A bolt breaks along a change in cross section well below its rated capacity. An anchoring screw spins freely in place, having snapped at its first supporting thread. A motor unexpectedly disengages its load, its driveshaft having fractured near a keyway. Such failures – involving axles, leaf springs, engine rods, wing struts, bearings, gears, and more – can occur, seemingly without cause, due to vibrational fracture. Vibrational fractures begin as cracks that form under cyclic loading at nominal stresses which may be considerably lower than the yield point of the material. The fracture is proceeded by local gliding and the development of cracks along lattice planes favorably orientated with respect to the principal stress. This non-reversible process is often misleadingly called “fatigue” and presents significant challenges to engineering teams that ill-advisedly take to searching for material faults. Several examples of notch-induced vibrational fractures are presented along with guidelines for investigating their cause.

A crankshaft was overloaded on a test stand and suffered an incipient crack in the crank pin. The crack run generally parallel to the longitudinal axis and branched off at the entrance into the two fillets at the transition to the crank arm. It consisted of many small cracks, all of which propagated at an angle of approximately 45 deg to the longitudinal axis, and therefore were caused by torsion stresses. Neither macroscopic nor microscopic examination determined any material or processing faults. Experience has shown that torsion vibration fractures of this kind usually appear in comparatively short journal pins at high stresses. This crankshaft fracture was an example of the damage that is caused or promoted neither by material nor heat treatment mistakes nor by defects of design or machining, but solely by overstressing.

This case study involves two continuously cast steel crankshaft failures. Three parties performed their own failure analyses: (1) the engine manufacturer responsible for component design, specification, and application; (2) the steel supplier and forging supplier responsible for making the steel, forging the shape, and preliminary heat treatment; and (3) a supplier that provided induction hardening, finish machining, and inspection. An independent engineering firm was subsequently involved, but because each party had its own agenda, there was no agreement on the metallurgical source of the failure and thus no continued analysis to pin down and eliminate the root cause.

A portion of two large spur tooth bull gears made from 4147H Cr-Mo alloy steel that had spalling teeth was submitted for evaluation. The gears were taken from a final drive wheel reduction unit of a very large open-pit mining truck. The parts had met the material and initial heat treat hardening specifications. The mode of failure was tooth profile spalling. By definition, spalling originates at a case/core interface or at the juncture of a hardened/nonhardened area. The cause of this failure was either insufficient or no induction-hardened case along the active profile. The cause was activated by a nonfunctioning induction hardening coil that did not or was not allowed to harden the midprofile of several teeth.

Splined rotor shafts (constructed from 1151 steel) used on small electric motors were found to miss one spline each from several shafts before the motors were put into service. Apparent peeling of splines on the induction-hardened end of each rotor shaft was revealed by visual and stereo-microscopic examination. One tooth on each shaft was found to be broken off. It was revealed by metallographic examination of an unetched section through the fractured tooth that the fracture surface was concave and had an appearance characteristic of a seam. Partial decarburization of the surface was revealed after etching with 1% nital. The presence of a crack, with typical oxides found in seams at its root, was disclosed by an unetched section through the shaft in an area unaffected by induction heating. The etched samples revealed similar decarburization as was noted on the fracture surface of the tooth. It was concluded that the seam had been present before the shaft was heat treated and these seams acted as stress raisers during induction hardening to cause the shaft failure. It was recommended that the specifications should specify that the shaft material should be free of seams and other surface imperfections.