Forensic Engineering

The Art and Craft of A Failure Detective

Colin Gagg, Colin R. Gagg

• Publisher: CRC Press
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN:
  9780367251680
• eBook ISBN:
  9781000038125
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Forensic Science
• Index: Technology & Engineering

Forensic Engineering: The Art and Craft of a Failure Detective synthesizes the current academic knowledge, with advances in process and techniques developed in the last several years, to bring forensic materials and engineering analysis into the 21st century.

The techniques covered in the book are applied to the myriad types of cases the forensic engineer and investigator may face, serving as a working manual for practitioners. Analytical techniques and practical, applied engineering principles are illustrated in such cases as patent and intellectual property disputes, building and product failures, faulty design, air and rail disasters, automobile recalls, and civil and criminal cases. Both private and criminal cases are covered as well as the legal obligation, requirements, and responsibilities under the law, particularly in cases of serious injury or even death.

Forensic Engineering will appeal to professionals working in failure analysis, loss adjustment, occupational health and safety as well as professionals working in a legal capacity in cases of produce failure and liability—including criminal cases, fraud investigation, and private consultants in engineering and forensic engineering.

Failure Analysis or Forensic Engineering?^*

1

* Certain brief passages in this chapter are incorporated, with permission, and used verbatim from the Elsevier book – Forensic Polymer Engineering: Why Polymer Products Fail in Service, Second Edition (2010) – co-authored by the author and cited within the References section at the end of this chapter.

1.0 Synopsis

Lessons derived from all forms of structural and equipment failure have been learned since the dawn of modern civilisation. Techniques and tools for investigating failure have been honed over time, by both scientists and practising engineers. However, until quite recently, failure investigation was restricted in that focus centre on material selection, design, product use/abuse, manufacture and failure mechanics within the part itself. Subsequent reporting therefore presented a somewhat narrow outlook, not fully exploring causes of failure or identifying potential problems that could follow. In more recent times the analytical discipline of forensic engineering has evolved, demanding a systematic approach to failure that will include any and all managerial and legal aspects surrounding an incident. The process will encompass and emphasise the whole system, rather than simply concentrating on the failure of a specific part. Service failure of any part or system will be accompanied by a clear potential for personal injury, monetary loss and/or damage to property. As such, forensic investigation and analysis are performed under an overarching umbrella of the legal system, with the consequences of failure being judged under the law of product liability. As a subject, forensic engineering is most commonly applied in civil law cases. However, its profile is also being raised in the arena of criminal law. In general, the objective of any forensic engineering investigation is to determine cause or causes of failure with a view to improve the performance or life of a component and/or to assist a court in establishing the facts of an event. The subject will also embrace the investigation of intellectual property claims, particularly patent disputes. Case study analysis has been identified as a prime route for promulgating failures in an attempt to limit (if not eliminate) further re-occurrence of identical failures. Furthermore, case study analysis has been accredited as a vehicle to inform a new generation of engineers of the downsides to new product development, and the serious consequences of product failure in the marketplace. Direct practical experience of failed products shows that there is still much room for progress in preventative engineering, and raising awareness among product designers and manufacturing personnel of the need to examine and analyse failures utilising appropriate tools which have been developed to a sophisticated level over the past decade.

1.1 Historic Failure Analysis

From classical temples to 21st-century corporate towers, engineers have learned more about safe and reliable design from past failures than from any perceived success.^[1] Failure engineering is the investigation of any unacceptable difference between expected and observed performance.^[2] As a subject, it is a recognised and researched arena in its own right, being of interest to both the academic and engineering communities.^[3,4] Prevention of failure is a key underlying principle for all engineering disciplines, with the failure analyst normally taking a lead role in any subsequent investigation. Some of the best-known examples of failure analysis have been associated with high-profile disasters.^[5,6] However, when any structure, product or process fails prematurely, the question will be raised as to ‘why’, particularly if failure causes injury or death. From the far reaches of time, there has been a history of penalties for ‘failure’, with blame for any mistake or loss being firmly apportioned. Historic law includes:

1. 1. The King of Babylonia’s ‘Code of Hammurabi’ in 2200 bc (Figure 1.1):
   The code contains a section covering personal injury, indicating that penalties were imposed for injuries sustained through unsuccessful operations by doctors, and for damages caused by neglect in various trades. Rates are fixed in the code for various forms of service in most branches of trade and commerce,^[7] e.g. for builders whose structures fall down – if the owner of the building dies, the builder shall be put to death. If the owner’s son is killed, the builder’s son shall be put to death.
2. 2. The 15th-Century Common Law in England:
   If a carpenter undertakes to build a house and does it ill (not well), an action will lie against him.^[8]
3. 3. The Napoleonic Code of 1804:
   Stated that if there is a loss in serviceability in a constructed project within ten years of its completion because of a foundation failure or from poor workmanship, the contractor and architect will be sent to prison.^[9]

Figure 1.1 (A) The Code of Hammurabi, 2200 bc. (B) Closer view of inscription. (Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, licensed under Creative Commons.)

With any law or decree surrounding failure, care must be exercised to ensure that a culture of ‘blame’ does not obscure the main priority of failure investigation.^[10,11]

July 2003, six railway engineers – among them chartered professionals – stood in the dock at Hertfordshire Magistrates Court (UK) to face manslaughter charges levelled against them for their role in the Hatfield rail crash of October 2000. That they were there simply highlights the absurdity of society’s ever-increasing desire ‘to see someone pay’. It highlights the growing trend by the public and the media to look for someone to blame and make an example of them.^[12]

When analysing a failure, there is an implicit need to understand how a component or system works in its present configuration and the most likely way it will fail. This is a key requirement if reliability is to be improved.^[13] However, true understanding of any failure can be completely biased by a ‘blame culture’ search for the cause or causes of failure. Human nature being what it is, the individual will often look for someone else to blame for misfortunes of their own making, thus avoiding the embarrassment of having to admit to a mistake. If this situation prevails, it will lead to poor investigation of an incident or accident, with only the basic cause being identified and not the underlying cause or causes.^[14]

The European Community, at an International Civil Aviation Organisation meeting,^[15] in describing ‘The need for a Just Culture’, reported:

‘Lack of full and open reporting continues to pose a considerable barrier to further safety progress in many areas. Major impediments are a fear of prosecution and a lack of appropriate confidentiality. The effectiveness of reporting is totally dependent on a conducive reporting environment – a Just Culture – defined as a culture in which front line operators are not punished for actions or decisions that are commensurate with their experience and training, but also a culture in which violations and wilful destructive acts by front line operators or others are not tolerated (Figure 1.2).’

Figure 1.2 Boeing 307 NC19903 crashed into Elliott Bay near Seattle, 28 March 2002. The U.S. Coast Guard responded to rescue the victims. Probable cause: ‘Loss of all engine power due to fuel exhaustion that resulted from the flight crew’s failure to accurately determin...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Author
• 1 Failure Analysis or Forensic Engineering?
• 2 Initial Aspects of Forensic Failure Investigation
• 3 A Framework or Methodology for Forensic Investigation
• 4 Analytical Methods
• 5 Sources of Stress and Service Failure Mechanisms
• 6 Fracture Morphology and Topography
• 7 The Engineer in the Courtroom
• 8 Engineering Failure Case Study Analysis as a Teaching Tool
• 9 Failure Due to Manufacturing Faults
• 10 Component Failure in Road Traffic Incidents and Accidents
• 11 Fraudulent Insurance Claims
• 12 Criminal Cases
• Author’s Closing Remarks
• Index