A spiral bevel gear and pinion set that showed "excessive wear on the pinion teeth" was submitted for analysis. This gear set was the primary drive unit for the differential and axle shafts of an exceptionally-large front-end loader in the experimental stages of development. There was no evidence of tooth bending fatigue on either part. Several cracks were associated with the spalling surfaces on the concave sides of the 4820H NiMo alloy steel pinion teeth. The gear teeth showed no indication of fatigue. The primary mode of failure was rolling contact fatigue of the concave (drive) active tooth profile. The spalled area was a consequence of this action. The pitting low on the profile appeared to have originated after the shift of the pinion tooth away from the gear center. The shift of the pinion was most often due to a bearing displacement or malfunction. The cause of this failure was continuous high overload that may also have contributed to the bearing displacement.

A failed spiral gear and pinion set made from 4320H Ni-Cr-Mo alloy steel operating in a high-speed electric traction motor gear unit driving a rapid transit train were submitted for analysis. The pinion was intact, but the gear had broken into two sections that resulted when two fractured areas went through the body of the gear. Wheel mileage of the assembly was 34,000 miles at the time of failure. All physical and metallurgical characteristics were well within specified standards, and both parts should have withstood normal loading conditions. The primary mode of failure was tooth bending fatigue of the gear from the reverse direction near the toe end. The cause of failure was a crossed-over tooth bearing condition that placed loads at the heel end when going forward and at the toe end when going in reverse. The condition was too consistent to be a deflection under load; therefore, it most likely was permanent misalignment within the assembly.

A ‘worn-out’ spiral bevel gear and pinion set was submitted for examination and evaluation. This was a spiral bevel drive set with the gear attached to a differential. The assembled unit was driving a new, large, experimental farm tractor in normal plowing and tilling operations. The primary failure was associated with the 4820H NiMo alloy steel pinion, and thus the gear was not examined. The mode of failure was rolling contact fatigue, and the cause of failure improper engineering design. The pattern of continual overload was restricted to a specific concentrated area situated diagonally across the profile of the loaded side, which was consistent on every tooth.

The failure of an ATAR engine accessory angle drive gear assembly caused an engine flame-out in a Mirage III aircraft of the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) during a landing. Stripping of the engine revealed that the bevel gear locating splines (16 NCD 13) had failed. Visual and low-power microscope examination of the spline of the shaft showed evidence of fretting wear debris; similar wear was observed on the splines of the mating bevel gear. It was concluded that the splines had failed by severe fretting wear. Fretting damage was also observed on the shaft face adjacent to the splines and on the bevel gear abutment shoulder. Additional tests included a metrological inspection of the shaft, bevel gear and support ring; metallographic examination of a section from the shaft; chemical analysis of the shaft material (16 NCD 13); and hardness testing of a sample of the yoke material. The wear had been caused by incorrect machining of the shaft splines, which prevented the bevel gear nut from locating correctly against the gear.

Drastic reduction in the service life of a production gearbox was observed. Within the gearbox, the axial load on a bevel gear (8620 steel, OD 9.2 cm) was taken by a thrust-type roller bearing (3.8 cm ID, 5.6 cm OD) in which a ground surface on the back of the bevel gear served as a raceway. Spalling damage on the ground bearing raceway at five equally spaced zones was disclosed by inspection of the bevel gear. The bearing raceway was checked for runout by mounting the gear on an arbor. It was found that the raceway undulated to the extent of 0.008 mm total indicator reading and a spalled area was observed at each high point. The presence of numerous cracks that resembled grinding cracks was revealed both by magnetic-particle inspection and microscopic examination. Spalling was produced by nonuniform loading in conjunction with grinding cracks. As corrective measures, the spindle of the grinding machine was reconditioned to eliminate the undulations and retained austenite was minimized by careful heat treatment.

The gear of a spiral bevel gear set broke into three pieces after about two years of service. The gear (made of 4817 steel) broke along the root of a tooth intersected by three of the six 22-mm diam holes used to mount the gear to a hub. Fatigue progression for about 6.4 mm at the acute-angle intersections of three mounting holes with the root fillets of three teeth was revealed by examination of gear. Cracks at the intersections of the remaining three mounting holes and the adjacent tooth-root fillets were revealed by magnetic-particle inspection. Through hardening at the acute-angle intersections of the mounting holes and tooth-root fillets was revealed by metallographic examination. Design of the gear and placement of the mounting holes, which resulted in through hardening, were concluded to be the contributing factors to the fatigue failure of the gear.

A spiral bevel gear set in the differential housing of a large front-end loader moving coal in a storage area failed in service. The machine had operated approximately 1500 h. Although the failure involved only the pinion teeth, magnetic particle inspection was performed on each part. The 4817 NiMo alloy steel pinion showed no indication of additional cracking, nor did the 4820 NiMo alloy steel gear. The mode of failure was tooth bending fatigue with the origin at the designed position: root radius at midsection of tooth. The load was well centered, and progression occurred for a long period of time. The cause of failure was a suddenly applied peak overload, which initiated a crack at the root radius. Progression continued by relatively low overstress from the crack, which was now a stress-concentration point. This was a classic tooth bending fatigue failure.

The failure of a spiral bevel gear from the transmission of a helicopter was discovered when the transmission was removed after an in-flight incident. Two adjacent teeth from the carburized AISI 9310 steel gear were found to have undergone fatigue failure. Internal initiation occurred in a region depleted of chromium and nickel. This condition coincides with a microstructural inhomogeneity consisting of large, soft ferrite grains. Its origin was probably contamination of the solidifying ingot during the consumable vacuum arc remelting operation.

This article first reviews variations within the most common types of gears, namely spur, helical, worm, and straight and spiral bevel. It then provides information on gear tooth contact and gear metallurgy. This is followed by sections describing the important points of gear lubrication, the measurement of the backlash, and the necessary factors for starting the failure analysis. Next, the article explains various gear failure causes, including wear, scuffing, Hertzian fatigue, cracking, fracture, and bending fatigue, and finally presents examples of gear and reducer failure analysis.

Gears can fail in many different ways, and except for an increase in noise level and vibration, there is often no indication of difficulty until total failure occurs. This article reviews the major types of gears and the basic principles of gear-tooth contact. It discusses the loading conditions and stresses that effect gear strength and durability. The article provides information on different gear materials, the common types and causes of gear failures, and the procedures employed to analyze them. Finally, it presents a chosen few examples to illustrate a systematic approach to the failure examination.

The case study presented in this article details the failure investigation of an M50 alloy steel bearing used in a jet engine gearbox drive assembly. It discusses the investigative steps and analytic tools used to determine the root cause, highlighting the importance of continuous, thorough questioning by the investigating activity. The combined analyses demonstrated that the bearing failed by a single event overload as evidenced by bulk deformation and traces of foreign material on the rolling elements. The anomalous transferred metal found on the rolling elements subsequently led to the discovery of overlooked debris in an engine chip detector, and thus resulted in a review of several maintenance practices.

A ball bearing in a military jet engine sustained heavy damage and was analyzed to determine the cause. Almost all of the balls and a portion of the outer race were found to be flaking, but there were no signs of damage on the inner race and cage. Tests (chemistry, hardness, and microstructure) indicated that the bearing materials met the specification requirements. However, closer inspection revealed areas of discoloration, or nonuniform contact marks, on the ID surface of the inner ring. The unusual wear pattern suggested that the bearing was not properly mounted, thus subjecting it to uneven or eccentric loading. This explains the preferential nature of the flaking on the outer race and points to an assembly error as the root cause of failure.

Several teeth of a bevel pinion which was part of a drive unit in an edging mill failed after three months in service. Specifications required that the pinion be made from a 2317 steel forging and that the teeth be carburized and hardened to a case hardness of 56 HRC and a core hardness of 250 HRB. Two teeth were revealed by visual examination to have broken at the root and fatigue marks extending across almost the entire tooth were exhibited by the surface of the fracture. Cracking in all the tooth was showed by magnetic-particle inspection. The pinion was concluded to have failed by tooth-bending fatigue. Spalling was also noted on the pressure (drive) side of each tooth at the toe end which indicated some mechanical misalignment of the pinion with the mating gear that caused the cyclic shock load to be applied to the toe ends of the teeth.

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.

Rolling-element bearings use rolling elements interposed between two raceways, and relative motion is permitted by the rotation of these elements. This article presents an overview of bearing materials, bearing-load ratings, and an examination of failed bearings. Rolling-element bearings are designed on the principle of rolling contact rather than sliding contact; frictional effects, although low, are not negligible, and lubrication is essential. The article lists the typical characteristics and causes of several types of failures. It describes failure by wear, failure by fretting, failure by corrosion, failure by plastic flow, failure by rolling-contact fatigue, and failure by damage. The article discusses the effects of fabrication practices, heat treatment and hardness of bearing components, and lubrication of rolling-element bearings with a few examples.

This article describes some of the welding discontinuities and flaws characterized by nondestructive examinations. It focuses on nondestructive inspection methods used in the welding industry. The sources of weld discontinuities and defects as they relate to service failures or rejection in new construction inspection are also discussed. The article discusses the types of base metal cracks and metallurgical weld cracking. The article discusses the processes involved in the analysis of in-service weld failures. It briefly reviews the general types of process-related discontinuities of arc welds. Mechanical and environmental failure origins related to other types of welding processes are also described. The article explains the cause and effects of process-related discontinuities including weld porosity, inclusions, incomplete fusion, and incomplete penetration. Different fitness-for-service assessment methodologies for calculating allowable or critical flaw sizes are also discussed.

This article is dedicated to the fields of mechanical engineering and machine design. It also intends to give a nonexhaustive view of the preventive side of the failure analysis of rolling-element bearings (REBs) and of some of the developments in terms of materials and surface engineering. The article presents the nomenclature, numbering systems, and worldwide market of REBs as well as provides description of REBs as high-tech machine components. It discusses heat treatments, performance, and properties of bearing materials. The processes involved in the examination of failed bearings are also explained. Finally, the article discusses in detail the characteristics and prevention of the various types of failures of REBs: wear, fretting, corrosion, plastic flow, rolling-contact fatigue, and damage. The article includes an Appendix, which lists REB-related abbreviations, association websites, and ISO standards.

Two examples concerning fabricated mild steel rotor spiders which failed due to lack of torsional rigidity, probably supplemented by the presence of high internal stress, are described. The machine concerned in the first case was a 3,000 hp three-phase slip-ring motor. In the second case the machine was a 200 kW alternator, direct-driven by a diesel engine running at 750 rpm. Both the foregoing failures reveal the same basic weakness, i.e., insufficient rigidity when subjected to variations or reversals of torque. In the first case, the bars welded to the arms were inadequately supported in a lateral direction, so that excessive stresses of a fluctuating nature were set up in the welds as a result of the frequent load changes that arose in service. This weakness was eliminated when designing the replacement spider. In the second example, failure also arose as a result of deficient torsional rigidity with the consequent development of excessive stresses in the welds at the junctions of the bars with the sleeve, the torque being of a fluctuating character due to the impulses imparted by the engine.