Failure Engineering Artifacts

226 Pages·2013·2.66 MB·English

This thesis is an attempt to clarify a concept we are all familiar with, engineers and
non-engineers alike. It shows that, behind the first impression of familiarity, there is a
F
wide range of intuitions about failure which are not easily reconciled. While the ensuing a
ambiguities and lack of clarity may be tolerated in ordinary circumstances, engineers ilur
e
strive for precision and efficiency. These qualities become even more relevant given that : A
engineering activities are increasingly carried out by multidisciplinary and multicultural n
a
teams. ly
s
is

o
The chapters included in this thesis illustrate that pursuing conceptual clarification f
a
may result in valuable contributions to the existing literature. The identification of tacit n

E
assumptions that, so far, have gone undetected can help bringing some degree of order n
g
and unity to discussions that have shown a tendency towards fragmentation along in
e
disciplinary boundaries. e
r
in
g
As a whole, these chapters constitute the preliminaries of a conceptual framework that, C
o
once supplemented with additional engineering and philosophical contributions, may n
c
embrace the multiple facets of failure; a rather complex tangle of phenomena which, e
p
despite engineersí efforts to rein it in, is not going to disappear from the engineering t
agenda anytime soon.
L
u
c Failure: Analysis of an
a

D
e
‘Wonder en is l
F
ra Engineering Concept
t
e
gheen wonder’
Luca Del Frate
S
im
o
n
S
te
v
in
S
e
rie
s
in
th
e
P
h
ilo
s
o
p
h
y
o
f Te Simon Stevin Series in the Philosophy of Technology
c
h
n
o
lo
g
y
Failure
Analysis of an Engineering Concept

Failure
Analysis of an Engineering Concept

Proefschrift

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor
aan de Technische Universiteit Delft,
op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. ir. K.C.A.M. Luyben
voorzitter van het College voor Promoties,
in het openbaar te verdedigen op dinsdag 28 januari 2014 om 15.00 uur

door Luca DEL FRATE
Laurea in filosofia, Università degli Studi di Padova

geboren te Palmanova, Italië
Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotor:
Prof. dr. ir. P.A. Kroes

Co-promotoren:
Dr. P.E. Vermaas
Dr. M.P.M. Franssen

Samenstelling promotiecommissie
Rector Magnificus, Technische Universiteit Delft, voorzitter
Prof. dr. ir. P.A. Kroes, Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor
Dr. P.E. Vermaas, Technische Universiteit Delft, copromotor
Dr. M.P.M. Franssen, Technische Universiteit Delft, copromotor
Prof. dr. ir. M. Boon, Universiteit Twente
Prof. dr. S.O. Hansson, Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan
Prof. dr. C.W. Johnson, University of Glasgow
Prof. dr. ir. P.H.A.J.M. van Gelder, Technische Universiteit Delft
Prof. dr. ir. I.R. van de Poel, Technische Universiteit Delft, reservelid

© Luca Del Frate, 2014
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without prior permission in writing
of the publisher.

editors: Peter Kroes and Anthonie Meijers

ISBN: 978-90-386-3542-2
ISSN: 1574-941X
Contents
List of papers vii
Acknowledgements ix
1 Introduction 1
1.1. Multiplicity of definitions 5
1.2. Life Cycle Engineering and the evolving concept of failure 8
1.3. A dual audience 11
1.4. Learning from failures and beyond 16
2 Towards a Trans-disciplinary Concept of Failure for Integrated Product
Development 23
Abstract 23
2.1. Introduction 23
2.2. From the sequential model to Integrated Product Development 25
2.3. The cross-functional failure domain 31
2.4. Criteria 35
2.5. Definitions’ assessment 42
2.6. A tentative trans-disciplinary definition of failure 44
2.7. Conclusions 45
Appendix: Failure definitions 47
Appendix 2: Additional failure definitions 49
3 Failure of Engineering Artifacts: A Life Cycle approach 53
Abstract 53
3.1. Introduction 53
3.2. The traditional approach on failure 56
3.3. Four basic assumptions of the traditional approach 60
3.4. Beyond the traditional approach 64
3.5. From one customer to many stakeholders 69
3.6. A new definition of failure 74
3.7. The life cycle approach in action 81
3.8. Conclusion 88

v
4 Preliminaries to a Formal Ontology of Failure of Engineering Artifacts 91
Abstract 91
4.1. Introduction 91
4.2. The traditional definition: Function-based failure 94
4.3. Specification-based failure 99
4.4. Material-based failure 101
4.5. A case story: the mutual independence of the three notions 104
4.6. Discussion of main ontological commitments 106
4.7. Conclusion 108
5 Root Cause as a U-turn 109
Abstract 109
5.1. Introduction 109
5.2. Root cause 111
5.3. Backward-looking approach 116
5.4. Forward-looking approach 125
5.5. Root cause as a U-turn 127
5.6. Conclusion 132
6 Learning from Failure: Not so Paradoxical After All 135
Abstract 135
6.1. Introduction 135
6.2. Paradigms of learning: Roebling and Co. 139
6.3. Defining failures and successes in engineering 144
6.4. Ambiguities of learning in engineering 148
6.5. The learning hypothesis disambiguated 157
6.6. Conclusion 176
Bibliography 181
Summary 201
Samenvatting 205
About the author 211
Simon Stevin (1548-1620) 213

vi
List of papers
Chapter 2
Del Frate, L., Franssen, M., and Vermaas, P. E. (2011) 'Towards a trans-
disciplinary concept of failure for Integrated Product Development', in:
International Journal of Product Development 14 (1-4): 72–95.

Chapter 3
Del Frate, L. (2013) 'Failure of Engineering Artifacts: A Life Cycle Approach', in:
Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3): 913–944.

Chapter 4
Del Frate, L. (2012) 'Preliminaries to a formal ontology of failure of engineering
artifacts', in: Donnelly, M. and Guizzardi, G. (eds.), Formal Ontology in
Information Systems: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference
(FOIS 2012), IOS Press, Amsterdam: 117–130.

Chapter 5
Del Frate, L., Zwart, S. D., and Kroes, P. A. (2011) 'Root cause as a U-turn', in:
Engineering Failure Analysis 18 (2): 747–758.

Chapter 6
A version of this chapter will be submitted to the journal Technology and Culture.

Maarten Franssen, Peter Kroes, Pieter Vermaas, and Sjoerd Zwart are acknowl-
edged for granting permission to publish the co-authored papers in this
dissertation.

vii

Acknowledgements
Doing a PhD-project is a journey, a long, sometimes bumpy journey full of
surprises, funny episodes, and interesting people. Admittedly, the PhD-journey
analogy has been made so many times that it has become a cliché. Nevertheless,
I think it is a very appropriate analogy, especially if you consider the amount of
travel that working in academia today implies. Moreover, I personally associate
some of the most vivid memories of this PhD with travelling. Definitely the most
memorable was my second journey to Japan, in February 2012. I was going there
for a conference together with Peter Kroes, my promotor, who had been invited
as a keynote speaker. Our destination was Sendai, the capital of Miyagi Prefec-
ture. Less than a year before, the 11th of March 2011, the area was struck by the
massive Tohoku earthquake and the following tsunami. Indeed, Sendai is
located about 100 Km north of the infamous Fukushima nuclear power plant
and some of the damage was still visible around the conference venue itself in
the form of long and wide cracks running along walls and staircases (everybody
reassured us the buildings were totally safe, though). On the second day of our
trip we were invited to visit the coastal areas to the south and see with our own
eyes what happened there. It was a cold and rainy day and before us stood a vast
area of complete destruction. In that location the gigantic wave reached as high
as 17 meters. Only houses built above that line survived, everything else had
been swept away. Such was the amount of debris that after one year of work even
the super-efficient Japanese were still busy with the clean-up. Although we had
already seen plenty of images of that kind on TV, walking through that deserted
place and witnessing the admirable dignity of our Japanese hosts made a great
impression on us.
But that was not the end of our journey and the following days we enjoyed
the warmth of Japanese hospitality. We were shown around, visited beautiful
temples, abundantly explored the local cuisine, and took a ride on the mighty
Shinkansen, the bullet train. Even though it was a short trip, the combination of
contrasting experiences and emotions made me realize that, besides being a
talented philosopher (which I already knew him to be), Peter is also a wonderful
travel companion. His enthusiasm is contagious and because of his genuine
passion for learning there is never shortage of subjects for conversation. And he
ix