Engineering maintenance assumptions for failure

In high-performance engineering environments — from aerospace to rail, oil & gas to advanced manufacturing — failures are expected to be rare and preventable. So, when the same issue keeps happening, even after corrective action has been taken, the question arises: how is this possible?

It’s easy to assume repeat failures are the result of poor workmanship or inattention, but the truth is often more complex. In many cases, skilled and experienced teams are doing everything they’ve been trained to do — yet the fault reappears. This is usually a sign that the underlying cause hasn’t been fully addressed.

Fixing symptoms, not causes 

A common reason repeat failures persist is because teams are fixing what’s visible, not what’s systemic. If a bearing seizes, the bearing is replaced — but what if the root cause is misalignment, contamination, or poor lubrication control? Without investigating the chain of contributing factors, the cycle of replacement continues without real resolution.

Understanding root causes of repeat failures

• Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) : RCFA is a structured method aimed at identifying the fundamental reasons behind equipment failures. By addressing these root causes, organisations can implement solutions that prevent recurrence, thereby enhancing equipment reliability.
• Challenges in Root Cause Analysis: Effective root cause analysis requires thorough troubleshooting and data collection. Inadequate initial assessments can lead to missed evidence, making it difficult to pinpoint the true causes of failures.
• Importance of Comprehensive RCA: A robust RCA process involves clear problem definition, establishing timelines, distinguishing between root causes and other factors, and creating causal graphs. This comprehensive approach ensures that corrective actions address the underlying issues rather than just the symptoms.

Contamination, the invisible factor

Contamination is a silent contributor to many repeat failures. Microscopic residues, dust particles, or oil film may not be visible — but they influence everything from friction to corrosion rates to electrical conductivity. Even precision assemblies can fail if components aren’t properly cleaned or stored before use. It’s not always the technician’s fault; sometimes the right cleaning or decontamination step was never built into the process.

Documentation gaps and tribal knowledge

Many engineering environments rely on ‘tribal knowledge’ — experience held by individuals rather than documented procedures. While valuable, this can result in inconsistencies when different teams approach the same issue. If deviations, temporary fixes, or out-of-spec conditions aren’t formally recorded, it’s nearly impossible to build a reliable picture of the failure mode.

Seeing the bigger picture

At Metalwash, we often find that a fresh perspective helps break the cycle. Whether it’s analysing contamination risks, helping teams inspect parts to a higher technical standard, or supporting better documentation of cleaning and maintenance procedures, our goal is the same: to support engineering outcomes, not just individual tasks.

 

Repeat failures are not just frustrating — they’re expensive. They affect reliability, erode confidence, and damage long-term performance. But with the right insight and process controls in place, they can be prevented. Talk to us about how Metalwash can be part of your failure prevention systems.