Sie sind auf Seite 1von 36

Collars

Old lot and new lot


Old: ductile fracture
New: brittle fracture

No differences in composition (emission spectrometer)


No differences in microstucture (optical microscope,
SEM)
Fracture surfaces (SEM) Fish eyes in new lot
hydrogen embrittlement (emission spectrometer does
not detect hydrogen)
Manufacturing problem send a bill to manufacturer

Collars

Collars

Collars

Another hydrogen embrittlement


case

Keel of a boat

A VERY badly corroded part (pitting)


Aluminium alloy, had been in seawater
Painted with black paint by owner
Paint was tried to remove by grinding, but was
not completely successfull
Al analysis was OK (EDS)
Analysis of the paint: 33% Cu, 28% S, 28% Al,
6% Zn, 3% Si, 2% Mg, and 1% Ca
Reason of the failure?

Keel of a boat
Reason of the failure: Reaction of copper
containing paint and aluminium
Owners fault

Plastic cover
Failured after a short operation time
Visual examination and SEM
Fatigue fracture
Initiation site 0.5 mm below the surface at the
tip of a crack (not forrmed mechanically)
Crack has been formed during manufacturing
(melt processing)

Plastic cover

Plastic cover

Rail
A rail failured 30.3.2005 when a train was
passing (air temperature about -10 C)
Rail steel (grade R260), manufactured 1975
Visual examinatin on failure site
Determination of the primary fracture surface
(corroded badly) may have formed ealier
Determination of the initiation point (rail fishplate bolt
hole)
Determination of the secondary fracture surfaces (not
so badly corroded)
Photographing of the site

Rail
Fracture surface studies (visual, SEM)
Removal of the corrosion product (ultrasonic cleaning
+ rust removal agent)
Brittle fracture, no signs of fatigue fracture
Burr of the hole (hole was drilled)
Burr seems to be heavily heated during drilling
Burr was not sharp, but rather blunted by high temperature

Fracture surfaces were not rubbed against each


other a gap was formed between the fracture
surfaces tensile stresses in the rail

Rail
Macrostructural studies
Macrostructure OK, very homogeneous

Microstructural studies
Interior: perlitic
Surface: ferritic-pearlitic
OK, no big inclusions

Microstructure of the burr


Thick oxide layer (heating)
Microstructure is not martensitic (it is ferrite + pearlite) T has
not raised to austenite area (730 C) or cooling rate was too
slow, the latter more probable
Crack, surfaces were oxidiced formed during drilling stress
concentration

Rail
Tensile tests

Yield strength 490 MPa


Ultimate tensile strength 970 MPa
Elongation at failure 20 %
All OK

Impact strength tests as a function of T


20 C 2.9 J.100 C 7.8 J
Brittle

Hardness tests
250 HV1 330 HV1, average 300 HV1
OK

Chemical composition

C, S, P and Al were high, but typical to rather old steels (1975) impact
strengt and transition temperature
Anyway, composition of the material was not the principal reason of the
failure

Rail
Conclusions
Brittle below 100 C
Composition enhance brittleness
Temperature enhance brittleness
Main reason was the poor finishing of the hole
cracks stress concentrations
enhance brittleness

Rail
Secondary fracture

Primary fracture

Rail

Primary fracture

Primary fracture

Rail

Initiation point

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail

Rail
Limits

C 0.8 %
P 0.02 %
S 0.025 %
Al 0.004 %

Shaft
Shaft of a hydraulic cylinder, Fe 52
Visual inspection + SEM

Initiation points on the oppositie sides of the shaft bending


loading
No microstructural defects

Optical microscopy
No microstructural defects

Analysis and hardness OK


Yield point 360 MPa, ultimate tensile strength 575 MPa
Conclusions
Material and its properties OK
Overloading
Faulty design

Shaft

Shaft

Gear
Visual inspection
Fatigue
Initiation point

Microstructure
Optical microscope + SEM
Casting pores (sizes 2-3 mm), also on the surface
stress concentrations

Microstructure, hardness, mechanical properties,


fracture toughness OK
Conclusion
Manufacturing defect

Gear

Gear

Gear
General view
Light areas
Proeutectoid
Widmansttten ferrite
in the matrix of ferrite
+ pearlite

Gear
Dark areas
Bainite + ferrite (white
areas)

Expansion compensator

Duplex (austenitic-ferritic) stainless steel


Cold formed and annealed at 1065 C, cooling in air
Fractured at the bent spot during mounting (welding)
Visual examination + SEM cracks, no oxidation
formed after annealing
Optical microscopy intermetallic compounds at grain
boundaries brittleness
Annealing in laboratory at 1100 C and quenching in
water no intermetallic compounds
Tensile test, ultimate elongation 12 % (should be 30 %)
brittle
Analysis OK

Expansion compensator
Annealing a test-piece in laboratory at
1100 C and quenching in water no
intermetallic compounds
A well?-known fact: at temperature-range
350-800 C intermetallic compounds
precipitate brittleness. Therefore, use
water quenching, if possible.
Conclusion
Wrong heat-treatment

Expansion compensator

Expansion compensator

Expansion compensator