I believe the most effective method for resolving an experiment failure is more testing. This gives you the opportunity to try out different parameters and see their interactions. It will become clear down the line which ones have the highest level of success. Also, root cause analysis is very important. Finding out exactly where the failure happened will help create a more robust solution. In our company, we use a lot of software tools. Often, the programs written will have bugs that we have to find. Seeing the results of the program and working backwards helps us find where the origin of the problem lies. This in turn, will allow us to change the code and make a better one for future use.

In resolving failure, the first step to take is to define the scope of what can be modified. In our simulation, this is the verification protocol and the product components. The listed specifications could not be modified. Therefore, we are limited to resolve the failure within the scope of changing the product components used and testing procedures. Now, from within the scope, the possible causes of error must be identified. It could be the bottle. Maybe the label. Maybe additional treatment to the bottle surface can secure the label's adhesion. However, it is important to limit the scope when identifying error by only focusing on the actually application of the product out in the field. Therefore, a root cause of error may be identified in the conditions the product was placed while under testing. If the testing conditions are not in accordance to the conditions applicable to the product, then those variables must be corrected.

When dealing with experiment failure I believe it is necessary to take a step back, and reflect on what could have gone wrong. Errors cannot be fixed without first knowing what the problem is. Brainstorming, and working through the process of the experiment theoretically before the performing of the experiment is, in a way, like proof reading a paper. Going back over procedures, and double checking the materials used could be all the difference in fixing an issue within an experiment. However, if the experiment keeps failing, than it will need to be changed entirely; in which the experiment definitely needs to be "brought back to the drawing board", and new procedures need to be created. The best way to a quick resolution, in my opinion, would be careful review and planning.

In this week simulation, the experiment forced the team to follow a specific resolving its failure as the project deliverables were stated and the protocol followed in the lab was clarified. In my opinion, it was good to think first about the possible reason behind the experiment's failure and study all those reasons, in order to be able to handle the problem and solve it. Sometimes, lab experts may spend so much time on solving the problem without really spotting the error initially. reviewing all the protocol steps and paying attention for every single detail such as the cleaning method, the bottle size and the label size, the peeling off time, the ethanol concentration, and etc. From spotting the exact problem, one could think about the right solution and plan an experimental way for testing.

I think we have to go through each aspect of the experiment we are going through, and then recheck where we are failing like in this case there was only one thing that was not justified and hence we went back and changed it. Going back to the drawing board and verifying again is the most effective method to find the desired solution.

As another person said, it is important to step back and look at what has happened. Formulating theories on why something has not gone correctly is the first step to remediating the situation. When you can have at least a starting point as to where something has gone wrong it makes things easier in solving the problem. What should be done next is to act on the initial theories in steps to change or remediate what was wrong. If that change solves the problem, then its a success! If what you thought of changing does not fix the issue, then it is time to go back and make a new theory with that failure in mind, and making changes. Repeating until issue is fixed.

I think the most important part is determining what the root cause of the failure is or else every solution you come up with will just be a bandage solution. Temporary solutions won't fix the problem long term and might cause further trouble down the road. Determining the cause can involve further experimentation to confirm the problem. Once this is done, then a solid solution can be put together.

I think the most important step in resolving experimental failure is to make sure that the team doesn't feel like they will get blamed. Human nature is to protect yourself! Once the team understands that a failed experiment doesn't mean that someone has to be blamed, the emotions and the bias are removed. However, if the team members feel like their are at risk of getting in trouble, the priority will be to protect yourself instead of conducting an unbiased root cause investigation. 

One of the primary tasks as a biomedical equipment technician is troubleshooting broken devices and confirming the error or issue. When dealing with a product that is not functioning properly, it helps to distinguish all components of the product and test each component separately until the error is confirmed. The failure can often indicate which component is failing which provides a starting point when troubleshooting. Using logical reasoning as well as trial and error problem solving techniques has proven to be successful for me when dealing with experiment or device failure.

I believe the first step should always be understanding the problem in and out, because finding a solution requires a very deep and accurate understanding of the problem and its causes. It should be no surprise to anyone that once a problem occurs no matter how small, it should be solved. A solution requires an understanding of all the variables that caused the problem, and their direct relation to that failure. whether you start anew or just change a few parts, understanding the cause will determine all that. based on personal experience, working on a solution can only be achieved after understanding what went wrong.

I think that most importantly the team needs to understand fully why this failure happened. Then use that information to understand the problem they need to tackle. They need to understand fully why this label did not work but why it was a better choice over the other labels. The team could go back and look over why they decided to use these certain labels over others one. With this knowledge they are able to create different tests that tackle this problem specifically and they will be able to test the other labels again. The team should also remember to keep an open mind and just find a solution that can address this problem.

You need to clarify the proplem and identify the reasons that led to it, and you must continue the search until you reach the root of the problem. After determining the problem, the person who is able to solve it must be identified, and whether it will require him to follow up and scrutinize other matters later, with an expected timetable to accomplish these tasks entrusted to him.

As many of the responses above stated, the most important thing to do in that instance is to isolate and understand the failure mode. When performing testing, there is often a pretty structure protocol to follow, so changing up too many parameters is generally not an option. Additionally, drastically changing the experiment isn't a good idea because then you won't be able to determine what actually caused the test to fail, and if it passes the next go around, you won't know which parameter you changed was the true solution. Therefore, trying to isolate specific potential failure modes and making adjustments one by one is your best bet. 

To define one method to cover every experimental failure is quite tough. Each experiment will have its own unique needs and plans for evaluation. But as a sort of outline of the steps would need to be, isolate the problem, determine the cause, develop solutions, test hypothesis, implement a solution. This week we first had to identify where the problem was. Clearly it was in the adhesive used to hold the label on the bottle, so then with experiments and analysis, the cause can be determined. Something in the water is degrading the adhesive. The most likely suspect is the temperature, so the water temperature is changed, and the labels stay adhered to. This system can be scaled to much larger problems with many more parts, it just means that the process will take longer.