The 1040 steel crankshaft in a reciprocating engine cracked within one year of operation. The journals of the main and crankpin bearings were inspected by the magnetic-particle method. Three to six indications of 1.5 to 9.5 mm long discontinuities were observed in at least four of the main-bearing journals. A crack along the fillet, almost entirely through the web, was observed in one of the main-bearing journals. Numerous coarse segregates, identified as sulfide inclusions, were identified by macroetching the surface during metallographic examination of a section taken through the main-bearing journal at the primary crack. Fatigue cracking with low-stress high-cycle characteristics was disclosed during macroscopic examination of the crack surface. Sulfide inclusions, which acted as stress raisers, were found to be present in the region where cracking originated. As a corrective measure, ultrasonic inspection was used in addition to magnetic-particle inspection to detect discontinuities.

Cylinder fatigue can result from abnormal heating in service. Fatigue can be experienced also by piston heads, exhaust valves, and turbosupercharger housings (castings). Pistons from different engines series can sometimes fit, but because of slight design modifications, they may not function properly. Circumferential cracks and fractures near the head-to- barrel junctions have occurred on numerous cylinders of reciprocating piston engines. In most instances, cracks were caused by high cyclic pressures and high temperatures resulting most probably from detonation. At times, fractures or cracks (or both) were also caused by a combination of unfavorable temperature distribution (and possibly excessive pressures around the cylinder barrel), un-nitrided internal surfaces of cylinder barrels, and inadequate thread contours, which caused high stress concentrations at the thread roots. One example of the most common type of cylinder failure is illustrated.

The master connecting rod of a reciprocating aircraft engine revealed cracks during routine inspection. The rods were forged from 4337 (AMS 6412) steel and heat treated to a specified hardness of 36 to 40 HRC. H-shaped cracks in the wall between the knuckle-pin flanges were revealed by visual examination. The cracks were originated as circumferential cracks and then propagated transversely into the bearing-bore wall. No inclusions in the master rod were detected by magnetic-particle and x-ray inspection. Three large inclusions lying approximately parallel to the grain direction and fatigue beach marks around two of the inclusions were revealed by macroscopic examination of the fracture surface. Large nonmetallic inclusions that consisted of heavy concentrations of aluminum oxide (Al2O3) were revealed by microscopic examination of a section through the fracture origin. The forging vendors were notified about the excess size of the nonmetallic inclusions in the master connecting rods and a nondestructive-testing procedure for detection of large nonmetallic inclusions was established.

An investigation of a damaged crankshaft from a horizontal, six-cylinder, in-line diesel engine of a public bus was conducted after several failure cases were reported by the bus company. All crankshafts were made from forged and nitrided steel. Each crankshaft was sent for grinding, after a life of approximately 300,000 km of service, as requested by the engine manufacturer. After grinding and assembling in the engine, some crankshafts lasted barely 15,000 km before serious fractures took place. Few other crankshafts demonstrated higher lives. Several vital components were damaged as a result of crankshaft failures. It was then decided to send the crankshafts for laboratory investigation to determine the cause of failure. The depth of the nitrided layer near fracture locations in the crankshaft, particularly at the fillet region where cracks were initiated, was determined by scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with electron-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDAX). Microhardness gradient through the nitrided layer close to fracture, surface hardness, and macrohardness at the journals were all measured. Fractographic analysis indicated that fatigue was the dominant mechanism of failure of the crankshaft. The partial absence of the nitrided layer in the fillet region, due to over-grinding, caused a decrease in the fatigue strength which, in turn, led to crack initiation and propagation, and eventually premature fracture. Signs of crankshaft misalignment during installation were also suspected as a possible cause of failure. In order to prevent fillet fatigue failure, final grinding should be done carefully and the grinding amount must be controlled to avoid substantial removal of the nitrided layer. Crankshaft alignment during assembly and proper bearing selection should be done carefully.

Results of failure analyses of two aircraft crankshafts are described. These crankshafts were forged from AMS 6414 (similar composition to AISI 4340) vacuum arc remelted steels with sulfur contents of 0.003% (low sulfur) and 0.0005% (ultra-low sulfur). A grain boundary sulfide precipitate was caused by overheat of the low sulfur steel, and an incipient melting of grain boundary junctions was caused by overheat of the ultra-low sulfur steel. The precipitates and incipient melting in these two failed crankshafts were observed during the examination. As expected, impact fractures from the low sulfur steel crankshaft contained planar dimpled facets along separated grain boundaries with a small spherical manganese sulfide precipitates within each dimple. In contrast, planar dimpled facets along separated grain boundaries of impact fractures from the ultra-low sulfur crankshaft steel contained a majority of small spherical particles consisting of nitrogen, boron, iron, carbon, and a small amount of oxygen. Some other dimples contained manganese sulfide precipitates. Fatigue samples machined from the ultra-low sulfur steel crankshaft failed internally at planar grain boundary facets. Some of the facets were covered with nitrogen, boron, iron, and carbon film, while other facets were relatively free of such coverage. Results of experimental forging studies defined the times and temperatures required to produce incipient melting overheat and facets at grain boundary junctions of ultra-low sulfur AMS 6414 steels.

Vibration analysis can be used in solving both rotating and nonrotating equipment problems. This paper presents case histories that, over a span of approximately 25 years, used vibration analysis to troubleshoot a wide range of problems.

Impact or percussive wear is defined as the wear of a solid surface that is due to percussion, which is a repetitive exposure to dynamic contact by another body. Impact wear, however, has many analogies to the field of erosive wear. The main difference is that, in impact wear situations, the bodies tend to be large and contact in a well-defined location in a controlled way, unlike erosion where the eroding particles are small and interact randomly with the target surface. This article describes some generic features and modes of impact wear of metals, ceramics, and polymers. It discusses the processes involved in testing and modeling of impact wear, and includes two case studies.

Friction and wear are important when considering the operation and efficiency of components and mechanical systems. Among the different types and mechanisms of wear, adhesive wear is very serious. Adhesion results in a high coefficient of friction as well as in serious damage to the contacting surfaces. In extreme cases, it may lead to complete prevention of sliding; as such, adhesive wear represents one of the fundamental causes of failure for most metal sliding contacts, accounting for approximately 70% of typical component failures. This article discusses the mechanism and failure modes of adhesive wear including scoring, scuffing, seizure, and galling, and describes the processes involved in classic laboratory-type and standardized tests for the evaluation of adhesive wear. It includes information on standardized galling tests, twist compression, slider-on-flat-surface, load-scanning, and scratch tests. After a discussion on gear scuffing, information on the material-dependent adhesive wear and factors preventing adhesive wear is provided.

Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM) is a systematic methodology for preventing failures. This article begins by discussing the history of RCM and uses Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) all-industry standard JA1011 as its model to describe the key characteristics of an RCM process. It then expands on questions involved in RCM process, offering definitions when necessary. Next, the article describes the approach of RCM to failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), the failure management policies available under RCM, and the criteria of RCM for deciding when a specific failure management policy is technically feasible. Then, after discussing the ways that RCM classifies failure effects in terms of consequences, it describes how RCM uses failure consequences to identify the best failure management policy for each failure mode. Next, the building blocks of RCM are put together to create a failure management program. The article ends with a discussion on some practical issues pertaining to RCM that lie outside the scope of SAE JA1011.

Reliability-centered maintenance (RCM) is a systematic methodology for preventing failures. This article discusses the history of RCM and describes the key characteristics of an RCM process, which involves asking seven questions. The first four questions comprise a form of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), and therefore, the article explains the approach of RCM to FMEA and the failure management policies available under RCM. It reviews the ways that RCM classifies failure effects in terms of consequences and details how RCM uses failure consequences to identify the best failure management policy for each failure mode. The article concludes with a discussion on some practical issues pertaining to RCM that lie outside the scope of SAE JA1011.

Plastics or polymers are used in a variety of engineering and nonengineering applications where they are subjected to surface damage and wear. This article discusses the classification of polymer wear mechanisms based on the methodologies of defining the types of wear. The first classification is based on the two-term model that divides wear mechanisms into interfacial and bulk or cohesive. The second is based on the perceived wear mechanism. The third classification is specific to polymers and draws the distinction based on mechanical properties of polymers. In this classification, wear study is separated as elastomers, thermosets, glassy thermoplastics, and semicrystalline thermoplastics. The article describes the effects of environment and lubricant on the wear failures of polymers. It presents a case study on nylon as a tribological material. The article explains the wear failure of an antifriction bearing, a nylon driving gear, and a polyoxymethylene gear wheel.

This article considers two mechanisms of cavitation failure: those for ductile materials and those for brittle materials. It examines the different stages of cavitation erosion. The article explains various cavitation failures including cavitation in bearings, centrifugal pumps, and gearboxes. It provides information on the cavitation resistance of materials and other prevention parameters. The article describes two American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards for the evaluation of erosion and cavitation, namely, ASTM Standard G 32 and ASTM Standard G 73. It concludes with a discussion on correlations between laboratory results and service.

This article considers the main characteristics of wear mechanisms and how they can be identified. Some identification examples are reported, with the warning that this task can be difficult because of the presence of disturbing factors such as contaminants or possible additional damage of the worn products after the tribological process. Then, the article describes some examples of wear processes, considering possible transitions and/or interactions of the mechanism of fretting wear, rolling-sliding wear, abrasive wear, and solid-particle erosion wear. The role of tribological parameters on the material response is presented using the wear map concept, which is very useful and informative in several respects. The article concludes with guidelines for the selection of suitable surface treatments to avoid wear failures.

This article focuses on the types of activities required for the resolution of wear problems. These include examining and characterizing the tribosystem; characterizing and modeling the wear process; obtaining and evaluating wear data; and evaluating and verifying the solution.

A mechanical part, which supports the moving part, is termed a mechanical bearing and can be classified into rolling (ball or roller) bearings and sliding bearings. This article discusses the failures of sliding bearings. It first describes the geometry of sliding bearings, next provides an overview of bearing materials, and then presents the various lubrication mechanisms: hydrostatic, hydrodynamic, boundary lubrication, elastohydrodynamic, and squeeze-film lubrication. The article describes the effect of debris and contaminant particles in bearings. The steps involved in failure analysis of sliding bearings are also covered. Finally, the article discusses wear-damage mechanisms from the standpoint of bearing design.

The first part of this article focuses on two major forms of machining-related failures, namely machining workpiece (in-process) failures and machined part (in-service) failures. Discussion centers on machining conditions and metallurgical factors contributing to (in-process) workpiece failures, and undesired surface layers and metallurgical factors contributing to (in-service) machined part failures. The second part of the article discusses the effects of microstructure on machining failures and their preventive measures.

Materials selection is closely related to the objectives of failure analysis and prevention. This article briefly reviews the general aspects of materials selection as a concern in both proactive failure prevention during design and as a possible root cause of failed parts. Coverage is more conceptual, with general discussions on the following topics: design and failure prevention, materials selection in design, materials selection for failure prevention, and materials selection and failure analysis. Because materials selection is just one part of the design process, the overall concept of design is discussed. The article also describes the role of the materials engineer in the design and materials selection process. It provides information on the significance of materials selection in both the prevention and analysis of failures.

Materials selection is an important engineering function in both the design and failure analysis of components. This article briefly reviews the general aspects of materials selection as a concern in proactive failure prevention during design and as a possible root cause of failed parts. It discusses the overall concept of design and describes the role of the materials engineer in the design and materials selection process. The article highlights the significance of materials selection in both the prevention and analysis of failures.