In the last post (part 2), I discussed my definition of critical thinking. Critical thinking is only one skill set in the “took kit of thinking” that I have developed over the last 25 years. In order of our natural tendencies, I usually list the six basic thinking types as follows.

We talked about David Levy’s book Tools of Critical Thinking: Metathoughts for Psychology in part 1. There is no similar book for people involved in failure analysis, although that will change if I ever finish the book I have been working on since 2003.

After spending a few years on a LinkedIn Group called “Critical Thinking in the Workplace,” it became clear to me that there was no universally accepted definition of critical thinking. 

Every once in a while we have large, painful failures that are visible to lots of people.

Technically, the cracks discussed in part 1 are quench cracks because they showed up after quenching.

Figures 1 and 2 show cylindrical parts that were apparently intact prior to hardening heat treatment (austenitize, quench and temper).

What scientific fields help the failure analyst understand the situations they investigate?

Failure analysis may be viewed as a series of intentionally planned, sequential activities geared to understanding how the subject component came to be unfit for its original purpose.

If you are doing failure analysis, you need to be able to tell if the component was made by the specified process.

Quality failure analysis rests on the use of high-level human cognition. Here are five aspects of human mental processes that form the foundation of the way effective thinkers use their mental skills. Let’s review them here, in reference to the basic steps of a failure investigation.