Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis 56 (2016) 1014

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/csefa

Case study

Analysis of a failed rocker arm shaft of a passenger car engine


G.A. Nassef a, A. Elkhatib a, Mostafa Yakout b,*
a
b

Department of Production Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria 21544, Egypt


Department of Mechanical Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada L8S 4L7

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 30 July 2015
Received in revised form 15 December 2015
Accepted 4 January 2016
Available online 8 January 2016

This paper investigates the failure of a rocker arm shaft of a passenger car. The shaft failed
by brittle fracture across one of the four holes supporting the shaft into the cylinder head.
The running distance of the engine just before failure was 40,626 km. Visual examinations
of etched sections of the failed shaft and a new one revealed four distinct zones of darker
etching appearance. These zones correspond to the four locations where the rocker arms
t the shaft.
Microscopic observations of the failed shaft revealed that the four dark-etching areas
are surface hardened zones of martensitic microstructure. Furthermore, scanning the
microstructure along the failed shaft showed that the heat treatment was so mistakenly
extended by excessive heating so that the structure of the shaft near the supporting holes
contains considerable content of martensite phase. This conclusion has been conrmed by
the results of hardness measurements along the surface of the shaft.
Microscopic investigations of the failed shaft revealed the presence of microcracks
close to the supporting holes. These cracks may have been induced in the shaft by the nonuniform cooling during quenching in the course of heat treatment, or may be nucleated by
repeated loading during service. This premature failure has occurred by the rapid crack
propagation because of the lower fracture toughness of the martensite.
2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords:
Root cause analysis
Improper heat treatments
Failure of rocker arm shaft
Hardened steels
Material technology

1. Introduction
Suddenly during the start-up of a passenger car engine, a high abnormal noise accompanied by a jerky vibration of the
engine had been manifested. After dismantling, the local dealer service found that the rocker arm is broken near the middle
as shown in Fig. 1(a). The fracture passes across the hole of one of the supporting bolts as shown in Fig. 1(b). Visual
examination of the car engine showed that the running distance of the engine just before failure was 40,626 km during which
regular services had been given to the engine as recommended by the manufacturers manual.
One of the major causes of component failure is faulty manufacturing. This includes all effects that increase brittleness or
those inducing cracks and or stress raisers in the component. Improper heat treatment has been considered as major causes
of many failures in the literature. Examining the causes of the problem, we came across the following cases.
Torronen et al. [1] examined the brittle fracture behaviour of a Cr-Mo-V alloyed pressure vessel steel after a variety of
quenching and tempering treatments. They found the effective grain size of martensitic microstructure in the alloyed steel.
Lee et al. [2] examined the failure of a rocker arm shaft for passenger car in the design stage and the robustness of its
boundary condition using orthogonal arrays and ANOVA. They found that a fatigue crack in rocker arm shaft was initiated at

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 905 979 4509.


E-mail addresses: mohamemy@mcmaster.ca, yakout_mostafa@yahoo.com (M. Yakout).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csefa.2016.01.001
2213-2902/ 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/
4.0/).

[(Fig._1)TD$IG]

G.A. Nassef et al. / Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis 56 (2016) 1014

11

Fig. 1. Photograph of the failed rocker arm shaft.

through hole and subsequently propagated along its sidewall. An extension of this work [3] shows that the failure stress
conditions of this kind of parts should be analysed before installation. They suggested FEA and SEM analysis to estimate the
stress conditions.
Muhammad et al. [4] investigated the failure of a diesel engine rocker arm and observed metal particles and scratches on
the crack area. Hence, they attributed the failure to a fatigue failure due to stress localisation.
Monlevade et al. [5] suggested that the untempered martensite leads to the appearance of microcracks that develop into
premature catastrophic failures due to its very high hardness. The failure may be avoided by considering the nal heat
treatment process, the pre-heating prior to processing, and the proper assembly of the parts to avoid vibration or relative
movement that may cause friction between parts during use.
In their detailed paper, Ibrahim and Sayuti [6] studied the hardness, microstructure and cracking mechanism of hardened
and tempered AISI 1045 (CF 45 in DIN 17212-72 standrad). They concluded the proper heating and cooling conditions to
avoid cracking due to martensite formation. Another study [7] shows the effect of forming various grain size of austenite on
the martensite morphology, and consequently on the mechanical properties such as hardness and fatigue. It is concluded
that the privileges of controlling the temperature and holding time of the heat treatment process lead to some enhancements
of martensite morphology.
Mateo et al. [8] studied the fatigue resistance of two different samples from austenitic stainless steel grade AISI 301 LN.
The rst sample was annealed and the second sample was cold rolled. They observed different fatigue limits due to the
transformation of austenite to martensite. They hypothesised that the fatigue differences are attributed to the accumulation
of plastic deformation during the treatment which is different from process to another.
From this short review, it is clear that heat treatment, grain size, and the appearance of martensitic phase are main failure
causes of engine components.

2. Experimental work
This paper presents the procedure used to investigate the failure of the rocker arm shaft. The shaft material was
investigated by chemical analysis. Microscopic investigations were applied to compare the microstructure of the failed shaft
with the microstructure of a new shaft. The shaft hardness was measured to investigate the failure cause.
2.1. Characterisation of the shaft material
Chemical analysis of the shaft material gave the composition listed in Table 1. According to DIN 17212-72 standrad, CF 45
is the nearest grade to this steel. This steel belongs to steel grades suitable for surface heat treatments. The recommended
heat treatment condition of the DIN grade is given in Table 2. These conditions are general and may change according to the
application.
2.2. Microscopic investigations
The etched sections of the new shaft and failed shaft were examined. The macro-etching of the new shaft showed areas of
darker etching colours where rocker arms get into contact with the shaft as shown in Fig. 2(a). It is observed that the darker
etching zones are equally spaced, regular and correspond to the areas of rocker arms contact. Conversely, the darker etching
zones of the failed shaft are wider and irregular and extend to the hole locations as shown in Fig. 2(b) and (c).
Observation of the microstructure of the failed shaft at the interface between the two different etching zones close to the
hole, arrow location in Fig. 2(c), showed different microstructures at both sides of the interface as shown in Fig. 3. The dark

G.A. Nassef et al. / Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis 56 (2016) 1014

12

Table 1
Chemical composition of shaft material (wt.%).
Element

Si

Mn

Cr

Ni

Cu

wt.%

0.460

0.280

0.800

0.016

0.013

0.220

0.110

0.002

0.015

Table 2
Heat treatment condition of DIN grade.
Hardening

Quenching agent

Tempering temperature

830860 8C

Water or oil

550660 8C

[(Fig._2)TD$IG]

Fig. 2. (a) Dark-etching zones at rocker arms seats, (b) comparison between dark-etching zones of the new shaft and the failed shaft and (c) dark-etching
zone of the failed shaft.

etching zone is martensitic whereas the light etching one is pearlitic-ferritic. This had been conrmed by measurement of
hardness in the two zones, which gave 240 and 460 HV respectively.
The microstructures of both the failed shaft and the new one at similar locations just beneath the hardened case are
shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b) respectively. The microstructures clearly showed that the grain size of the subsurface unhardened
material is coarser in the failed shaft than in the new one. This is attributed to the grain coarsening effect occurred by
excessive heating during surface treatments. Fig. 5 shows the etched cross sections of the failed shaft and the new one at
identical locations in one of the hardened zones. It is clearly evident that the case hardened layer in the new shaft is deeper
and far more uniform than in the failed one.
3. Hardness measurement
Measurement of hardness along both the failed shaft and the new one gave the hardness distribution shown in Fig. 6(a)
and (b). The hardened zone extends to about 20 mm for the new shaft whereas it extends to about 28 mm for the failed shaft.

[(Fig._3)TD$IG]

G.A. Nassef et al. / Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis 56 (2016) 1014

13

Fig. 3. Microstructure of the shaft material at the interface between the two different etching zones.

[(Fig._4)TD$IG]

Fig. 4. Microstructure of: (a) the failed shaft and (b) the new shaft at similar locations beneath the hardened layer.

[(Fig._5)TD$IG]

Fig. 5. Etched cross section of: (a) the failed shaft and (b) the new shaft taken at one of the four hardened zones.

Moreover, some of the four hardened zones in the failed shaft were mistakenly shifted so that the structure of the shaft near
the supporting holes contains considerable content of martensite phase.
4. Analysis of failure
The fracture surface shown in Fig. 1(b) is one typical of brittle fracture. The location of failure at the region led the
investigator to envisage the reasons for possible crack initiation in this area:

[(Fig._6)TD$IG]

G.A. Nassef et al. / Case Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis 56 (2016) 1014

14

Fig. 6. Hardness distribution along identical portions of the two rocker arm shafts.

1) Measurement of hardness along the surface of the shaft revealed that the shaft is surface heat-treated at the four locations
where the rocker arms t the shaft in service. This had been further conrmed by measurements on a new (unused) shaft
which was also investigated for comparison. However, the above results on the failed shaft revealed that the hardening
treatment had been mistakenly extended by excessive heating to affect the microstructure close to the hole. This had been
deduced from the higher hardness as well as from microstructural changes close to the hole.
2) Excessive heating had been also deduced from the considerable grain coarsening of the base metal of the failed shaft just
beneath the hardened case, as compared to the same location in the new reference shaft.
3) Moreover etching polished cross section at the location of one of the rocker arms revealed irregular dark-etching surface
layer as shown in Fig. 2(c) indicating irregular heating or cooling during heat treatment of the failed shaft.

5. Conclusions
Excluding design reasons, failures in such cases are attributed to one of the following reasons:
1) Consequential failure.
2) Improper lubrication.
3) Faulty manufacturing (including assembly).
Consequential failure is excluded because the shaft was the only failed component in the car engine. Given that the engine
had not been dismantled before the incidence and that the engine was given the in-time recommended service, the second
cause of failure is improbable.
For all of the above reasons and given the results of the above investigation, such failure is attributed to improper heat
treatment of the shaft during manufacturing. The failure mechanism is attributed to dynamic fatigue failure due to cyclic
crack propagation in the brittle zone of the arm. It is recommended to conduct a proper heat treatment to the whole body of
the arm in order to prevent recurrent similar failures in the future.
Acknowledgments
It is to acknowledge with gratitude the efforts of everyone who shared both practically and morally in the completion of
this paper.
References
[1] Torronen K, Kotilainen H, Nenonen P. A comparison of brittle fracture behaviour of variously tempered martensitic and bainitic structures of secondary
hardening Cr-Mo-V pressure vessel steel. In: 5th International Conference on Fracture (ICF 5); 1981.
[2] Lee D-W, Lee S-J, Cho S-S, Joo W-S. Failure of rocker arm shaft for 4-cylinder SOHC engine. Eng Fail Anal 2005;12:40512.
[3] Lee DW, Cho SS, Joo WS. An estimation of failure stress condition in rocker arm shaft through FEA and microscopic fractography. J Mech Sci Technol
2008;22:205661.
[4] Muhammad MM, Isa MC, Yati MSD, Bakar SRS, Noor IM. Failure analysis of a diesel engine rocker arm. Def S&T Tech Bull 2010;3(2):7884.
[5] Monlevade EF, Feitosa ME, Leite Junior PC, Bueno M. Fracture of cutting tools due to the formation of untempered martensite. Eng Fail Anal
2013;27:31421.
[6] Ibrahim A, Sayuti M. Effect of heat treatment on hardness and microstructures of AISI 1045. Adv Mater Res 2015;1119:5759.
[7] Prawoto Y, Jasmawati N, Sumeru K. Effect of prior austenite grain size on the morphology and mechanical properties of martensite in medium carbon
steel. J Mater Sci Technol 2012;28(5):4616.
[8] Mateo A, Fargas G, Zapata A. Martensitic transformation during fatigue testing of an AISI 301LN stainless steel. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials
Science and Engineering, vol. 31, Paper #012010. 2012. p. 17.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen