The best way to avoid hydrogen embrittlement is to use a material that is not susceptible. However, this usually means a lower-strength material, which may not always be acceptable, depending on the application. Another good way to avoid hydrogen embrittlement is to avoid exposure to hydrogen.
For example, if the hydrogen is being introduced by an electroplating operation, this might mean switching to mechanical plating, vacuum plating, or a dip-spin coating. It's also possible to reduce the risk of hydrogen embrittlement by "baking" the part as soon as possible after the operation that introduced the hydrogen (i.e. plating or welding). Baking means heating the part to a temperature that will allow the hydrogen to diffuse out. Typical baking temperatures range from 350°F to 400°F. For heat-treated parts, it's important to avoid temperatures that will reduce the part's strength. The longer the parts are in the furnace, the greater the likelihood that the hydrogen will be effectively removed. Some specifications require parts to be in the furnace for as long as 48 hours, while other specifications only require a minimum of three hours.
Hydrogen embrittlement is a delayed failure mode. It does not occur immediately, but strikes at random, usually within 24 hours to 48 hours after installation. The time to failure depends on the stress; the greater the stress a part is under, the more quickly failure will occur.
When I was a student, a professor told me about a problem with hydrogen embrittled fasteners that occurred during the construction of a major urban light rail system. Some of the fasteners were found to have failed within a day of installation. This led to an investigation that lasted several months. Eventually, the failures were attributed to hydrogen embrittlement. All of the remaining fasteners (several million dollars' worth) were therefore removed, scrapped out, and replaced with new fasteners. This was probably unnecessary; if the fasteners hadn't failed during the months of the investigation, they would most likely never fail. However, the city probably judged that, in the extremely unlikely event of a failure, the potential lawsuits could cost far more than the fasteners.
This is an interesting example of a failure mode that is not going to be easy to predict. It seems that, short of testing a sample of the parts after each process, one can only track the parts after production and remedy situations as they occur. This requires a detailed tracking of the products after delivery and detailed reports of problems. In general, quality control systems do this. By linking those databases with design data in a PLM system, another big theme of Design News lately, one can avoid the problem in the future.
@TJ McDermott: I would strongly recommend against derating hydrogen embrittled parts, if by derating you mean using the affected parts in a lower-stress application. The problem is that it's extremely difficult to predict what level of stress a hydrogen-embrittled part will fail at. Even residual stresses from the forming process may be enough to produce microcracks, which may propagate later in fatigue. If I knew that a part was likely to be hydrogen embrittled, I wouldn't recommend using it in any application.
The same line of argument applies to baking parts as a re-work method after a problem has been found. As I mentioned, it's important to bake parts as soon as possible after plating or welding. Some aerospace specifications require that this be done within one hour. The more time passes, the less effective baking will be. This is not so much due to the hydrogen being any more difficult to remove (although you will hear this claim), so much as the fact that microcracks may have already formed as a result of residual stress. Obviously, once cracks have formed, no amount of baking will heal them.
As naperlou pointed out, prevention of process-induced hydrogen embrittlement depends on having a good quality system in place. If you're plating or welding high-strength parts, you need to ensure that they are always baked at the proper temperature within the specified length of time.
Well, hydrogen embrittlement is a long known issue that has played havoc with metals at nuclear power plants and has lead to fuel rod cadding failures along with reduction of the rating of some containment vessels.
Derating is not a good option for dealing with hydrigen embrittlement due to the unpredictability of potnetial failure. The problem must be controlled/eliminted in process. I know of circumstance in which a critical flight control component fialed due to hydrogen embrittlement under strictly vibratory loading - no compression or tensile load at all. Reuslt was the death of a number of individuals.
Iterative design — the cycle of prototyping, testing, analyzing, and refining a product — existed long before additive manufacturing, but it has never been as efficient and approachable as it is today with 3D printing.
People usually think of a time constant as the time it takes a first order system to change 63% of the way to the steady state value in response to a step change in the input -- it’s basically a measure of the responsiveness of the system. This is true, but in reality, time constants are often not constant. They can change just like system gains change as the environment or the geometry of the system changes.
At its core, sound is a relatively simple natural phenomenon caused by pressure pulsations or vibrations propagating through various mediums in the world around us. Studies have shown that the complete absence of sound can drive a person insane, causing them to experience hallucinations. Likewise, loud and overwhelming sound can have the same effect. This especially holds true in manufacturing and plant environments where loud noises are the norm.
The tech industry is no stranger to crowdsourcing funding for new projects, and the team at element14 are no strangers to crowdsourcing ideas for new projects through its design competitions. But what about crowdsourcing new components?
It has been common wisdom of late that anything you needed to manufacture could be made more cost-effectively on foreign shores. Following World War II, the label “Made in Japan” was as ubiquitous as is the “Made in China” version today and often had very similar -- not always positive -- connotations. Along the way, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, and other Pacific-rim nations have each had their turn at being the preferred low-cost alternative to manufacturing here in the US.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.