1-20 of 96 Search Results for

connecting rods

Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.aero.c9001742
EISBN: 978-1-62708-217-4
... Abstract In a helicopter engine connecting rod, high-cycle, low-stress fatigue fractures in bolts and arms progressed about 75% across the section before the final rupture. Factors involved were insufficient specified preload, inadequate tightening during assembly, and engine overspeed...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.marine.c0047151
EISBN: 978-1-62708-227-3
... Abstract A motorboat engine connecting rod forged from carbon steel fractured in two places and cracked at the small end during service. The analysis (visual inspection, 50x micrographs of sections etched with 2% nital, magnetic-particle inspection, and metallographic examination) supported...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.marine.c9001195
EISBN: 978-1-62708-227-3
... Abstract A connecting rod from a motor boat was broken in two places at the small end. At position I there was a fatigue fracture brought about by operational stress, whereas the fibrous fracture surface II was a secondary tensile fracture. Furthermore the transition on the other side...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.auto.c0046182
EISBN: 978-1-62708-218-1
... surfaces before machining and before putting the part into service. Connecting rods Forgings Nonmetallic inclusions 15B41 UNS H15411 Fatigue fracture Metalworking-related failures A connecting cap ( Fig. 1a ) from a truck engine fractured after 65,200 km (40,500 miles) of service. The cap...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.process.c0047148
EISBN: 978-1-62708-235-8
... Abstract A connecting rod (forged from 15B41 steel and heat treated to a hardness of 29 to 35 HRC) from a truck engine failed after 73,000 Km (45,300 mi) of service. A piece of the I-beam sidewall of the rod, about 6.4 cm (2 in.) long, was missing when the connecting rod arrived at a laboratory...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.usage.c9001434
EISBN: 978-1-62708-236-5
... Abstract One of the connecting rods of a vertical, four-cylinder engine with a cylinder diameter of 5 in. failed by fatigue cracking just below the gudgeon-pin boss. Failure took place in line with the lower edge of a deposit of weld metal. The fracture surface was smooth, conchoidal...
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.aero.c0047856
EISBN: 978-1-62708-217-4
... Abstract 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...
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 15B41 steel forged truck connecting rod that failed in service from fatigue initiated at a forging lap. (a) Connecting rod and a detail of the I-beam portion showing the forging lop in one wall. More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Forged 15B41 steel connecting-rod cap that fractured from fatigue. Cracking originated at an open forging defect. (a) Configuration and dimensions (given in inches). (b) Section through the fracture surface showing oxide inclusions. 400x More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Top end of connecting rod, showing weld deposit. More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 4 Connecting rod bearings from Crank #1, pin #2 More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 5 Connecting rod bearing from Crank #2, pin #2 More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Reassembled pieces of the small end of a broken connecting rod. 1 4 × More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 3 Microsection through a fold in the flash zone of a connecting rod selected by the magnetic crack test. 50 × More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Steel connecting rod end that fractured and cracked in service because of a forging fold. (a) Reassembled rod end showing locations of fractures and crack. Arrow A shows a fatigue fracture; arrow B, a secondary tensile fracture; arrow C, the crack. (b) Fracture surfaces of the broken More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 A typical connecting rod rupture at beam section, near pin end. More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 2 Fatigue fracture face of a connecting rod, which is nicked at ‘O’. More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 4 Fatigue fracture face of connecting rod failure (left). No nick was found, but surface decarburization and incipient fatigue cracks occurred at the same location. More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Forged 4337 steel master connecting rod for a reciprocating aircraft engine that failed by fatigue cracking in the bore section between the flanges. (a) Configuration and dimensions (given in inches). (b) Fractograph showing inclusions (arrows) and fatigue beach marks More
Image
Published: 01 June 2019
Fig. 1 Failed connecting rod pieces (left) show arrows that indicate mating fracture surfaces of fatigue fracture, in cap bolt at head-to-shank fillet. Right-hand photo shows fracture zones; origins ‘O’ are fatigued areas. Tiny overload zone is indicated by arrow. More