This part was transferred from another source by the customer and was intended for the export market. The initial batches were supplied in two variants. The first variant failed before and after assembly at customer end whereas variant 2 has not failed even once (Figure 4.1). The customer initially suspected material/process and the subsequent detailed audit did not find any anomaly.

Figure 4.1 - Variants 1 &2 and Failure of Variant 2.

Both variants are produced in exactly similar manner, the only significant difference being the configuration of parts with different length of its extended portions.

The failure was suspected to be due to the storage and handling. Hence the storage of these parts (variant 1) and the various types / directions of load acting on it were simulated.

Type 1 (Figure 4.2) - assumes the parts sit on each other firmly but the extended tubes are getting loaded by the adjacent part.

Figure 4.2 - Failure mode type 1 - Fixed areas and Load points (Left) & Results (Right).

Type 2 (Figure 4.3) - assumes the parts sit on each other loosely and getting pushed up and down and the extended tubes are held firmly.

Type 3 (Figure 4.4) - assumes the parts get entangled with the adjacent part and the two extended portions are pushed outward.

Figure 4.3 - Failure mode type 2 - Fixed areas and Load points (Left) & Results (Right).

Figure 4.4 - Failure mode type 3 - Fixed areas and Load points (Left) & Results (Right).

All the types indicate that they could be a potential cause of the failure and hence the handling, storage and packing were completely redefined to protect the part at every stage of manufacturing and transits, eliminating this failure completely.