Failure Analysis Skill
Purpose
The Failure Analysis skill provides systematic methodology for investigating mechanical component failures, enabling root cause identification through fractography, metallography, stress analysis, and structured problem-solving approaches.
Capabilities
- Fractography interpretation (SEM, optical)
- Metallographic examination guidance
- Root cause analysis frameworks (5-Why, Fishbone)
- Failure mode identification (fatigue, corrosion, overload)
- Stress analysis correlation to failure location
- Chemical analysis interpretation
- Corrective action development
- Failure analysis report generation
Usage Guidelines
Investigation Process
Phase 1: Evidence Preservation
-
Documentation
- Photograph failed components as-received
- Document orientation and assembly position
- Record operating conditions at failure
- Preserve all fragments
-
Chain of Custody
- Log all handling
- Secure storage
- Controlled access
- Document any cleaning or cutting
Phase 2: Visual Examination
-
Macroscopic Features | Feature | Indication | |---------|------------| | Beach marks | Fatigue | | Chevron marks | Brittle fracture | | Shear lips | Ductile overload | | Corrosion products | Environmental attack | | Wear patterns | Tribological failure |
-
Fracture Origin
- Identify initiation site
- Look for stress concentrations
- Check for material defects
- Document surface conditions
Phase 3: Fractography
-
Optical Microscopy
- Low magnification overview
- Document fracture features
- Identify regions of interest
-
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) | Fracture Feature | Failure Mode | |------------------|--------------| | Striations | Fatigue crack growth | | Dimples | Ductile overload | | Cleavage facets | Brittle fracture | | Intergranular | Creep, SCC, hydrogen | | Quasi-cleavage | Mixed mode |
-
EDS Analysis
- Identify corrosion products
- Detect contamination
- Verify material composition
Phase 4: Metallography
-
Sample Preparation
- Section perpendicular to fracture
- Mount in appropriate media
- Grind and polish
- Select appropriate etchant
-
Examination
- Grain structure
- Heat treatment condition
- Inclusions and defects
- Microcracking
- Decarburization
Failure Mode Identification
Fatigue Failure
Characteristics:
- Beach marks (macroscopic)
- Striations (microscopic)
- Origin at stress concentration
- Minimal plastic deformation
- Flat fracture surface
Contributing Factors:
- Cyclic loading
- Stress concentration
- Residual stress
- Material defects
- Environmental effects
Overload Failure
Ductile:
- Significant plastic deformation
- Cup-and-cone fracture (tensile)
- Shear lips
- Dimpled fracture surface
Brittle:
- Little plastic deformation
- Flat fracture surface
- Chevron marks pointing to origin
- Cleavage or intergranular fracture
Corrosion Failures
| Type | Characteristics | Environment | |------|-----------------|-------------| | Uniform | General metal loss | Acids, bases | | Pitting | Localized attack | Chlorides | | SCC | Branching cracks | Specific ion + stress | | Corrosion fatigue | Accelerated fatigue | Cyclic + corrosive | | Hydrogen embrittlement | Intergranular fracture | Hydrogen source |
Wear Failures
| Type | Mechanism | Evidence | |------|-----------|----------| | Adhesive | Material transfer | Galling, scoring | | Abrasive | Hard particle cutting | Grooves, scratches | | Erosive | Fluid/particle impact | Surface damage pattern | | Fretting | Small amplitude motion | Oxide debris, pitting |
Root Cause Analysis
5-Why Method
Problem: Shaft failure
Why 1: Fatigue fracture
Why 2: High stress concentration at keyway
Why 3: Sharp corner radius
Why 4: Drawing did not specify radius
Why 5: Design review did not catch omission
Root Cause: Inadequate design review process
Fishbone Diagram Categories
- Material: Composition, defects, properties
- Machine: Equipment condition, maintenance
- Method: Process, procedure, design
- Man: Training, error, supervision
- Environment: Temperature, humidity, contamination
- Measurement: Calibration, accuracy
Process Integration
- ME-016: Failure Analysis Investigation
Input Schema
{
"failed_component": {
"part_number": "string",
"material": "string",
"service_history": "string",
"failure_date": "date"
},
"operating_conditions": {
"loads": "string",
"environment": "string",
"temperature": "number (C)",
"cycles_or_hours": "number"
},
"available_evidence": {
"fracture_surfaces": "boolean",
"mating_parts": "boolean",
"lubricant_samples": "boolean",
"maintenance_records": "boolean"
},
"analysis_scope": "preliminary|comprehensive"
}
Output Schema
{
"failure_mode": "fatigue|overload|corrosion|wear|other",
"root_cause": "string",
"contributing_factors": "array",
"evidence_summary": {
"visual": "string",
"fractography": "string",
"metallography": "string",
"chemical": "string"
},
"corrective_actions": [
{
"action": "string",
"category": "design|material|process|maintenance",
"priority": "high|medium|low"
}
],
"preventive_recommendations": "array",
"report_reference": "string"
}
Best Practices
- Preserve evidence before any destructive examination
- Document all observations photographically
- Follow systematic investigation process
- Consider multiple failure mechanisms
- Correlate fracture features with stress analysis
- Validate root cause with evidence
Integration Points
- Connects with FEA Structural for stress analysis
- Feeds into Material Selection for improved materials
- Supports Design Review for lessons learned
- Integrates with Quality for corrective actions