Advances in modeling and simulation, new finite element software, modeling engines and powerful computers are providing opportunities to interrogate designs in a very different manner and in a more detailed approach than ever before. Margins of safety are also often evaluated using local stresses for various design concepts and design parameters quickly once analysis models are defined and developed. This paper suggests that not all the negative margins of safety evaluated are real. The structural areas where negative margins are frequently encountered are often near stress concentrations, point loads and load discontinuities, near locations of stress singularities, in areas having large gradients but with insufficient mesh density, in areas with modeling issues and modeling errors, and in areas with connections and interfaces, in two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) transitions, bolts and bolt modeling, and boundary conditions. Now, more than ever, structural analysts need to examine and interrogate their analysis results and perform basic sanity checks to determine if these negative margins are real
