Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
(2010) 10:393398
DOI 10.1007/s11668-010-9373-4
TECHNICAL ARTICLEPEER-REVIEWED
Submitted: 25 January 2010 / in revised form: 7 June 2010 / Published online: 23 June 2010
ASM International 2010
Introduction
The primary objective of a metallurgical failure analysis is
to determine the root cause of failure. Whether dealing
S. F. Hassan (&)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, King Fahd University
of Petroleum & Minerals, P.O. Box 1061, Dhahran 31261,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
e-mail: sfhassan@kfupm.edu.sa
M. R. Alam
School of Engineering Systems, PELM, CQUniversity Australia,
Gladstone Campus, Bryan Jordan Drive,
Gladstone 4680, QLD, Australia
123
394
Gearbox shaft
Clutch shaft
Length, mm
1650
1350
150
230
Diameter at fracture, mm
Investigation Methodology
Metallography
An initial, thorough background investigation was conducted to identify possible contributing factors to the
failure. The failure analysis was organized so that the
investigation of the failed gearbox shaft and clutch shaft
included the study of (i) fractured surfaces by visual
observations and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
coupled with energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS)
to establish the failure modes, (ii) metallography of prepared sections from the shafts, (iii) the determination of the
chemical composition of the shafts by using spectroscopic
chemical analysis, and (iv) measurement of the tensile
properties and impact toughness of materials by tensile and
Charpy tests at room temperature. Care was taken to avoid
any damage to fractured surfaces.
Results of Investigations
Examination of Fracture Surface
The failed gearbox shaft is shown in Fig. 1a. The visual
examination of fracture surface (see Fig. 1b) revealed the
(i) presence of inwardly progressive circumferential beach
marks indicating fatigue, and (ii) smeared small final
fracture zone at the core of the shaft. Circumferential
ratchet mark suggests the fatigue started in multiple locations at the outer surface under rotational bending stress.
Careful view of matching fracture surfaces revealed that
there was sharp step-down in diameter (see Fig. 1c) of the
shaft which acted as stress riser, i.e., notch, and initiated
the fatigue cracks under rotational bending stress. Scanning
electron microscopy on the fracture surface revealed
striations (see Fig. 1e) in the beach marked fatigue zone
(b in Fig. 1b) and fine dimples (see Fig. 1f) in the
severely smeared final fracture zone (a in Fig. 1b).
The failed clutch shaft is shown in Fig. 2a. The visual
examination of the fracture surface of the clutch shaft
showed star-shaped fracture pattern typical of torsional
123
Chemical Analysis
Result of chemical analysis of the shafts materials is shown
in Table 2. Chemical analysis results revealed that the
gearbox shaft was made of SAE4340 grade steel, and the
clutch shaft was made of SAE5046H grade steel [4].
Mechanical Testing
Mechanical testing for tensile and fracture properties can
provide quantitative measures of strength and susceptibility
to failure. Tensile test and Charpy test were conducted to
measure the yield strength, percentage of elongation, and
the impact energies of the gearbox shaft and clutch shaft
materials, and the results are shown in Table 3.
Discussion
Chemical analysis on the materials composition (see
Table 2) suggested that the gearbox shaft was made of low
alloy SAE 4340 [4] which is considered to have excellent
notch toughness, which is in anomaly compared with other
high strength steels. Tempered martensitic microstructure
(see Fig. 3a) revealed by metallography on gearbox shaft
materials suggests that the shaft was heat treated. The
circumferential geometrical discontinuity in the gearbox
shaft was sharp due to sudden step-down in diameter (see
Fig. 1a, c) and induced the notching effect, i.e., acted as
stress concentration site under the rotational bending stress
[3, 5, 6]: For a rotating shaft, (a) every point on the
periphery sustains a cyclic tensile/compressive stress once
395
a
Final overload
Beach mark
Beach mark
(b)
Crack growth
direction
Ratchet mark
Machined zone
Machined
Fatigued zone
(a)
Stress riser
(d)
(c)
(e)
(f)
Fig. 1 (a) As-received fractured gearbox shaft. (b) Photograph showing crack initiation sites (pointed with arrow), smooth fatigue beach mark
(zone b) and rough final fracture (zone a) as the magnified view of the section boxed in figure (a). (c) Schematic diagram showing sharp
change in the diameter of the gearbox shaft around the fractured zone. (d) Fractograph showing crack initiation sites at the sharp edge of the
reduced section (boxed in figure a) in the case of gearbox shaft. (e) Fractographs showing fatigue striations with the presence of heavy plastic
deformation (zone b in figure b) in the case of gearbox. (f) Fractographs showing fine ductile dimples at the final overloaded region (zone a
in figure b) in the case of gearbox shaft
123
396
Fig. 2 (a) As-received clutch shaft. (b) Photographs showing uniformly distributed corrosion pits around the fracture zone in the case of clutch
shaft. (c) Fractographs showing cleavage steps on star-shaped pattern on the fracture surface of the clutch shaft. (d) Scanning electron
micrograph with associated EDX spectrum showing iron oxide in the corrosion pit of in the case of clutch shaft
123
extent that the applied stress caused the final tensile fracture (see Fig. 1a, f). The SEA4340 steel was apparently the
most suitable materials for the gearbox shaft which contained a design-induced notch because this steel has an
increasing notch endurance with increasing tensile
strength. Although this is an anomaly compared to other
grades of steels where notch endurance decreases with
increasing strength level [5], the fatigue endurance was
expected to be high in the high strength steel. However,
the measured strength of the gearbox shaft material
397
Conclusions
From the failure analysis, the following conclusions can be
made: (a) the root cause of entire system failure was the
fatigue of a gearbox shaft that was not heat treated properly; (b) rotary-bending fatigue was the failure mode of the
gearbox shaft, and this failure occurred because of the low
strength of the low alloy steel in the notch region; (c) the
Fig. 3 Representative micrographs showing (a) tempered martensitic, and (b) pearlite with proeutectoid ferrite network at grain
boundary, in the cases of gearbox and clutch shaft, respectively
Experimental
646
815.5
Clutch
Shaft
335.2
12401470
684.2
24
19
123
14
Elongation, %
Impact energy, J, at ?20C
SAE4340 [4]
Si
Mn
Cu
Ni
Gearbox shaft
0.44
0.30
0.68
0.03
0.12
Clutch shaft
0.45
0.30
0.81
0.01
0.02
Cr
Mo
1.72
0.74
0.20
0.13
Gradea
SAE4340
SAE5046H
123
398
Recommendations
The investigations suggested that (a) enhancement in
strength of the gearbox shaft material using a deep hardening heat treatment, and (b) the selection of a tougher low
alloy steel for the clutch shaft, coupled with periodic
inspection and proper maintenance should prevent future
premature failures.
123
References
1. Jing Ping, J., Guang, M.: Investigation on the failure of the gear
shaft connected to extruder. Eng. Fail. Anal. 15, 420429 (2008)
2. Sofronas, A.: Analytical Troubleshooting of Process Machinery
and Pressure Vessels. Wiley Interscience, John Wiley & Sons Inc
(2006)
3. Callister, W.D.: Materials Science and Engineering an Introduction, 7th edn., pp. 227238. John Wiley & Sons Inc, NY (2007)
4. Boyer, H.E.: Properties and selection: irons and steels. In: Metal
Handbook, 9th edn., vol. 1, pp. 130, 424426, 680. American
Society for Metals, Metal Park, OH (1978)
5. Hutchings, F.R., Unterweiser, P.M.: Failure Analysis: The British
Engine Technical Reports, pp. 99120. American Society for
Metals, Metal Parks, OH (1981)
6. Boyer, H.E.: Failure analysis and prevention. In: ASM Handbook,
vol. 11, pp. 373397. ASM International, Materials Park, OH (2002)