ASM Online Member Community

  • 1.  NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Long Island Chptr Admin
    Posted 27 days ago
      |   view attached
    Would anyone like to comment on the NYTimes article:

    A PDF copy is attached.

    "Metallurgist Admits She Falsified Test Results for Steel Used in Navy Submarines

    For more than 30 years, ABCDE LMNOPQ altered test results for more than 240 steel 
    productions while working for a foundry that provides metal for U.S. Navy submarines....."

    regards,
    - Jim Q
    Long Island Chapter



    Attachment(s)



  • 2.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 27 days ago
    The integrity of lab work is Metallurgy 101, it is sad that a well accomplished Metallurgist had altered her findings which make her actual test a waste of time, and displace the confidence of the customer. And for what? 






  • 3.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 27 days ago
    Lack of money is the root of all evil

    ------------------------------
    Donato FIRRAO FASM
    Professor
    Politecnico di Torino
    TORINO
    +393351494032
    Italy
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 26 days ago
    While obviously I do not condone falsifying test results, I admit that I too have wondered why the material required Charpy testing at -100F when the service environment is never going to get colder than 0F (freezing point of saturated saltwater) and will probably be closer to 30-40F most of the time. Since toughness correlates nonlinearly with temperature, wouldn't it be more sensible to test at the lowest anticipated service temperature and then bake in your safety factor by increasing the absorbed energy requirement at that temperature? How was a 100F safety factor justified in the writing of that spec?

    ------------------------------
    Sean Piper
    Product / Process Metallurgist
    Ellwood Texas Forge Houston
    Houston TX
    (713) 434-5138
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 26 days ago
    Impact testing of materials for use at very high strain rates is often conducted at temperatures well below the projected service temperature, because depressed temperature can sort of "pinch hit" for loading rates too high to be achievable in the laboratory.

    Impact testing of steels for oil well perforating gun tubes is often conducted at very low temperatures, because most labs do not have licenses for using explosives, nor are they willing to expose themselves to the associated risks.

    Too lazy to look it up right now, but I think -100F is specified in at least one ASTM spec for Charpy testing of steels meant for explosive applications - just because it is a round number, a low number, and easily achieved in dry-ice/acetone.

    As far as the individual deliberately falsifying the MTRs, that is beyond unforgivable.  If one believes the required testing regimen is inappropriate one should state that; don't claim to have conducted the tests as specified and report bogus results, that's lying.

    ------------------------------
    Andrew Werner
    Chief Metallurgist - Retired
    Retired
    East Bernard TX
    (832) 563-3489
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 26 days ago
    That's interesting about the loading rates, I did not realize temperature could be manipulated to simulate a faster impact although it makes sense. I would be very curious to see how that relationship is derived and quantified (i.e. an extra 20F = X more ft/s of impact velocity).

    110% in agreement that it is never acceptable to falsify anything and that she should have argued the requirement with the customer if she didn't think it would be possible to meet. In this case it's not even a gray area but even when it is, I still prefer to be conservative and defer to the customer's interpretation of an ambiguous requirement rather than run with it in a way that is convenient for me but introduces the risk of being accused of falsification down the road. I hope this incident serves as a reminder to anyone out there who doesn't consider integrity an immutable part of their job that the risk just isn't worth it.

    ------------------------------
    Sean Piper
    Product / Process Metallurgist
    Ellwood Texas Forge Houston
    Houston TX
    (713) 434-5138
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 22 days ago
    An excerpt from Engineers Canada Code of Ethics reads "Every professional engineer owes certain duties to the public, to their employers, to their clients, to other members of the profession and to themselves and shall act at all times with:
    1. fairness and loyalty to their associates, employers, clients, subordinates and employees;
    2. fidelity to public needs; and
    3. devotion to high ideals of personal honour and professional integrity"

    ------------------------------
    Nnaemeka Ugodilinwa
    Process Engineer
    StandardAero
    Winnipeg MB
    2043187632
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 22 days ago
    It is remarkable that Elaine Thomas' work was apparently never verified over a 32-year span.  Her supervisors have a whole lot of 'splaining to do!  The quality engineers at Atlas/Bradken's customers were perhaps lax in their quality audits, although this sort of tomfoolery would not necessarily be easily detected in an audit.  Falsification of data can sink ships, companies and careers just as surely as loose lips do.  How sad for all of us in this profession.

    ------------------------------
    Richard Chinn
    Research Materials Engineer
    National Energy Technology Lab
    Albany OR
    (541) 967-5986
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 21 days ago
    I agree with all previous comments.  Not to pile on, but this behavior is totally unacceptable, especially for a professional that had received rewards for her working career (will she be returning them in view of these revelations?)  Still, the customer (I believe it was the Navy) bears some responsibility as well:  they have been building submarines for 32 years and never once checked the certs that typically would accompany each shipment?  The automobile companies have explicit and detailed programs to at least spot check these test reports.

    Nassos Lazaridis





  • 10.  RE: NYTimes 11/09/2021 article on Falsified met testing

    Posted 19 days ago
    In today's highly competitive global competitive market, every company should, in my opinion, follow the advice of 'Trust but Verify.'  I can speak firsthand in the power industry of less than reputable companies who have copied/falsified MTRs which have resulted in failures in power plants.  Advances in non destructive and non-invasive tools like PMI guns, portable hardness testers, etc. are becoming common place due to issues like this.

    ------------------------------
    John Shingledecker
    Electric Power Research Institute
    Charlotte NC
    (865) 201-1252
    ------------------------------