Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
FRACTURE ANALYSIS
Machines arent supposed to break, and mechanical components such as shafts, fasteners, and
structures arent supposed to fail. But when they do fail, they can tell us exactly why.
It may sound a little far-fetched, but experts say that the causes for more than 90% of all plant
failures can be detected with a careful physical examination using low power magnification
and some basic physical testing. Inspection of the failure will show the forces involved,
whether the load applied cyclically or was single overload, the direction of the critical load,
and the influence of outside forces such as residual stresses or corrosion. Then, accurately
knowing the physical roots of the failure, you can pursue both the human errors and the latent
causes of these physical roots.
UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS
Before explaining how to diagnose a failure, we should review the effects of stress on a
part. When a load is put on a part, it distorts. In a sound design the load isnt excessive, the
stress doesnt exceed the "yield point", and the part deforms elastically, i.e., when the load is
released the part returns to its original shape. This is shown in Figure 1, a "stress-strain"
diagram that shows the relationship between loads and deformation.
In a good design, the part operates in the elastic range, the area between the origin and
the yield strength, the part will be permanently deformed. Even greater increases in load
will cause the part to actually break.
Figure 1 illustrates a very basic point of design, and applies when the load on a part is
relatively constant, such as the load on the frame of a building or the stress in the legs of your
desk. It is a very different case when fluctuating loads are applied, such as those in a
hydraulic cylinder or in an automotive connecting rod. These fluctuating loads are called
fatigue loads, and when the fatigue strength is exceeded, a crack can develop. This
fatigue crack can slowly work its way across a part until a fracture occurs. (Corrosion can
greatly affect the fatigue strength).
Figure 1
Machine components can fracture from either a single overload force or from fatigue
forces. Looking at the failure face will tell which of these was involved. A single overload
can result in either a ductile fracture or a brittle fracture.
DUCTILE OVERLOAD VS. BRITTLE OVERLOAD FAILURES
A "ductile failure" is one where there is a great deal of distortion of the failed part.
Commonly, a ductile part fails when it distorts and can no longer carry the needed load, like
an overloaded steel coat hanger. However, some ductile parts break into two pieces and
can be identified because there is a great deal of distortion around the fracture face,
similar to what would happen if you tried to put too much load on a low carbon steel bolt.
The term "brittle fracture" is used when a part is overloaded and breaks with no visible
distortion. This can happen because the material is very brittle, such as gray cast iron or
hardened steel, or when a load is applied extremely rapidly to a normally ductile part. A
severe shock load on the most ductile piece can cause it to fracture like glass.
An important point about failures is that the way the load is applied, i.e., the direction and the
type, can be diagnosed by looking at the failure face. A crack will always grow perpendicular
to the plane of maximum stress. Below we show examples of the difference in appearance
between ductile overload and brittle overload failures.
Figure 2
From the examples above in Figure 2, we know we can look at an overload failure and
knowing the type of material, tell the direction of the forces that caused the failure.
Common industrial materials that are ductile include most aluminum and copper alloys, steels
and stainless steels that are not hardened, most non-ferrous metals, and many plastics. Brittle
materials include cast irons, hardened steel parts, high strength alloyed non-ferrous metals,
ceramics, and glass.
One note of caution is that the type of fracture, ductile or brittle, should be compared with the
nature of the material. There are some instances where brittle fractures appear in normally
ductile materials. This indicates that either the load was applied very rapidly or some change
has occurred in the material, such as low temperature embrittlement, and the material is no
longer ductile. An example of this was a low carbon steel clip used to hold a conduit in
position in a refrigerated (-50 F) warehouse. The clip was made from a very ductile material,
yet it failed in a brittle manner. The investigation showed it had been hit by a hammer, a blow
that would have deformed it at normal temperatures.
In a brittle overload failure, separation of the two halves isnt quite instantaneous, but
proceeds at a tremendous rate, nearly at the speed of sound in the material. The crack
begins at the point of maximum stress, then grows across by cleavage of the individual
material grains. One of the results of this is that the direction of the fracture path is frequently
indicated by chevron marks that point toward the origin of the failure. Example 1 is a
photograph of the input shaft of a reducer where the chevron marks clearly point toward the
failure origin, while Figure 3 is a sketch of the cross section of the wall of a ruptured 20ft.
(6.1 m.) diameter vessel. In both cases, by tracing the chevron marks back to their origin, we
knew exactly where to take samples to determine if there was a metallurgical problem.
Example 1
Figure 3
FATIGUE FAILURES
So far weve talked about the gross overloads that can result in immediate, almost
instantaneous, catastrophic failures. A very important distinction is that fatigue cracks take
time to grow across a part. In a fatigue failure, an incident of a problem can exceed the
materials fatigue strength and initiate a crack that will not result in a catastrophic failure
for millions of cycles. We have seen fatigue failures in 1200 rpm motor shafts that took less
than 12 hours from installation to final fracture, about 830,000 cycles. On the other hand,
we have also monitored crack growth in slowly rotating process equipment shafts that
has taken many months and more than 10,000,000 cycles to fail.
Figure 4 shows a simple fatigue crack with the different growth zones and the major physical
features.
The fatigue zone is typically much smoother than the instantaneous zone, which is
usually brittle and crystalline in appearance. Progression marks are an indication that the
growth rate changed as the crack grew across the shaft and dont appear on many failure
faces.
Figure 4
There are some complex mechanisms involved in the initiation of a fatigue crack and once
the crack starts, it is almost impossible to stop because of the stress concentration at the tip.
STRESS CONCENTRATION
A stress concentration is a physical or metallurgical condition that increases the local stress in
the part by some factor. A good example is the shaft shown in Figure 5. We see that the stress
in the area of the radius varies depending on the size of the radius. A small radius can
increase the stress dramatically.
Figure 5
Stress concentrations, indicated by the symbol Kt, can be caused by changes in metallurgy,
internal defects, or changes in shape. There is extensive data that indicates that the resultant
values depends on both the type of stress, i.e., bending, torsion, etc., and the general shape of
the part.
Stress concentrations have a great effect on crack initiation because of their effect on
increasing the local stress. The crack can start solely as the effect of the operating loads or it
can be multiplied by the stress concentration factor.
WHAT TYPE OF LOAD WAS IT?
The face of a fatigue failure tells us both the type (bending, tension, torsion or a
combination) and the magnitude of the load. To understand the type of load, look at the
direction of crack propagation. It is always going to be perpendicular to the plane of
maximum stress. The four examples in Figure 6 reflects four common fracture paths.
Figure 6
Figure 6 brings up the question "what type of bending?" Was it one-way plane bending, like a
leaf spring or a diving board, or was it rotating bending, such as a motor shaft with a heavy
belt load? As seen in Figure 7, looking at the fracture face again tells us the type of load.
Notice that "rotating load" on the right causes the crack to grow in a non-uniform manner. In
general, when the divider of the instantaneous zone does not point to the origin, it shows
there was a rotating bending involved in the failure cause.
Figure 7
Figure 8
THE EFFECT OF STRESS CONCENTRATIONS ON A FRACTURE FACE
If a part is relatively lightly stressed, the cracking will start at only one point and the result
will look like one of the examples above. However, if a shaft is more heavily loaded, then
cracks can start in several places and work their way across the part. In Figure 9 we see a
sketch of a rotating shaft that failed in only a few weeks. Inspecting it, you can see the
instantaneous zone is very small, indicating it wasnt highly stressed. Also, the crack is
straight across the shaft, showing the cause was a bending load. But if the load was light, why
did the shaft fail? The answer is stress concentrations.
Figure 9
Looking at the fracture face, you see a series of ratchet marks. These are the boundaries
between adjacent fracture planes, i.e., between each pair of ratchet marks is a fracture origin,
and as these individual cracks grow inward they eventually join together on a single plane.
The small instantaneous zone indicates the stress at the time when the shaft finally broke was
low, but the multiple origins and the ratchet marks show us there was enough stress to cause
cracking at many points around the perimeter almost simultaneously.
From this you can conclude that there must have been a significant stress concentration. (The
calculated stress concentration was in the range of 4.0, so the stress in the area of those
origins was four times as much as it should have been.)
With this information on the type of load and the magnitude of the load, we can start looking
at some failures and diagnosing where they came from. Following are some examples of
failures and an explanation of their causes.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure13.
Figure 14.
A testimony to an inept repair. The weld
Figure 15.
loaded shaft.
Figure 16.
Ugly plain bending failure.
2. MATERIAL SUGGESTION
ANALYSIS
Carbon
(C)
Manganes
e (Mn)
Silicon
(Si)
Max
Max
Max
Chromiu
m (Cr)
Nickel
(Ni)
Copper
(Cu)
Phosphoru
s (P)
Sulfur
(S)
Max
Max
0.04
0.3
0.07
1
1
165-17.5
3-5
3-5
17-4 stainless generally conforms to ASTM A564 Type 630 AMS 5643
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Condition
A (annealed)
H900 (hardened at
900 F)
H1150 (hardened
at 1150 F)
Tensile
Strength
(PSI)
Yield
Strength
(PSI)
Shear
Strength
(PSI)
Elongation
in 2"
Hardness
150,000
110,000
10
40
34
200,000
185,000
14
50
44
145,000
125,000
19
60
33
The above values are average and may be considered as representative of 17-4 stainless
APPLICATIONS
17-4 is used where high strength and good corrosion resistance are required, as well as for
applications requiring high fatigue strength, good resistance to galling, seizing and stress
corrosion. Suitable for intricate parts requiring extensive machining and welding, and/or
where distortion in conventional heat treatment is a problem. The corrosion resistance of 17-4
is superior to that of hardenable straight chromium grades such as 416. It approaches the
corrosion resistance of the non-magnetic chromium-nickel grades. Corrosion resisting
properties will be affected by such conditions as surface finish and aging heat treatment.
Common applications include uses in aircraft and gas turbines, nuclear reactors, paper mills,
oil field industry, and chemical process components.
HEAT TREATING
Condition H 900 - 900 F for 1 hour, air cool. Rockwell C 44 average
Condition H1150- 1150 F for 4 hours, air cool. Rockwell C 33 average
Annealing (Condition A)
The annealing (solution treatment) temperature is 1900 F, followed by air cooling.
Maximum Brinell hardness at mid-radius is 363.
3. DESIGN
32 M
d 30 (1k 4 )
Where
d0
zero)
AXIAL LOADING
Case 2 considers axial loading. For a given axial force acted on the shaft, F and
nominal stress in axial force, a :
a=
4 F
d (1k 2)
2
0
Where
d 0 : Outer diameter of the shaft
k
zero)
: Column-action factor
( =1.0 for tensile load)
The term
long slender members which are acted upon by axial compressive loads where
defined as follows:
1) For
L
<115
K
1
10.0044 (
2) For
L
)
K
L
>115
K
yc
L 2
)
2 nE K
(
is
Where
K
: shaft length
yc
: 1.0 for hinged; 2.25 for fixed point; 1.6 for bearing
PURE TORQUE
Case 3 considers pure torque. For a shaft transmitting power, P0 at a rotational speed,
n the transmitted torque, T can be found from:
xy =
16 T
d ( 1k 4)
3
0
Where
xy
zero)
32 M
4 F
+ 2
3
4
d 0 (1k ) d 0 (1k 2)
The net normal stress can be either positive or negative. Normally, shear stress due to
torsion is only considered in a shaft, and shear stress due to load on the shaft is
neglected. Design of the shaft mostly uses maximum shear stress theory. It states that
a machine member fails when the maximum shear stress at a point exceeds the
maximum allowable shear stress for the shaft material. Therefore,
x 2 2
max = allowable= ( ) + xy
2
F d 0 (1+k 2 ) 2 2
16
allowable = 3
(M +
) +T
8
d 0 (1k 4 )
Therefore, the shaft diameter can be calculated in terms of external loads and material
properties. However, the above equation is further standardized for steel shafting in
terms of allowable design stress and load factors in ASME design code for shaft.
The shafts are normally acted upon by gradual and sudden loads. Hence, the equation
is modified in ASME code by suitable load factors as follows:
C
2 2
F d 0 (1+k )
2
(C b M +
) +( t T )
8
16
allowable= 3
4
d0 (1k )
Where
Cb
: bending factor
Ct
: torsion factor
Cb
Ct
1.0
1.0
1.5 2.0
1.5 2.0
1.5
1.0
1.5 2.0
1.0 1.5
2.0 3.0
1.5 3.0
allowable
allowable
allowable
to be considered for
allowable = 30% of the yield strength but not over 18% of the ultimate strength in
tension for shafts without keyways. These values are to be reduced by 25% for the
presence of keyways.
4. ENVIRONMENT FACTOR
Extreme heat or cold can have a damaging effect on fatigue failure and
fatigue life.
Protection Possibilities Checklist
The natural frequency of the structure must stay away from the frequency of
its working environment or loading. Increase natural frequency for reduction of
resonance corrosion fatigue
The fatigue process is thought to cause rupture of the protective passive film,
upon which corrosion is accelerated.
Referencing
http://www.maintenancetechnology.com/2012/07/failure-analysis-of-machine-
shafts/
http://www.plant-maintenance.com/articles/rcfa.shtml
http://www.speedymetals.com/information/Material2.html
http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/blog/fatigue-failure/preventing-fatigue-
failure-with-ultrasonic-impact-treatment
http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/blog/fatigue-failure/preventing-fatiguefailure-with-ultrasonic-impact-treatment
http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/blog/fatigue-failure/preventing-fatiguefailure-with-ultrasonic-impact-treatment