Pelican Parts Forums - Help Me Break Failure Down Into Its Simplest Parts...

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Help Me Break Failure Down Into Its Simplest Parts... (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/394279-help-me-break-failure-down-into-its-simplest-parts.html)

Help Me Break Failure Down Into Its Simplest Parts...

I was trying to explain failure the other day during a seminar I was giving. Basically all failure modes can be broken down (sorry for the pun) into a few basic conditions. Here is what I came up with. Mind you, it is part original and part known stuff floating around in very materials engineering textbook. I don't think I am missing anything let me know what you think and if you can back-up your arguement then I will include it in my next seminar!

Quote:

I figuer there are four sources of failure – man, method, machine and material.

From these four sources spring forth the manifestations of failure. There are hundreds of reference books dedicated to failure analysis. Many of these texts are rich with equations, explanations and examples of hundreds of failure modes. After reading through a few dozen of these it became very obvious that failure can be broken down into basic elements regardless of the item.

Every failure is a combination of a change and an influence as well as a cadence, articulation and affect. Thousands of combinations can be the culprit which makes failure analysis an almost impossible effort unless you were to break it down to basic elements.

Various items fail for different reasons. When something fails or breaks, it is doing so because of the following physical Change:
• Deformation
• Fracture
• Rupture
• Molecular Transformation

Change occurs because of the following Environmental Influence:
• Force
• Temperature
• Time
• Chemical

These Influences have a Cadence:
• Steady
• Random
• Cyclic

The Cadence can have variations of Articulation:
• Amplitude (strong to weak)
• Frequency (fast to slow).

All of which Affect:
• Surface and work inward
• Inside and work outward
• Entire part, material, device or tool all at once.

Failure can have one or more primary Changes and Influences as well as one or more secondary Changes and Influences.

Failure can be a combination of several influences which alone would not facilitate change but in concert would bring about a manifestation of failure.

Describing the failure mode considers all of these. If a part fails on the surface due to a slow, steady, chemical / molecular transformation it may have experienced surface rust. That’s a rather long-winded description for something that is very common and understood with two words but the taximetrics of failure are actually very important in understanding, categorizing and potentially eliminating the opportunity for failure.

So whats missing?

Stupid is as stupid does.

I attribute failure to a genetic predisposition toward sloth. At least, that's what my wife says (in so many words).

If you're looking for a test subject just drop me a line.

I'm going with the sloth thing too.

I'm glad you guys ain't any of my students! Then again, if you paid I could care less...

MISS-APPLICATION.
Using a machine in a way other than what it was designed for.

Cannot help,but this sloth learned something.
Rika

Physical degradation/abrasion.

ex. The relentless and consistent wearing down of a mans soul by an unloving and sexually frigid woman. :D

Deconstructionism is a failure.

;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sammyg2 (Post 3785226)

MISS-APPLICATION.
Using a machine in a way other than what it was designed for.

good one - but that would be basically a failure of the man and maybe method only and not the machine or material - but I like the way you think.

Moving out a little more globally (away from a focus on structural failure), failure can be defined as not meeting specifications.

A machine that never breaks or corrodes could be considered a failure if it is too heavy, too expensive, or too inefficient is the use of energy.

I propose that all failures of man made artifacts are ultimately traceable to man and his lack of knowledge of system boundary conditions, material properties, and all possible permutations of conditions in complex systems (control software failures).

Failure to compose or apply the proper specifications is the root of many failures.

Misuse or abuse of a system is merely a matter of definition and expectations.
Most would consider wear out of an internal combustion engine in one or two thousand cycles a failure. However, this is the typical lifetime of a high performance artillery piece barrel which is merely a highly loaded internal combustion engine.

Ah yes, the gremlin. Better make that five sources of failure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Sims (Post 3785563)

Jim, I agree with you 100%! That is the basis of my work...

I realize you're teaching about Lubes, Lube, but to the topic, my two cents:

Failure is a Winners sport.

Best thing a parent can teach their kids is "how to fail"

- Rob McKibbon, Author

ah, OK true. I do teach a little about lubes but actually I do the majority of my work in the field of reliability and cost reduction.

You should have a picture of me on a blackboard and tap it with your pointy little stick and say this is the eptimoe of a walking talking failure in life. To be avoided at all costs.

ah, OK, I guess I could do that...

So, by the looks of it, I think I have got'n to the heart of the matter? I didn't leave anything out?

I knew I could rely on the brain trust of the bored.