Complex Material Failure Analysis Investigations

An Overview of Complex Material Failure Claims

There is no exact definition for “complex claims.” They come in different shapes and sizes, usually involve multiple stakeholders, and are more challenging to investigate.

Materials Failure Modes

Every material, component, appliance, or system is prone to failure. However, there are only five different modes in which metallic materials can fail, namely:

• Fracture – The separation of an object or a material into two or more components under the action of stress.
• Fatigue – The weakening of the component or material caused by cyclic loading that results in progressive, brittle, and localized damage.
• Wear – Mechanically induced surface damage results in the progressive removal of material due to relative motion between that surface and the contacting substances.
• Corrosion – The dissolution of the material, consisting of oxides built up, rendering the product useless or leading to failure. All metals and alloys are subject to corrosion.
• Creep – Also referred to as cold flow, the permanent deformation increases under constant load or stress.

Why Failures Happen

While the failure modes of metallic materials are limited to five, there is an infinite number of causes for these failures. These can be classified in several categories, as outlined below:

1. Service or operating conditions 

If operating conditions are not ideal, the system will be prone to failure. Conditions such as the ones outlined below could cause material shortcomings.

Harsh environments: If subjected to very extreme conditions, the components of a fire suppression system in an automotive paint booth could fail in a short time.

Improper operation of valves: If the operator mixes up the valves.

Personal injuries: Abuse of tools can lead to personal injuries. Recklessness can also cause personal injuries. For example, a negligent person was cutting truck rims with a saw, and when he reached the tire, the saw bounced back, kicking him in the face. Operational conditions can cause even more personal injuries. For example, a wheelchair tipped over while a person rode it. Our investigation determined that radio interference from a nearby radio station with an electrical motor caused the operator to lose control of the wheelchair.

Corrosion: Corrosion can lead to failure, especially in metallic materials. We have seen a corroded cooling tower at a hospital. The legs were rusted, and the tower was in imminent danger of collapsing.

2. Improper maintenance

A lot of components and systems need to be well-maintained to function correctly.

Example 1: If gears or bearings are not lubricated, they go into lubricant starvation, leading to accidents. An example of this is the collapse of wind turbines and cranes.

Example 2: If the bolts of a wheel are not properly torqued, the wheel can separate from the axle. If the maintenance is not done according to the applicable regulations in a fire suppression system, that system could fail.

Example 3: Residential fuel storage tanks can leak if they are not maintained according to the applicable code. They can fail due to internal corrosion.

3. Manufacturing deficiencies 

Most manufacturers try to produce a defect-free product, but they don’t always succeed. Sometimes, defective products can end up in the market. For example, casting and welding deficiencies could lead to failures. There are various reasons for manufacturing deficiencies. For example, a defective aluminum ladder caused a permanent injury to a roofer who fell while he was climbing it because the ladder had defects in its castings.

An example of failure resulting from improper chemical composition can be seen in the case of a commercial pizza oven explosion. The oven exploded on first use because the stones were made from improper material.

Packaging and finishing issues can also lead to failures. For example, we have dealt with a case that involved chocolate contamination. The packaging of the chocolate was not made according to the applicable standards, and the substandard package caused contamination.

A manufacturing deficiency led to a personal injury involving a paddleboard. When the person using the paddleboard tried to climb on it, he scratched his chest because the paddleboard had manufacturing defects resulting in an improper finish.

4. Design deficiencies 

In our investigations, we encounter design deficiencies. A few examples are:

• A video screen collapsed at a theater in downtown Toronto because the latches holding the video panels were substandard.
• We regularly encounter plumbing components and appliances that have design deficiencies.
• Design deficiencies could lead to personal injuries. For example, a miter saw that had no safety pin, caused the blade to drop and cut the user’s fingers.

5. Installation issues 

Installation issues are a leading factor for failures. For example, if the system is not installed correctly and there is no insulation in a fire suppression system, that system could freeze during winter.

Example 1: In a water treatment plant, the constructor chose the wrong type of coupling in one of their systems, and that coupling corroded within days, creating significant damage.

Example 2: We have seen a locomotive engine fire caused by an improperly installed hydraulic hose.

6. Wear and Tear

Naturally, materials and components can become worn, primarily due to aging. One example is equipment aging, which was seen in the case of tahini paste contamination. An old pump caused the contamination because particles from the rotors ended up in the product.

Another example is a leaking oil pump. All the gaskets were brittle and dry, allowing oil to escape, leading to considerable environmental damage.

7. An Act of God

Sometimes, extreme weather conditions such as ice storms, natural disasters, and windstorms can lead to failure.

8. Negligence 

Some people are negligent, and their actions could lead to significant incidents. For instance, some people don’t turn the thermostat high enough during winter. As a result, the pipes freeze when nobody is home, leading to floods.

Example 2: Frequently, when a residential oil storage tank is located indoors, it is overfilled because the driver who is delivering the oil is not paying attention to the equipment. This, too, can lead to failure.

9. Insurance fraud/ breaking and entering/ revenge

We have seen intentionally flooded homes, in an attempt to get insurance money. We have seen orchestrated break-ins so people could claim money for personal belongings. We have also seen improper use of rented hardware tools where people intentionally got hurt to claim that the tool was defective.

Basic steps in failure analysis

Although each investigation is unique, the basic steps are the same. To complete an investigation, forensic engineers should take note of these essential steps:

1. Gather as much background information as possible, including photos, maintenance records, inspection records, and repairs, if any.
2. Try to get an understanding of the circumstances of the event. If possible, interview all the parties involved, such as owners, operators, contractors, and witnesses.
3. Organize your investigation and conduct it thoroughly. Make a list of tasks you must complete to avoid losing track of what needs to be done.
4. It is essential to identify the components of interest for the investigation and document their condition, environment, and relationship with each other.
5. Obtain permission to remove components and document the procedure.
6. Prepare a proper chain of custody because more clients or opposing experts are inquiring about the chain of custody. Prepare a chain of custody from the moment you get components from a site to the moment you bring them to the lab.
7. Initially conduct preliminary and non-destructive testing and examination.
8. Discuss preliminary findings and further course of action with the client.
9. If a joint destructive examination is required, prepare a testing protocol. Circulate it with other parties and allow them to discuss the testing protocol.
10. Organize the testing and lab examination.
11. Analyze the gathered data and determine the root causes of the failure.
12. You have to compare data with applicable standards, codes, or regulations in many instances.
13. Discuss findings with the client.
14. Prepare a formal report, if required.

We have been involved in several complex failure analysis investigations. Below are a few case studies showing practical applications of the above principles.

Case Study 1: Collapse of a Grain Silo Spout

A grain silo spout collapsed and spilled grains to the ground,and we were asked to determine the cause of the incident. This image was taken by the homeowner shortly after the incident occurred. Fortunately, nobody was hurt.

Figure 1: The collapsed grain silo spout

The elevators in the grain silos were only a few years old, and the failure occurred without warning. By the time we were assigned to this claim, the site condition had changed. Most of the components were removed for storage, and we could not see their layout on site. When the site is cleared quickly, it makes our work more difficult.

The structure was unstable, so it was difficult to climb it to see its condition at the top. Therefore, we retained the services of industrial climbers and guided them via radio to take essential photographs. This was before the availability of drone technology.

Initial observations

Figure 2: Deficiencies noted, including crisscrossing cables

As indicated in figure 2, there were a few deficiencies, like crisscrossing cables, turnbuckles crossing, and cables rubbing against the top of the lift. However, the evidence was already in a shed, where we had the opportunity to examine it in the presence of representatives from the manufacturer and installer.

We needed to identify the various components and determine how they were installed. Following this preliminary examination and identification, relevant evidence was collected and brought to our facility for further review.

One item of interest was the retarder, a specially designed box that slowed the speed of the grains, thereby preventing them from being crushed. Each spout was provided with a retarder, which had two pipe sections welded on each side. The spout was also installed on-site using welding. Therefore, it had two different welds. One was the manufacturing weld done at the factory, and the second weld was done by the installer on site.

The factory weld was of interest to us. You can see one of the pipe sections at the end of the retarder. We looked at the factory weld and marked locations where samples of interest could be cut and used for further examination.

Figure 3: The factory weld with marked locations

Preliminary Findings and Analysis: The Turnbuckle

Another item of interest was a broken turnbuckle. We wanted to determine whether it was the triggering factor in the failure or the effect of the incident. A turnbuckle is a device for adjusting the tension or length of cables. They are designed to take only longitudinal loads. So, bending the turnbuckle on the fracture area suggests that the turnbuckle was subjected to lateral loads.

We also noted that the threads were crushed in the section where the turnbuckle was compressed. In a fractured component, fracture surfaces are usually mirrored images of each other. Therefore, we retained a small sample from the turnbuckle and took it to a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM).

The SEM allows examination of components to magnifications up to 30,000 times or higher. In addition, the images obtained under SEM showed cleavage facets, which indicates that the fracture was trans granular.

Figure 4: SEM images of the turnbuckle sample

Figure 4 shows no manufacturing defects that indicate that the turnbuckle has an issue. Further, we conducted a metallurgical evaluation of the turnbuckle. This evaluation was done in the longitudinal section. We examined the microstructure under an optical microscope, and we did not see any gross metallurgical deficiencies.

The microstructure was typical for steel that is commonly used to make bolts. Chemical analysis indicated that it is made from carbon steel, which is also typical for turnbuckle applications. Based on the examination of the turnbuckle and the results obtained, we determined that the turnbuckle was not the cause of failure.

Preliminary findings and analysis: The weld samples

One could see an excessive weld at the bottom from the weld samples we selected for examination. The low part of the microscope images shows that the weld did not penetrate throughout the entire wall.

The weld exhibits a deficiency called incomplete weld penetration. The fractured weld was taken for examination under SEM. Relevant features which were not visible by the naked eye were observed. As indicated on the right-hand side image in figure 5, the weld had a lot of pores, and incomplete weld penetration was confirmed.

Figure 5: SEM image of the weld

Porosity in any material is undesirable because pores can act as stress concentrators and reduce the load-carrying capability. However, welds are very complex structures. Therefore, when we analyzed the weld’s microstructure, we found porosity.

Conclusion

We concluded that the spout collapsed because of manufacturing deficiencies, namely a substandard weld. Other factors added undesirable stresses to the structure. The crisscrossing of cables caused by an installation deficiency and ice buildup due to weather conditions contributed to the failure. However, these factors acting alone could not have caused the collapse.

The main contributing factor to the incident was the sub-standard weld. Therefore, the turnbuckle failure was not the contributing factor but the result of the failure.

Case study 2: Tower Crane Collapse

A tower crane collapsed at a construction site, injuring the crane operator. Fortunately, there were no fatalities but significant property and equipment damage. Unfortunately, the Ministry of Labor was involved due to the personal injury, making our site access more difficult.

Parties involved

• The crane owner
• The developer
• The crane inspector
• The Ministry of Labor
• The installer of the crane

Initial observations

The crane collapse was caused by the failure of a slew ring, a ring that allows the crane to rotate in the horizontal plane. The slew ring is held in place by 48 bolts. These bolts fractured, causing the crane to collapse. Several bolts were retrieved from the site for further lab examinations. However, not all the bolts were found.

In a tower crane incident, it is essential to retrieve the crane logbooks, including inspection, maintenance, and service. It has particular requirements on how it is maintained and inspected.

Figure 6: Some of the bolts retrieved from the site, labeled for further examination

Preliminary Findings and Analysis

In examining the fractured surface of the bolts under a low-power microscope, we observed that most of them exhibited beach marks, which are always associated with fatigue. The fatigue of the bolts indicated improper installation. When the crane was erected, these bolts were not properly tightened. They were either overtightened or too loose.

Metallurgical evaluation did not produce any evidence of gross metallurgical deficiencies. In addition, chemical analysis revealed that the bolts were manufactured using the required steel grade according to the crane manufacturer’s specifications.

Conclusion

We concluded that the collapse of the tower crane was the result of improper installation on site. The bolts securing the slew ring were not properly torqued, and no manufacturing deficiencies were found in the fractured bolts.

The fact that this crane was over 30 years old at the time of the incident contributed to the failure. The life expectancy of a tower crane is approximately 25 years. Additionally, the crane was imported from Germany, no longer certified. Finally, the operator did not maintain the required logbooks as per Canadian Standard Association, and the crane operator was an illegal immigrant without a working permit in Canada.

Case Study 3: Automotive Part – Tie Rod

A vehicle was being driven on a straight stretch of road when it suddenly went into oncoming traffic, hitting two bikers headfirst. Unfortunately, one of the bikers died.

We were required to examine the vehicle’s components and determine what could have caused the car to lose control. Our focus was on the tie rod, shown in figure 7 below.

Figure 7: The wrecked car (left) and the fractured tie rod (right)

The tie rod fractured completely, and this condition caused the vehicle to go into oncoming traffic and the driver had no control over the steering wheel. Tie rods are essential parts of the vehicle steering system. They connect the steering gear to the wheel using the length of the rod with a ball-and-socket at one end. So, practically, tie rods move from the steering wheel to the wheels.

Involved parties

• The car manufacturer
• The service technician who maintained the vehicle
• The driver
• The family of the two bikers involved

Preliminary findings and analysis

We removed the incident tie rod and took it for examination under SEM with consent from all involved parties. We also conducted the mechanical and chemical analysis, and no gross abnormalities were observed.

Figure 8: SEM images of the fractured tie rod

The most crucial piece of evidence was on the fracture surface. These two images taken under the SEM show a feature called dimples. Dimples are always associated with ductile overload.

Conclusion

Essentially, the tie rod fractured because it was subjected to some sort of stress. It did not fail as the result of a manufacturing defect. There is a saying in material science that the material failed as intended. The component is designed to withstand certain stress. Beyond that stress, it will eventually fail, which will not be the manufacturer’s fault. It will fail because it was subjected to an overload, which is the case here.

Despite the driver maintaining that a vehicle defect caused the accident, he was held accountable for the tragedy because the tie rod failed as intended. If it were defective, the failure mode would be entirely different, as there would be significant tells on the fractured surface to indicate that.

Figure 9: Microscopic images of the fractured surface

The consecutive markings on the left image are called beach marks. They’re evidence of a progressive failure, indicating that the tie rod would have failed because of fatigue.

The appearance of grains on the middle image is usually associated with hydrogen embrittlement. Hydrogen embrittlement refers to when steel becomes brittle due to hydrogen ingress in the microstructure. It’s usually caused by improper heat treatment. The right-side image shows cleavage marks, which indicated that the rod was brittle. However, it was not showing any evidence of a manufacturing problem.

Case Study 4: Chair with Welded Frame

Chairs with welded frames were installed in a public place, and a parent was holding his baby over his shoulder, rocking the chair,  when the weld sustaining the seat failed without warning. As a result, the baby fell to the ground head first.

We were asked to provide an independent engineering opinion on the most probable cause for the incident.

Involved parties

• The owner of the place where the incident happened
• The chair manufacturer
• The chair distributor

Initial observations

We collected the incident chair and a few sample chairs for comparison. Each party sent their technical experts to participate in the joint examination.

Figure 10: The seat is supported at the rear using a curved bar welded onto the frame. The close-up on the right shows the weld on a non-failed chair

We considered this a design deficiency because people tend to sway when sitting on chairs, subjected to cyclic stresses. On the incident chair in figure 11, both welds gave way.

Figure 11: The incident chair (left) and the remaining frame with the locations of the failed welds (right).

Preliminary findings and analysis

We documented the frame and welds. Then, we took them for examinations under the stereomicroscope and later under SEM.

Figure 12: Stereomicroscope images of the welds

As shown in the two images above, the bars with the two failed welds showed large porosity and inclusions. One of the welds was taken for examination under SEM, which confirmed the presence of large pores and non-metallic inclusions. We also conducted a methodological evaluation of the weld. The weld appeared to be non-uniform, and it had pores.

Conclusion

We concluded that the accident resulted from a design deficiency and manufacturing deficiency. The matter was settled out of court and in favor of the plaintiff. As a result of our investigation, 800 similar chairs from nationwide locations were removed from service.

Case Study 5: Fire Sprinkler CPVC Pipe Joint Separation

A CPVC in a fire sprinkler system failed in a high-rise residential building, resulting in the separation of the joint separation and fitting. The client wanted to investigate this matter for potential subrogation.

Typically, the piping systems in a residential building are concealed above the ceiling or in the walls. In this case, separated polymer pipes caused flooding that resulted in a collapsed roof. The damages covered over 40 units, the two elevators in the building, the lobby, and some common areas. The damages cost over a million dollars.

Involved parties

• The building owner
• The installer
• The pipe and contact cement manufacturer
• The fire protection company who did the actual installation

Initial observations

The components were secured, and we were provided access to the scene. All sprinkler systems need to be put back in service quickly, so whenever you get one of these claims, you must ensure that somebody documents them adequately.

We inspected the entire sprinkler system and documented its conditions, as well as its settings. It was crucial to examine the whole site because sometimes evidence is not in the secure components; it’s in a broken or separated part somewhere in the incident site.

Figure 13: The separated pipe (right) and it’s close-up (left)

The pipe separated without any warning within the ceiling cavities. The pipe repairs were completed immediately to get the system back in operation and provide fire protection to the entire building again. We realized that the failed pipe joint caused the pipe separation upon examining the components. In addition, our site visit eliminated other potential causes of failure.

Figure 14: An example of a joint connected to a sprinkler head (left) and the separated pipe (right)

The red substance connecting the pipe pieces is the contact cement or glue used to join the pipes and fittings. It’s common for joint sections to separate in systems that use polymer pipes.

Preliminary findings and analysis

During the investigation, we found that the cut end of the pipe was not square. In addition, there was a lack of or inadequate chamfering or beveling of the pipe end. These two are critical installation features. The manufacturer points these out very clearly in their instructions, and for a good reason. There was also inadequate application of the contact cement. It didn’t make proper contact on all the surfaces.

There was insufficient insertion depth, one of the most critical steps. Several factors play a role in the strength of the joint based on how deep it is inserted into the socket of the fitting.

In this investigation, we had to look into the measurements of the components, and review codes, standards, and manufacturer instructions. It helped us develop a hypothesis during analysis. We hypothesized that the cause of failure could have resulted from installation issues or the contact cement being outside the specific area.

We then conducted a joint inspection with the other parties. We sectioned the pipe and completed various tests to determine the root cause of the failure. We used analytical methods such as FTIR and GCMS on the pipe and cement.

 Figure 15: FTIR results

FTIR helped us understand the material components and any deviations from the standard. They also helped us identify possible contaminants of the surfaces to determine if the contact cement was degraded before its use. Finally, we analyzed the leftover blobs of contact cement on the pipe.

Figure 16: GCMS results

GCMS helped us identify specific components and the quantity of those detrimental to the contact cement. However, we did not find any components or deviations that were large enough to support a hypothesis of the contact cement being defective.

Possible reasons for the failure

• Improper installation
• A defective solvent cement or glue
• Defective pipe or fitting
• An excessive internal fluid pressure

The static pressure from the sprinkler system itself or an issue with the pumps that could trigger an instantaneous increase in pressure could have caused the failure.

Conclusion

We found several issues with the insertion depth and the cutting of the pipe. That led us to conclude that the installation was the only contributing factor to the failure and that the installer did not follow the appropriate procedures. Therefore, the improper installation was the cause of the failure.

Case Study 6: A boom lift failure

Figure 17: The failure site

A contractor was working on a boom lift when it suddenly failed. The bucket fell to the ground while the contractor was inside, and he suffered personal injuries. In this case, the focus of that failure was the turntables on the boom lift.

Involved parties

• The lift manufacturer
• The lift installer
• The bolt manufacturer
• The maintenance company
• The contractor who suffered personal injuries

Initial observations

 

Figure 18: An example of in-tact turntables

The turntables separated because the bolts securing them fractured. The images above show what that would look like upon installation.

Figure 19: A close-up of one of the failed bolts (right) and other failed bolts from the site (left).

Some failed bolts looked very jagged and rough, and others looked smoother. The smooth bolts showed some signs of fatigue. Out of the twenty bolts, only five of them were fatigued. Fatigue can result from manufacturing, design, installation, or maintenance failure.

Figure 20: A close-up of the bolts showing signs of failure

The marks on the left picture in figure 20 indicate a crack, which develops in the material over time. Eventually, the component will lose strength if the gap is big enough. If the crack completes, the bolt will fail by fracture.

Preliminary findings and analysis

We conducted microscopy, metallography, hardness, tensile, and chemistry tests to understand the composition of the bolts. We also ran these tests to look for possible internal issues with the bolts.

We proved that the material was strong enough to resist loads or static loads of the boom lift. In Canada, the standard for steel construction includes safety considerations for loads and reducing or eliminating the likelihood of fatigue.

We reviewed material strength, structural load, steel construction code, and fatigue considerations in the structural analysis. As a result, we determined that the bolts met the requirements for their standard. We also concluded that the boom lift design met the minimum structural requirements for its intended loads. However, it may have failed to account for cyclical loads caused by the vehicle it was mounted on or the loads applied during operation.

Potential reasons for the failure

• Improper design
• Defective bolts
• Improper installation
• Inadequate maintenance

Conclusion

We proved that the material strength was enough but may not have been well within the safety requirements in the structural codes. The fatigue in those bolts was slightly the result of improper torquing during installation. We also considered that the bolts were not re-torqued or were not receiving proper maintenance.

The installer did not include re-torquing the bolts in their procedures. In addition, the contractor, who was supposed to do inspections yearly, did not complete their annual maintenance on this unit. All these factors played a role in the failure, but we concluded that the leading cause of the failure was the inadequate installation and lack of timely maintenance.

Case Study 7: Corrosion of stainless-steel wires in water connectors

A water connector failed due to the failure of the stainless-steel wire braids. Water connectors can create massive damage depending on where they are in the building.

Figure 21: An example of a functioning water connector

Flexible water connectors can be found in high-rise buildings. They’re made of an internal polymeric hose with a braided stainless steel wire on the outside. Sometimes, the inner hose may not withstand the internal pressure by itself. Hence, the braided wire material is added on the outside.

The braided wire material provides strength for these connectors to withstand pressure. It’s easy to presume that stainless steel does not rust or corrode. However, that depends on several factors, including material composition, ambient conditions where connectors are installed, and other chemicals.

Parties involved

• The unit owner
• The manufacturer of the water connector
• The wire manufacturer
• The maintenance contractor
• Property management
• The Canadian supplier
• The installer

Initial observations

 Figure 22: The damaged flexible water connector

Figure 22 shows a slight opening on the rubber, and that’s where the water came out. Once the metal wires break, nothing is holding the rubber hose. So, it bulges and perforates.

Typically, three types of corrosion affect the wires on a connector like this, and they are:

• General corrosion – Surface corrosion indicated by brown material that we see whenever steel is rusting 

• Pitting corrosion – Shows small surface perforation in the material. It is much harder to see by visual inspection alone, and it typically occurs as a result of some of the chemicals that come in contact with the surface of the wires.
• Stress corrosion cracking – This shows as cracks grow into the wires.

We didn’t see a lot of rust on the connector. However, some rust spots could be seen by the naked eye.

Preliminary findings and analysis

Figure 23: The visual microscope image of the wire (left) and the SEM image (right)

We used SEM for our water connector analysis and a visual microscope for the braided wires. The results showed cracks and pits developing on the wire. There were also a lot of brown rusty surface deposits. It was a clear indication that the stainless steel was rusting away.

Figure 24: A microscopic depiction of the cracks and pits on the wires

We mounted and polished these wires to show how the cracks and the pitting progressed inside. We revealed some fine cracks and pits that weakened the materials and eventually led to the failure. However, as the image above indicates, there wasn’t a lot of material loss, meaning the wires did not experience much surface corrosion. Instead, the corrosion was rapid and invasive, going into the material itself.

Potential reasons for the failure

• Improper material composition
• Inadequate heat treatment during manufacturing
• The storage of harsh chemicals in the vicinity of the connector
• Inadequate maintenance or replacement schedule

The root cause of failure could have been stress corrosion cracking aided by pitting. It points to the hose or the wires being attacked by chemicals that caused the breakdown.

However, there are times when some steps in the manufacturing process are not done correctly, which makes these wires more susceptible to this type of failure.

We showed that the wire composition slightly deviated from what the material specification was supposed to be, which allowed for localized corrosion to develop quickly. It wasn’t wholly different from what it should have been, but it was enough to allow corrosion to start.

The wire showed minor but clear signs of corrosion, and this connector could have been inspected and replaced since it was over ten years old.

The security and the property management could not find the shutoff valve for this bathroom, which was in the common areas of the building. As such, they had to shut off the water for the entire building. This process took a long time, and a lot of water escaped through the building. If property management had better procedures, they could have substantially mitigated the resulting damages.

Conclusion

We concluded that the root cause of the failure was defective material. However, inadequate maintenance was a contributing factor. Moreover, improperly trained personnel contributed to the extent of damages.

When it comes to subrogation involving material failures, identifying other contributory factors is as important as determining the root cause of failure. Identifying all the involved parties requires out-of-the-box thinking and gathering the correct information early in the investigation.

Origin and Cause – An Expert in Complex Claims

Through the journey of this article, we have exposed the various facets of Complex Claims and failure analysis. There are multiple reasons why failure could occur, and our expert forensic team at Origin and Cause is well versed in this domain to provide an unbiased understanding of the claim at hand. Contact us for any assistance regarding complex claims and failures that require expertise. Our team will get to the bottom of the cause through a thorough scientific understanding of the case.