site may cause a fact to remain concealed. There is no such thing as a quality investigation that is performed in ignorance of how the object is supposed to function and how it can malfunction. Knowledge of high-stress locations and operating conditions is critical to being able to draw useful and credible conclusions. While it is clearly important not to jump to conclusions before the testing is completed, it is also highly impractical in most cases to perform a competent analysis in the total absence of speculations about the manner and cause(s) of the failure. This is an important point, because many people believe that the failure analyst should operate “blindly” in order to avoid clouding his or her judgement. However, data may be interpreted in widely varying ways by different people, or even by the same person at different times or in different circumstances. This must be recognized in the overall context of how the failure happened and how the various participants (including the analyst) are acting. Clearly, the likely and alternative findings columns of Table 3 may be viewed differently by various participants, depending on the overall situation of how a failure might have happened. The Failure Analysis Process: An Overview Debbie Aliya, Aliya Analytical Practices and Procedures The practices (and tools previously discussed, Table 6) that may be used by failure analysts are of many types and represent continuously developing knowledge of how to work in many diverse areas, including: · Selecting a test · Selecting a specimen for a test · Setting up a photograph to highlight a particular type of fracture feature · Conducting an interview with a friendly person who wants to know what went wrong · Conducting an interview with a defensive person who thinks that he or she may be blamed for the failure · Analysis of a particular alloy or stress system or component type Like any activity requiring skills and knowledge, the “practice of practices” is also a lifetime effort, and probably most difficult, as it requires the ability to see around one's own mental filters. The procedures of failure analysis are perhaps the easiest to define of the lists reviewed so far in this article. Procedures are relatively straightforward sets of instructions intended to provide guidance in performing a particular action. A procedure to make and polish a micromount from a specimen, which has already been selected according to the principles of failure analysis and in accordance with the approach of the investigator, is quite straightforward. A procedure to measure the thickness of a piece of sheet metal is not difficult. Procedures like these are easy to write and relatively easy to follow, after proper training. However, the importance of competent and careful technician work in failure analysis can hardly be overestimated. A sloppy technician who leaves scratches in micromounts can be excused if all that is needed is a grain size or a total case depth. If the desired datum is the crack path at the origin of the crack or the depth of a corrosion pit, careful attention to detail and pride of craftsmanship are necessities. General procedures for each of the physical analysis steps in failure analysis are given in articles in the Section on “Tools and Techniques in Failure Analysis” in this Volume. Detailed procedures regarding equipment operation may be found in the equipment manuals. The file is downloaded from www.bzfxw.com
The person doing the technician work in a failure analysis must also have procedures that are specific to the components and alloys in question. It is very important to document specimen location, position, and orientation, in the absence of detailed preexisting procedures. For example, when testing an externally threaded fastener, the standard test position for a hardness test is a distance equivalent to one diameter in from the small end, at midradius. A common location for effective case depth on small gears is at the center of the gear thickness, at midheight of the tooth. The new technician may find it difficult to find terms to describe the position easily, but it is good practice to develop the analytical mind. In some cases, a sketch in the lab notebook may be an easier alternative Communications. The importance of developing communication skills also cannot be overestimated technician who does routine certification work can be taught how to do a task and go on with his or her With most failure analysis work, new decisions must be made each time a project is started. Some of these decisions may be as simple as figuring out how to clamp the part in the saw, without damaging the fracture surfaces, during microspecimen extraction. In this case, if the inexperienced technician knows how to listen carefully to a senior technician, things will probably work out satisfactorily The lead investigator in a complex investigation obviously requires much more developed communication skills, including specialized knowledge of how not to be misunderstood during a deposition or trial. Attorneys can make opposing experts look less knowledgeable than they are by asking if a certain reference is authoritative. If the expert answers yes, the attorney may proceed to give a" pop quiz"on any page in the reference. Obviously, most experts have not memorized all of the useful reference books that exist. In addition if something in the reference is in apparent conflict with something the expert has said, the attorney will be sure to point it out. Now the expert is in a rather weak position. a better description of any reference might be useful reference, or"widely used reference. "It may also be useful to point out that the issue is not just whether a reference, even the present Volume, is generally authoritative, but whether it is relevant and correct when applied to a specific situation. Failures that appear to be similar may have significantly different causes The Society for the Advancement of Science in Law has several publications on communications for expert witnesses that may be of use to those who do litigation support work. Several organizations also exist to train expert witnesses in self-defensive litigation communication skills In order to communicate effectively with people who request work, especially if the analyst is new to the field there are certain things of which he or she should be aware. These include basics of organizational structures, and the perspectives of the management who will use and evaluate the information provided by the analyst. It is worth being aware of trends in the legal climate, specifically issues regarding what the company wants employees to document and to refrain from documenting. In general, documentation should be complete and correct. There is no benefit, and in fact there is actual harm in retaining incomplete or unreliable information These issues are particularly important to the employee who sincerely wants to prevent recurrences of failures People who request the work may skim and file the report and may not take the action anticipated. Even errors that seem well documented to the analyst may not be convincing enough to change a mind that has decided no changes need to be made, the failure will not recur, and that in any case, it is too expensive to prevent any further failures. For example, just because the failure analyst performs an outstanding job on the latest investigation and shows that a simple change in procedure could reduce scrap by 50%, there is no guarantee that the simple change will be made. The International Organization for Standardization(ISo)9000 registration procedures require companies to adhere to a policy of decision making for the common good of humanity, so if a direct safety issue is involved, it may be easier to make changes than otherwise. However, these guidelines are not terribly specific. Scrap reduction, while clearly beneficial to both the bottom line and the environment (and thus humanity at large), may not appear to be mandated by these ISo procedures Many constraints make procedural changes difficult within an organization. One of these constraints may be the ISo 9000 procedures themselves. Before changes are made, extensive testing, evaluation, and multidepartment multilevel approvals may be required. This takes time. Because it often takes quite a long time, other priorities may push the change that was thought to be useful to a very low priority level. Other constraints may be related to budgetary considerations. There are many companies that have budgeted amounts for cost of scrap, but cannot get money shifted to a capital expenditure if a new piece of monitoring equipment is needed The failure analyst's work often takes a long time to be seen as valuable by fellow workers Another important concept that affects implementation of findings is that people learn in different ways. Some people absorb information easily while reading. Some have to hear a verbal presentation. Some need flashy graphic images. Some need to take a tour of the production line and actually watch the operation. while
The person doing the technician work in a failure analysis must also have procedures that are specific to the components and alloys in question. It is very important to document specimen location, position, and orientation, in the absence of detailed preexisting procedures. For example, when testing an externally threaded fastener, the standard test position for a hardness test is a distance equivalent to one diameter in from the small end, at midradius. A common location for effective case depth on small gears is at the center of the gear thickness, at midheight of the tooth. The new technician may find it difficult to find terms to describe the position easily, but it is good practice to develop the analytical mind. In some cases, a sketch in the lab notebook may be an easier alternative. Communications. The importance of developing communication skills also cannot be overestimated. The technician who does routine certification work can be taught how to do a task and go on with his or her work. With most failure analysis work, new decisions must be made each time a project is started. Some of these decisions may be as simple as figuring out how to clamp the part in the saw, without damaging the fracture surfaces, during microspecimen extraction. In this case, if the inexperienced technician knows how to listen carefully to a senior technician, things will probably work out satisfactorily. The lead investigator in a complex investigation obviously requires much more developed communication skills, including specialized knowledge of how not to be misunderstood during a deposition or trial. Attorneys can make opposing experts look less knowledgeable than they are by asking if a certain reference is “authoritative.” If the expert answers “yes,” the attorney may proceed to give a “pop quiz” on any page in the reference. Obviously, most experts have not memorized all of the useful reference books that exist. In addition, if something in the reference is in apparent conflict with something the expert has said, the attorney will be sure to point it out. Now the expert is in a rather weak position. A better description of any reference might be “useful reference,” or “widely used reference.” It may also be useful to point out that the issue is not just whether a reference, even the present Volume, is generally authoritative, but whether it is relevant and correct when applied to a specific situation. Failures that appear to be similar may have significantly different causes. The Society for the Advancement of Science in Law has several publications on communications for expert witnesses that may be of use to those who do litigation support work. Several organizations also exist to train expert witnesses in self-defensive litigation communication skills. In order to communicate effectively with people who request work, especially if the analyst is new to the field, there are certain things of which he or she should be aware. These include basics of organizational structures, and the perspectives of the management who will use and evaluate the information provided by the analyst. It is worth being aware of trends in the legal climate, specifically issues regarding what the company wants employees to document and to refrain from documenting. In general, documentation should be complete and correct. There is no benefit, and in fact there is actual harm in retaining incomplete or unreliable information. These issues are particularly important to the employee who sincerely wants to prevent recurrences of failures. People who request the work may skim and file the report and may not take the action anticipated. Even errors that seem well documented to the analyst may not be convincing enough to change a mind that has decided no changes need to be made, the failure will not recur, and that in any case, it is too expensive to prevent any further failures. For example, just because the failure analyst performs an outstanding job on the latest investigation and shows that a simple change in procedure could reduce scrap by 50%, there is no guarantee that the simple change will be made. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9000 registration procedures require companies to adhere to a policy of decision making for the common good of humanity, so if a direct safety issue is involved, it may be easier to make changes than otherwise. However, these guidelines are not terribly specific. Scrap reduction, while clearly beneficial to both the bottom line and the environment (and thus humanity at large), may not appear to be mandated by these ISO procedures. Many constraints make procedural changes difficult within an organization. One of these constraints may be the ISO 9000 procedures themselves. Before changes are made, extensive testing, evaluation, and multidepartment, multilevel approvals may be required. This takes time. Because it often takes quite a long time, other priorities may push the change that was thought to be useful to a very low priority level. Other constraints may be related to budgetary considerations. There are many companies that have budgeted amounts for cost of scrap, but cannot get money shifted to a capital expenditure if a new piece of monitoring equipment is needed. The failure analyst's work often takes a long time to be seen as valuable by fellow workers. Another important concept that affects implementation of findings is that people learn in different ways. Some people absorb information easily while reading. Some have to hear a verbal presentation. Some need flashy graphic images. Some need to take a tour of the production line and actually watch the operation. While a