Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention

, Volume 11, Issue 6, pp 588–594 | Cite as

Damage Assessment Using Fractography as Failure Surface Evaluation: Applications in Industrial Metalworking Machinery

Feature

Abstract

Fractography is a powerful analytic tool for the evaluation of failure surface topography and root-cause analyses. Fractography, embracing both light and electron optics methods, is utilized in modern failure analysis and is recognized by the engineering community as a unique process for industrial problem solving, evaluating machinery/component failures, and providing solutions for performance improvements. In the present study, the role of fractography is highlighted through characteristic failures of industrial machinery components. Low-power stereomicroscopy and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) micro-fractography are the principal analytic tools that were used in the context of the present research.

Keywords

Macrofractography Microfractography Metalworking machinery Fatigue Overload 

References

  1. 1.
    ASM Handbook, vol. 12: Fractography. ASM International, Materials Park, OH (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lynch, S.P., Moutsos, S.: A brief history of fractography. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 6(6), 54–69 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hull, D.: Fractography, Observing, Measuring and Interpreting Fracture Surface Topography. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wulpi, D.J.: Understanding How Components Fail, 2nd edn. ASM International, Materials Park, OH (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sachs, Ν.W.: Practical Plant Failure Analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pantazopoulos, G., Vazdirvanidis, A.: Fractographic and metallographic study of spalling failure of steel straightener rolls. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 8(6), 509–514 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Psyllaki, P., Papadimitriou, K., Pantazopoulos, G.: Failure modes of liquid nitrocarburized and heat treated tool steel under monotonic loading conditions. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 6(6), 13–18 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pantazopoulos, G., Sampani, A., Tsagaridis, E.: Torsional failure of a knuckle joint of a universal steel coupling system during operation—a case study. Eng. Fail. Anal. 14(1), 73–84 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pantazopoulos, G., Zormalia, S., Vazdirvanidis, A.: Investigation of fatigue failure of roll shafts in a tube manufacturing line. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 10(5), 358–362 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pantazopoulos, G., Vazdirvanidis, A., Toulfatzis, A., Rikos, A.: Fatigue failure of steel links operating as chain links in a heavy duty draw bench. Eng. Fail. Anal. 16(7), 2440–2449 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pantazopoulos, G., Zormalia, S.: Analysis of the failure mechanism of a gripping tool steel failure operated in an industrial tube draw bench. Eng. Fail. Anal. 18(6), 1595–1604 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sachs, N.W.: Understanding the surface features of fatigue fractures: how they describe the failure cause and the failure history. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 5(2), 11–15 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rolls for Metalworking Industries. Iron and Steel Society (ISS), Warrendale, PA (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    DeVries, P.H., Ruth, K.T., Dennies, D.P.: Counting on fatigue: striations and their measure. J. Fail. Anal. Preven. 10(2), 120–137 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ELKEME Hellenic Research Centre for Metals S.A.AthensGreece

Personalised recommendations