Let's Talk Testing: Seeing is Believing in Fractographic Analysis


Reading time ( words)

One of the more common types of failure analysis is the investigation of something that has broken. For this column, we will be discussing a broken material, or, more commonly, a fractured or cracked material.

Fractographic analysis is sometimes perceived as a difficult analysis, given its roots in material science, but one might be surprised to learn that failure modes for this type of study are well-established and well reported and can easily be found in textbooks, reference materials, and even with a Google search!  Given that, this column is not being written to teach a lesson in fractographic failure modes, but more so to provide some insight in performing the analysis yourself, or at least give you some direction to get things started.

sellers0716.jpgUnlike many types of forensic analyses, a fractographic investigation most times doesn’t really need any high dollar, sophisticated instrumentation or equipment. This is true because the most pertinent information in a fracture based investigation is simply the visual examination of the fracture surface itself. Now, that can be problematic in some instances, because the fractured surface can become damaged before it is discovered. If a crack happens and is still connected on one end, it’s possible that the opposing surfaces of the fracture can make contact with each other—through movement of the specimen while still in use or even through simple vibration—potentially damaging the surface characteristics that are needed to determine the failure mode at hand. This is not overly common, but can happen, and as such it’s worth mentioning here. For this reason, one recommendation that can be made is…don’t put the pieces back together! In line with what has been mentioned just a few sentences ago, putting the fractured pieces back together can accidentally damage what you’re really trying to inspect.

Read the full column here.

 

Editor's Note: This column originally appeared in the July 2016 issue of The PCB Magazine. This is Keith’s first in a series of columns having to do with inspection and test— from the test lab perspective.

Share

Print


Suggested Items

I-Connect007 Editor’s Choice: Five Must-Reads for the Week

11/27/2020 | Nolan Johnson, I-Connect007
Well, it’s the last Friday in November. On any normal year in the U.S., this would be “Black Friday” because, for many retailers, the kickoff to the holiday season’s shopping spree is the source for most of the operating income for the year. While it remains to be seen how exactly how much traditional in-store and online retailing will rake in, with the varied pandemic lockdowns, it’s clear that readers wanted to get the latest electronics industry sales numbers!

I-Connect007 Editor’s Choice: Five Must-Reads for the Week

07/24/2020 | Nolan Johnson, PCB007
This week’s top five is a smattering across the industry. There’s an update on an established vendor and a press release from a startup. Then, we have two columns: one on M&A, and the other on supply chain disruptions. Finally, I highlight an interview from a U.S. food distributor sales manager, shedding light on the similarities of supply chain interruption in all industries. It's quite an assortment, but what they all have in common is that readers found these items compelling.

June PCB007 Magazine on TQM: A Preview

06/10/2020 | Nolan Johnson, I-Connect007
The June issue of PCB007 Magazine will be published next week. Can’t wait to download it? Enjoy this preview of how we arrived at the topic of TQM, as well as what you can expect to read inside. One gem: Happy Holden retrieves some of W. Edwards Deming’s lost chapters after uncovering pre-publication drafts of the 1985 Deming book that Happy received as a training handout at Hewlett-Packard from Deming himself.



Copyright © 2021 I-Connect007. All rights reserved.