Uncategorized

Failure Analysis Essay

Posted by author-avatar
On July 9, 2021
0 comments

ABET Competency Objectives (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems

(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility

(g) an ability to communicate effectively

(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context

Writing and Submission Requirements

Length:     700 words, minimum

Format:     IEEE manuscript form (columns not necessary); double spaced, pg #s in upper left, title, headings should be both labeled and numbered

Submission:        Turn text in to E-Learning as an attached document in Word format (.docx). Name the file using your full name and the name of the assignment (e.g.: Emory Smith FA Case Analysis.docx).

Assignment Prompt and Context

Failure Analysis (FA) is both a preventative process and forensic tool in engineering. FA is used during the design and development phase of a product, process, or service to systematically anticipate potential points of failure and correct them before the product is released to the consumer. As a forensic process, FA is used to diagnose actual failures and recommend solutions. For both kinds of FA, “standards” may be employed to guide decisions.

Famous cases of engineering failure include the Challenger Shuttle Disaster, the I-35W Mississippi Bridge collapse in Minneapolis, MN, and more recently, the I-85 bridge collapse and fire in Atlanta, GA. Every day, though, engineering failures happen all over the world, both big and small, with damage ranging from minimal to catastrophic. Failures may be due to manufacturing decisions (e.g., using a lower quality material to cut costs), use violations (the consumer uses the item in an incorrect manner, e.g., pushing a machine past capacity), or unexpected environmental conditions (e.g., extreme weather events or unanticipated air flow through a building). FA as a process is at the heart of balancing production and performance in engineering.

In this paper, you will report on an engineering failure in your field and make recommendations for how this failure can be prevented in the future. This failure could be a famous or published case of failure (such as named above) or it can be a common type of failure, such as turbine failure, which you examine using published case studies. The emphasis in this paper is on the Recommendations section – this is your opportunity to use your engineering knowledge to recommend a solution to a problem.

Instructions

You will research and document an engineering failure in your area of engineering. Your paper will include the following major sections:

  1. Case Description (what happened?)
  2. Case Investigation (what did they find? How did they find it?)
  3. Recommendations (how will this problem be prevented in the future?)

Case description – the section describes the failure. This includes the context of the failure and why the failure matters.

Case Investigation – this section documents the failure analysis methods used in the case, including the tests that were performed and the outcomes of the tests. This section should include all information necessary to understanding the root cause.

Recommendations – this section explains the impact of the failure, identifies standards or practices which may have contributed to the failure, and makes recommendations for how to prevent the failure from happening again.

Any of the above sections may have sub-sections. For example, you may use subheadings for each type of test performed. You may also use lists, tables, and diagrams in your paper.

Other Requirements

  • At least two images or figures must be used in the paper. You may use more than two figures. Label and cite figures properly.
    • Use the Word “References” menu to insert captions.
  • A minimum of 6 high quality sources: academic, trade, and reference texts are acceptable.
    • Using low-quality sources will result in a 25% reduction in grade.
  • The final paper must have a title, Table of Contents, and References page.
    • If you do not use a title page, then include your name in the header with the page number.
    • Use the Word Style menu to create headings. This will allow you automatically generate a TOC using the References tool.
    • Failure to use the Style and References menu will result in a 10% reduction in grade.

Newer Response Guidelines After posting to this discussion read the postings from other students. Respond to at least one other post and identify concerns about the analysis and ask additional questions that would help clarify the position taken. This discussion will analyze whether Pete is entitled to recover against Ocean World under a strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities/animals theory and whether his parents are entitled to recover for their emotional distress under that theory. An owner/possessor of an animal with dangerous tendencies may be subject to strict liability if a person suffers physical harm from the abnormally dangerous tendency of the animal. Restatement (Third) of Torts §23. “Strict liability under §§20-23 does not apply if the person suffers physical or emotional harm as a result of making contact with or coming into proximity to the defendant’s animal or abnormally dangerous activity for the purpose of securing some benefit from that contact or that proximity.” Restatement (Third) of Torts Phys. & Emot. Harm § 24. An activity is abnormally dangerous and subject to strict liability if there is a “highly significant risk of physical harm even when reasonable care is exercised by all actors” and “the activity is not one of common usage.” Restatement (Third) of Torts §20. In this case Ocean World has an attraction featuring their famous killer whale Jaws. Pete suffered serious physical injuries when Jaws launched himself out of the tank as Pete walked near the edge of it. To be held strictly liable Ocean World must have known or had reason to know that Jaws had “dangerous tendencies abnormal for the animal’s category.” Restatement (Third) of Torts §23. However “if the plaintiff is a patron of the zoo exposed to wild animals because of the benefits the plaintiff secures by visiting the zoo the plaintiff is beyond the scope the defendant’s strict liability.” Restatement (Third) of Torts Phys. & Emot. Harm §24 cmt a. Pete is beyond the scope of Ocean World’s strict liability and is not entitled to recover against Ocean World under a strict liability theory because if reasonable care had been exercised by all actors visiting the tanks would not have carried a significant risk of physical harm. Pete’s parents did not see Jaws’s attack on Pete but they heard him scream and suffered severe emotional distress when they saw him. Their perception of the event is not limited to sight but the parents must have contemporaneously perceived the incident to recover for their emotional distress. Restatement (Third) of Torts Phys. & Emot. Harm § 48 cmt. e (2012). If they do recover the recovery may be reduced because of their own negligent supervision of Pete which enabled him “to wander to a dangerous area” where due to Ocean World’s negligence Pete was injured. Restatement (Third) of Torts Phys. & Emot. Harm § 48 cmt. d (2012). Although Pete and his parents may recover for their harm they will not be able to do so under the theory of strict liability.
Back to list
Older physician assisted suicide (PAS)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *