Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

jo u rn a l h omep age : w w w .e l se v i e r. c o m / lo c a te /e n g f a i l a n a l

Failure analysis of an elevator drive shaft

A. Gksenli *, I.B. Eryrek
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Gmssuyu 34437, Taksim, Istanbul, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study failure analysis of an elevator drive shaft is analyzed in detail. Failure occurred
Received 23 May 2008 at the keyway of the shaft. Microstructural, mechanical and chemical properties of the
Accepted 25 May 2008 shaft are determined. After visual investigation of the fracture surface it is concluded that
Available online 11 June 2008
fracture occurred due to torsional-bending fatigue. Fatigue crack has initiated at the key-
way edge. Considering elevator and driving systems, forces and torques acting on the shaft
Keywords: are determined; stresses occurring at the failure surface are calculated. Stress analysis is
Drive shaft also carried out by using nite element method (FEM) and the results are compared with
Elevator
the calculated values. Endurance limit and fatigue safety factor is calculated, fatigue cycle
Failure analysis
Notch effect
analysis of the shaft is estimated. Reason for failure is investigated and concluded that frac-
Finite element method ture occurred due to faulty design or manufacturing of the keyway (low radius of curvature
at keyway corner, causing high notch effect). In conclusion effect of change in radius of cur-
vature on stress distribution is explained by using FEM and precautions which have to be
taken to prevent a similar failure is claried.
2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The elevator drive shaft investigated in this paper was in service for 30 years. Elevator drive system is mounted at the
bottom of the building (Fig. 1). It is reported that no maintenance was applied on the shaft during operation life. The elevator
is used in a building consisting of eight oor and 16 apartments. The elevator has a four person (320 kg) capacity. Just before
the accident, two persons were leaving the elevator and because of sudden fracture of the shaft, connection between pulley
and electric engine was broken, which lead the break system of the engine to fail. Due to the weight of balance weight, ele-
vator lifted upwards with a huge speed. During the accident nobody was injured.

2. Analysis of elevator drive system

During analysis of elevator drive system, it is concluded that torque, which is produced by an electric motor, is transmit-
ted by a worm gear to the shaft. The electric engine, which produces 6.5 HP, is rotating 1500 rpm and reduction ratio of the
worm gear is 28.6. The shaft rotates the pulley by a key. The four main ropes of the elevator are placed on the pulley and by
revolving in both direction of the drive shaft and pulley, the elevator moves up and down. Service speed of the elevator is
0.6 m/s. The shaft is supported in three points in form of journal bearings (Fig. 2).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: goksenli@itu.edu.tr (A. Gksenli), eryurekb@itu.edu.tr (I.B. Eryrek).

1350-6307/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.05.014
1012 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019

Fig. 1. Elevator system inside the building.

Fig. 2. Elevator drive system.

3. Visual investigation of fracture surface

After primary visual investigation it is revealed that fracture occurred at the keyway where the pulley is fasten at the shaft
(Fig. 3).
After analyzing fracture surface (Fig. 4), a typical torsional-bending fatigue fracture surface is detected [1]. Fatigue cracks
initiated at the corners of the keyway and moved almost along the whole surface. The small area of brittle fracture surface
indicates a low applied stress. Fatigue lines were detected only near to the brittle fracture region. This might be due to the
friction of two separated surfaces with each other, causing the formed fatigue lines to disappear.

4. Properties of material

As no information with respect to the chemical composition of the shaft material was available, the rst task in the failure
analysis was the material identication. To determine shaft material, chemical, mechanical properties and microstructural
analysis was carried out.
 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019 1013

Fig. 3. Failed shaft.

Fig. 4. Fracture surface.

4.1. Chemical analysis

The chemical analysis of the shaft was carried out by atomic absorption spectroscopy and is reported in Table 1.

4.2. Microstructure

The microstructure of the shaft material was developed by etching, after diamond polishing, with 2% Nitral solution and
was observed under the microscope (Fig. 5). A ferriticpearlitic and ne grain structure can be clearly seen.

4.3. Mechanical properties

Tensile and hardness tests were performed to determine the mechanical properties of the shaft which can be seen in
Table 2.
Considering mechanical, chemical and microstructural analyze results, shaft material is estimated as St52.0. Tensile, yield,
elongation and hardness values are suitable for the catalogue values of St52.0 according DIN 1629 [2].

Table 1
Chemical composition of the shaft

C 0.22 Al 0.012 P 0.031

Si 0.40 Mn 0.13 S 0.029
1014 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019

Fig. 5. Microstructure of the shaft material (200).

Table 2
Mechanical properties of the shaft

Yield strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa) Rapture elongation (%) Hardness (BHN)
339 569 18 165

5. Stress analysis

By stress analysis, minimum and maximum normal and shear stress values occurring at the fracture surface during oper-
ation is investigated. At rst, forces and torques acting on the shaft are determined. By analyzing minimum stress value, only
the weight of the empty cabin (420 kg) and balance weight (580 kg) is considered. In this case, reaction forces causes a bend-
ing moment of 437.4 N m at the fracture surface resulting as normal stress value of 20.6 MPa. Shear forces, caused due to the
loads of empty cabin, ropes and balance weights, forms a shear stress of 3.5 MPa. By analyzing maximum stress value, bal-
ance weight, cabin weight with four persons inside (each person is 80 kg and the total weight of the cabin is 740 kg), torsion
moment and impact ratio is considered. In this case bending moment of 571 N m occurs at the fracture surface causing a
normal stress value of 27 MPa. Shear stress value, due to shear force, is 4.7 MPa. The 6.5 HP electric engine rotates at
1500 rot/min, conversion ratio of the worm gear is 28.6 and drive system efciency (due to worm gear mechanism) is
0.7. Considering these parameters, torsion moment is calculated as 887.7 N m. Total shear stress is calculated under these
circumstances as 25.7 MPa.
By visual examination it was determined that the transition from keyway ground to keyway side surface (corner) was
approximately perpendicular and almost no radius of curvature (RC) was observed (Fig. 6).
Theoretical, RC cannot be zero, it can only reach a value of 0.4 mm by ne milling cutter [3]. Therefore by calculations RC
is taken as 0.4 mm, causing an enormous high notch effect. The theoretical notch effect is analyzed in two states (using rel-
evant tables [4]); shear notch effect (aS) which is determined as 2.93 and bending notch effect aB is determined as 2.72. Fa-
tigue notch factor (b) considering geometry and material of the shaft can be calculated as [4]:
b 1 a 1 g 1

Fig. 6. Failed shaft and fracture surface.

 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019 1015

where g is notch sensitivity factor and its value is 0.85 [4]. Using Eq. (1) shear fatigue notch effect (bS) is calculated as 2.64
and normal fatigue notch effect (bN) as 2.46. Impact ratio coefcient is taken as 1.2. Considering shear and normal stresses,
impact ratio (q) and fatigue notch effects, equivalent stress (rEQ) is calculated using Shape Deformation Energy Hypothesis
[5] as
q
rEQ 2
r q bN 3 s q bS
2
2

The summarized results can be seen in Table 3.

5.1. Fatigue strength analysis

Fatigue strength (endurance limit rE) of the shaft material was calculated as [6]
rE 0:5 UTS 0:5 568 284 MPa 3
Considering size
. . factor (kD) for 60 mm diameter as kD = 0.77 and surface factor (ne polished) kS = 0.95 [6]; the new
endurance limit rIE is calculated as

rIE rE kS kD 284 0:77 0:95 208 MPa 4

rI
E 208 MPa. From our calculations done before we know that average stress value (rM) is not zero. To determine the
effect of rM on endurance limit, we have to know or at least to estimate rM. To calculate rM, we have to consider the change
of stress value occurring at the fracture surface in time. But this is quite difcult. By our calculations done before we calcu-
lated maximum and minimum stress values. Minimum stress value occurred at empty cabin and stationary position (veloc-
ity is zero) and with no acceleration, maximum stress value by acceleration of the elevator and four persons (each person is
assumed to be 80 kg) inside the cabin. But in real, number of persons transported inside the cabin is not always the maxi-
mum transportation number of person (four). Therefore a Variable-amplitude stress occurs at the fracture surface depend-
ing on the number of persons inside the cabin (Fig. 7).
Each minimum peak demonstrates the stress value at the fracture surface at the time the elevator is not moving and is
empty, each maximum peak demonstrates the stress value occurring at the time of cruise of the elevator with person(s) in-
side the cabin and considering acceleration.
To calculate average stress value, we have to transform Variable-amplitude stress into Constant-amplitude stress by
assuming that always maximum stress occurs at the fracture surface (always four persons are transported). According to this
assumption, change of stress value versus time can be seen in Fig. 8. In this case average stress value is 108 MPa.
Considering average stress value, before calculated
. . endurance limit is modied. By the analysis, criteria of Goodman [6] is
regarded (Fig. 9) and modied endurance limit rEII is calculated as
rII I
E rE 1 rM =UTS 208 1 108=569 170 5
. .
Considering modied endurance limit r and equivalent stress (rEQ), fatigue safety factor (t) can be calculated as
II
E

t rI E=rEQ 170=162 1:05 6

5.2. Fatigue life analysis

From Eq. (6) can be seen that fatigue safety factor is quite very low (t = 1.05). For detailed fatigue life analysis, life cycle is
estimated by following assumptions: The total elevator displacement inside the building is by eight oors approximately
21 m. The building consists of 16 apartments. In half of the apartments there are two and other half there are three persons
living. Each person is using the elevator twice a day. The elevator has been used 340 days in a year and shaft is in operation
for 30 years. The diameter of the pulley is 400 mm and by each rotation the elevator is moving 1.257 m. Considering these
explanations, total life of the shaft was approximately 6.8 106 cycles.
For further fatigue analysis, stress-cycle (SN) curve of the shaft is estimated. To draw the SN curve of the shaft, accord-
ing to Juvinall and Shigley [7,8], stress value (rF) where fatigue failure cycle at 103 cycles occur, can be calculated as
rF m UTS 7

Table 3
Stress, force and torque values occurring at the fracture surface during operation

Normal stress (MPa) Shear stress (MPa) Equivalent stress (MPa)

Shear force Torque Total

Minimum 50.6 9.2 9.2 54
Maximum 79.7 15.1 67.3 82.4 162
1016 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019

Fig. 7. Stresstime graphic acting on the fracture surface depending on the number of persons inside the cabin (Variable-amplitude load).

Fig. 8. Stresstime graphic acting on the fracture surface (Constant-amplitude load).

Fig. 9. Determining modied endurance limit considering average stress value of 108 MPa (according to Goodman).

where m = 0.9 for bending. The stress value at Nf = 103 cycles according Eq. (7) is 512 MPa. The second point at the graph
is the endurance limit value, which is 106 cycles for steel. According to these explanations, estimated SN diagram can be
seen in Fig. 10.
By low stress values and high cycle fatigue, failures can occur between 106 and 107 cycles [9]. Therefore estimating life
cycle value of 6.8 106 cycles for fatigue failure supports our thesis.
 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019 1017

Fig. 10. Estimated stress-cycle diagram.

6. Finite element analysis

To examine stress distribution at the keyway and fracture surface, nite element method (FEM) was applied. By the anal-
ysis ANSYS program was used. A precise geometrical model of the shaft was built up. Since the shaft is too long to be ana-
lyzed completely as a three-dimensional object, only the keyway and fracture region was modeled in detail (Fig. 11).
High stress regions, especially at the corner of the keyway can be clearly seen. The dominant effect of the raise in stress
values is the low radius of curvature causing a high notch effect. The aim of stress analysis using FEM was to verify our stress
calculations done before. From Fig. 11 can be seen that stress values at the fracture surface were close to the calculated ones.

7. Discussion

By increasing radius of curvature (RC) value, stresses occurring at the keyway corner could be decreased effectively. To
determine the effect of RC on stress distribution, nite element analysis is carried out. By this examination, RC-value was
increased stepwise for visual analysis of decrease in stress values, which can be seen in Fig. 12.
Dramatic decrease of stress values at keyway corner can be clearly seen. For further investigation, the effect of change in
RC on stress and fatigue safety factor is analyzed in detail which can be seen in Figs. 13 and 14.
By increasing radius of curvature even from 0.5 mm to 2 mm would decrease stress value from 163 to 104 MPa and an
increase in fatigue safety factor from 1.05 to 1.78. Figs. 13 and 14 demonstrate that an increase of radius of curvature would

Fig. 11. Finite element mesh of the shaft.

1018 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019

Fig. 12. Effect of radius of curvature (RC) on stress distribution using FEM.

Fig. 13. Effect of RC on stress distribution.

Fig. 14. Effect of RC on fatigue safety factor.

probably prevent the failure of the elevator drive shaft. In conclusion it is determined that fracture of the shaft occurred due
to faulty design or manufacturing of the keyway (low radius of curvature), causing a high notch effect.
 A. Gksenli, I.B. Eryrek / Engineering Failure Analysis 16 (2009) 10111019 1019

8. Summary

Failure analysis of an elevator drive shaft is investigated in detail. Microstructural, mechanical and chemical properties of
the shaft are determined. After visual investigation of the fracture surface it is concluded that fracture occurred due tor-
sional-bending fatigue. Fatigue crack has initiated at the keyway edge. Forces and torques acting on the shaft are deter-
mined; stresses occurring at the fracture surface are calculated. Endurance limit and fatigue safety factor is calculated,
fatigue analysis and fatigue cycle life of the shaft is estimated. Fracture of the shaft occurred due to faulty design or manu-
facturing of the keyway (low radius of curvature), causing a high notch effect. In conclusion effect of change in radius of cur-
vature on stress intensity and distribution is explained by using FEM and precautions which have to be taken to prevent a
similar failure is claried.

References

[1] Eryrek IB. Failure analysis. Istanbul: Birsen Publisher; 1993.

[2] Eube J. Standards for steel a handbook of tables from DIN standards. Beuth; 2007.
[3] Edwards K, McKee BR. Fundamentals of mechanical component design. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991.
[4] Frost NE, Marsh KJ, Pook LP. Metal fatigue. New York: Dover Publisher; 1999.
[5] John C. Strength of materials and structures. New York: Arnold Publisher; 1999.
[6] Buch A. Fatigue data handbook. Trans Tech. Publisher; 1998.
[7] Juyinall RC, Marshek KM. Fundamentals of machine component design. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley and Sons; 1991.
[8] Shigley JE, Mischke CR. Mechanical engineering design. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1989.
[9] Glec S, Aran A. Fatigue strength of steels and cast irons. TUBITAK Publisher; 1983.