Chapter 8: Mechanical Failure & Failure

Analysis
ISSUES TO ADDRESS...
How do flaws in a material initiate failure?
How is fracture resistance quantified; how do different
material classes compare?
How do we estimate the stress to fracture?
How do loading rate, loading history, and temperature
affect the failure stress?

Ship-cyclic loading Computer chip-cyclic Hip implant-cyclic

from waves. thermal loading. loading from walking.
Adapted from chapter-opening Adapted from Fig. 22.30(b), Callister 7e. Adapted from Fig. 22.26(b),
photograph, Chapter 8, Callister 7e. (by (Fig. 22.30(b) is courtesy of National Callister 7e.
Neil Boenzi, The New York Times.) Semiconductor Corporation.)
 Fracture mechanisms
Ductile fracture
Occurs with plastic deformation

Brittle fracture
Occurs with Little or no plastic
deformation
Thus they are Catastrophic meaning
they occur without warning!
 Ductile vs Brittle Failure
Fracture Very Moderately
Brittle
behavior: Ductile Ductile

Ductile fracture is
nearly always
desirable!

%Ra or %El Large Moderate Small

Ductile: Brittle:
warning before No
fracture warning
 Example: Failure of a Pipe
Ductile failure:
--one piece
--large deformation

Brittle failure:
--many pieces
--small deformation

Figures from V.J. Colangelo and F.A.

Heiser, Analysis of Metallurgical Failures
(2nd ed.), Fig. 4.1(a) and (b), p. 66 John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1987. Used with
permission.
 Moderately Ductile Failure
Evolution to failure:
void void growth shearing
necking and linkage fracture
nucleation at surface

Resulting 50
50mm
mm
fracture
surfaces
(steel)
100 mm
Inclusion From V.J. Colangelo and F.A. Heiser, Fracture surface of tire cord wire
particles Analysis of Metallurgical Failures (2nd loaded in tension. Courtesy of F.
ed.), Fig. 11.28, p. 294, John Wiley and Roehrig, CC Technologies, Dublin,
serve as void Sons, Inc., 1987. (Orig. source: P. OH. Used with permission.
nucleation Thornton, J. Mater. Sci., Vol. 6, 1971, pp.
347-56.)
sites.
 Ductile vs. Brittle Failure

cup-and-cone fracture brittle fracture

Adapted from Fig. 8.3, Callister 7e.

 Brittle Failure
Arrows indicate point at which failure originated

Adapted from Fig. 8.5(a), Callister 7e.

 Brittle Fracture Surfaces: Useful to examine
to determine causes of failure
Intergranular Intragranular
(between grains) 304 S. Steel (within grains)
(metal) 316 S. Steel
Reprinted w/permission (metal)
from "Metals Handbook", Reprinted w/ permission
9th ed, Fig. 633, p. 650. from "Metals Handbook",
Copyright 1985, ASM 9th ed, Fig. 650, p. 357.
International, Materials Copyright 1985, ASM
Park, OH. (Micrograph by International, Materials
J.R. Keiser and A.R. Park, OH. (Micrograph by
Olsen, Oak Ridge D.R. Diercks, Argonne
National Lab.)
160 mm
4 mm National Lab.)

Polypropylene Al Oxide
(polymer) (ceramic)
Reprinted w/ permission Reprinted w/ permission
from R.W. Hertzberg, from "Failure Analysis of
"Deformation and Brittle Materials", p. 78.
Fracture Mechanics of Copyright 1990, The
Engineering Materials", American Ceramic
(4th ed.) Fig. 7.35(d), p. Society, Westerville, OH.
303, John Wiley and (Micrograph by R.M.
Sons, Inc., 1996. Gruver and H. Kirchner.)
3 mm
1 mm
(Orig. source: K. Friedrick, Fracture 1977,
Vol. 3, ICF4, Waterloo, CA, 1977, p. 1119.)
 Failure Analysis Failure Avoidance
Most failure occur due to the presence of defects
in materials
Cracks or Flaws (stress concentrators)
Voids or inclusions
Presence of defects is best found before hand
and they should be determined non-destructively
X-Ray analysis
Ultra-Sonic Inspection
Surface inspection
Magna-flux
Dye Penetrant
 Ideal vs Real Materials
Stress-strain behavior (Room Temp):
perfect matl-no flaws
E/10 TSengineering << TSperfect
materials materials
carefully produced glass fiber

E/100 typical ceramic typical strengthened metal

typical polymer
0.1
DaVinci (500 yrs ago!) observed... Reprinted w/
permission from R.W.
-- the longer the wire, the Hertzberg,
"Deformation and
smaller the load for failure. Fracture Mechanics
of Engineering
Reasons: Materials", (4th ed.)
Fig. 7.4. John Wiley
-- flaws cause premature failure. and Sons, Inc., 1996.

-- Larger samples contain more flaws!

 Considering Loading Rate Effect

Increased loading rate... Why? An increased rate

-- increases y and TS allows less time for
-- decreases %EL dislocations to move past
obstacles.

TS
y larger

TS
smaller
y

 Impact (high strain rate) Testing
Impact loading (see ASTM E23 std.):
(Charpy Specimen)
-- severe testing case
-- makes material act more brittle
-- decreases toughness
Useful to compare alternative materials
for severe applications

Adapted from Fig. 8.12(b),

Callister 7e. (Fig. 8.12(b) is
adapted from H.W. Hayden,
W.G. Moffatt, and J. Wulff, The
Structure and Properties of
Materials, Vol. III, Mechanical
Behavior, John Wiley and Sons,
Inc. (1965) p. 13.)

final height initial height

 Considering Temperature Effects
Increasing temperature...
--increases %EL and Kc
Ductile-to-Brittle Transition Temperature (DBTT)...

FCC metals (e.g., Cu, Ni)

Impact Energy

BCC metals (e.g., iron at T < 914C)

polymers
Brittle More Ductile

High strength materials ( y > E/150)

Adapted from Fig. 8.15,

Callister 7e.
Temperature
Ductile-to-brittle
transition temperature
Figure 8.3 Variation in ductile-to-brittle transition temperature with alloy composition. (a)
Charpy V-notch impact energy with temperature for plain-carbon steels with various carbon levels
(in weight percent). (b) Charpy V-notch impact energy with temperature for FeMn0.05C alloys
with various manganese levels (in weight percent).

(From Metals Handbook, 9th

ed., Vol. 1, American Society
for Metals, Metals Park, OH,
1978.)
 Design Strategy: Build Steel Ships
Quickly!
Pre-WWI: The Titanic
Reprinted w/ permission from R.W. Hertzberg,
"Deformation and Fracture Mechanics of Engineering
Materials", (4th ed.) Fig. 7.1(a), p. 262, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1996. (Orig. source: Dr. Robert D.
Ballard, The Discovery of the Titanic.)
Problem: Used a type of steel with a DBTT ~ Room temp.
As a Designer: Stay Above The DBTT!
WWII: Liberty ships
Reprinted w/ permission from R.W. Hertzberg,
"Deformation and Fracture Mechanics of Engineering
Materials", (4th ed.) Fig. 7.1(b), p. 262, John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1996. (Orig. source: Earl R. Parker,
"Behavior of Engineering Structures", Nat. Acad. Sci.,
Nat. Res. Council, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., NY,
1957.)
 Flaws are Stress Concentrators!
Results from crack propagation
Griffith Crack Model:
1/ 2
a
m 2o K t o
t

t where
t = radius of curvature of
crack tip
o = applied stress
m = stress at crack tip
Adapted from Fig. 8.8(a), Callister 7e.
 Concentration of Stress at Crack Tip

Adapted from Fig. 8.8(b), Callister 7e.

 Engineering Fracture Design
Avoid sharp corners!
o
max
Stress Conc. Factor, K t =
w o
max
2.5 max is the concentrated
stress in the narrowed
r, h region
fillet 2.0 increasing w/h
radius
Adapted from G.H. 1.5
Neugebauer, Prod. Eng.
(NY), Vol. 14, pp. 82-87
1943.)
1.0 r/h
0 0.5 1.0
sharper fillet radius
 Crack Propagation

Cracks propagate due to sharpness of crack tip

A plastic material deforms at the tip, blunting the
crack.
plastic
deformed region
brittle

Energy balance on the crack

Elastic strain energy-
energy is stored in material as it is elastically deformed
this energy is released when the crack propagates
creation of new surfaces requires (this) energy
 When Does a Crack Propagate?
Crack propagates if applied stress is above critical
stress
1/ 2
i.e., m >c 2E s
c
orKt > Kc a

where
E = modulus of elasticity
s = specific surface energy
a = one half length of internal crack
Kc = c/ 0

For ductile materials replace s by s + p

where p is plastic deformation energy
 Fracture Toughness
Graphite/ K1c plane strain stress
Metals/ Composites/
Ceramics/ Polymers concentration factor with
Alloys fibers
Semicond
100 edge crack; A Material
C-C(|| fibers) 1 Property we use for design,
70 Steels
60 Ti alloys developed using ASTM Std:
50
40
ASTM E399 - 09 Standard
30
Al alloys Test Method for Linear-Elastic
Mg alloys
Plane-Strain Fracture
K Ic (MPa m 0.5 )

20 Toughness K Ic of Metallic
Al/Al oxide(sf) 2
Y2 O 3 /ZrO 2 (p) 4 Materials
10 C/C( fibers) 1 Composite reinforcement geometry is: f =
Al oxid/SiC(w) 3 fibers; sf = short fibers; w = whiskers; p =
Diamond Si nitr/SiC(w) 5
7 Al oxid/ZrO 2 (p) 4 particles. Addition data as noted (vol. fraction
6 Si carbide Glass/SiC(w) 6 of reinforcement):
5 Al oxide PET 1. (55vol%) ASM Handbook, Vol. 21, ASM Int., Materials
4 Si nitride Park, OH (2001) p. 606.
PP 2. (55 vol%) Courtesy J. Cornie, MMC, Inc., Waltham,
3 PVC
MA.
3. (30 vol%) P.F. Becher et al., Fracture Mechanics of
Ceramics, Vol. 7, Plenum Press (1986). pp. 61-73.
2 PC 4. Courtesy CoorsTek, Golden, CO.
5. (30 vol%) S.T. Buljan et al., "Development of Ceramic
Matrix Composites for Application in Technology for
Advanced Engines Program", ORNL/Sub/85-22011/2,
1 <100> ORNL, 1992.
Si crystal PS Glass 6 6. (20vol%) F.D. Gace et al., Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc., Vol.
<111>
0.7 Glass -soda 7 (1986) pp. 978-82.
0.6 Polyester
Concrete
0.5
As Engineers we must Design Against Crack
Growth
Crack growth condition:
K Kc = Y a
Largest, most stressed cracks grow first!
--Result 1: Max. flaw size --Result 2: Design stress
dictates design stress! dictates max. flaw size!
2
Kc 1 Kc
design amax
Y amax Ydesign
amax

fracture fracture
no no
fracture amax fracture
Y is a material behavior shape factor
 Design Example: Aircraft Wing
Material has Kc = 26 MPa-m0.5
Two designs to consider...
Design A Design B
--largest flaw is 9 mm --use same material
--failure occurs at stress = 112 MPa --largest flaw is 4 mm
Kc --failure stress = ?
Use... c
Y amax
Key point: Y and Kc are the same in both designs!
--Result:
112 MPa 9 mm 4 mm

c amax A c amax B
Answer: ( c )B 168 MPa
Reducing flaw size pays off!

 Lets look at Another Situation
Steel subject to tensile
stress of 1030 MPa, it has Ka Y a a
K1c of 54.8 MPa(m) a here
handbook value
Y 1
If it has a largest surface
crack .5 mm (.0005 m) long Y a a 1*1030* 3.141*.0005 40.82
will it grow and fracture? Since K a < K1c the part won't fail!

K1c Y c a
What crack size will result 2
K1c

2
54.8
in failure? Y c
a 1*1030
3.1416
a .0009m .9mm
Figure 8.7 Two mechanisms for improving fracture toughness of ceramics by crack
arrest. (a) Transformation toughening of partially stabilized zirconia involves the stress-
induced transformation of tetragonal grains to the monoclinic structure, which has a larger
specific volume. The result is a local volume expansion at the crack tip, squeezing the
crack shut and producing a residual compressive stress. (b) Microcracks produced during
fabrication of the ceramic can blunt the advancing crack tip
 Fatigue behavior:
Fatigue = failure under cyclic stress
specimen compression on top (Fig. 8.18 is from
Materials Science in
motor Engineering, 4/E by Carl.
bearing bearing counter
A. Keyser, Pearson
Education, Inc., Upper
flex coupling Saddle River, NJ.)
tension on bottom

Stress varies with time.

max
-- key parameters are S (stress
S
m
amplitude), m, and frequency
min time

Key points when designing in Fatigue inducing situations:

-- fatigue can cause part failure, even though max < c.
-- fatigue causes ~ 90% of mechanical engineering failures.
Because of its importance, ASTM and ISO have developed many
special standards to assess Fatigue Strength of materials
 Some important Calculations in
Fatigue Testing
A Material 6.4 mm in is subject to (fatiguing) loads:
5340 N - tensile then compressive
max 5340 5340 165.99 MPa
3.22 105
3 2
6.4*10 2

min 5340 5340 165.99 MPa

5
6.4*10 3 2
3.22 10
2
max min 165.99 165.99 MPa
m mean stress 0
2 2
r stress range Max min 331.99 MPa
a stress amplitude S r 2 165.99 MPa
Figure 8.8 Fatigue corresponds to the brittle fracture of
an alloy after a total of N cycles to a stress below the
tensile strength.
 Fatigue Design Parameters
S = stress amplitude
Fatigue limit, Sfat: case for
--no fatigue failure if unsafe steel (typ.)

S < Sfat Sfat

safe
Adapted from Fig.
8.19(a), Callister 7e.
Fatigue Limit is defined in:
ASTM D671 10 3 10 5 10 7 10 9
N = Cycles to failure
However, Sometimes, the
fatigue limit is zero! S = stress amplitude
case for
unsafe Al (typ.)

safe Adapted from Fig.

8.19(b), Callister 7e.

10 3 10 5 10 7 10 9
N = Cycles to failure
 Lets look at an Example
Given: 2014-T6 Alum. Alloy bar (6.4 mm )
find its fatigue life if a part is subject to loads:
5340 N - tensile then compressive
max 5340 2
5340 5 165.99 MPa

3
6.4*10 2 3.22 10

min 5340 2
5340 165.99MPa

6.4*10 3

2 3.22 105

max min 165.99 165.99 MPa

m 0
2 2
r Max min 331.99 MPa
a S r 2 165.99 MPa
Examining Fig (right) at S = 165.99
Fatigue Life = Cycles to Failure 7 106
For metals other than Ferrous alloys, F.S. is
taken as the stress that will cause failure
after 108 cycles
Figure 8.21 Fatigue behavior for an acetal polymer at various
temperatures.

(From Design Handbook for Du

Pont Engineering Plastics, used
by permission.)

For polymers, we
consider fatigue
life to be (only)
106 cycles to
failure thus fatigue
strength is the
stress that will
lead to failure
after 106 cycles
 Fatigue Mechanism
Cracks in Material grows incrementally
da typ. 1 to 6
K
m

dN
~ a
increase in crack length per loading cycle
crack origin
Failed rotating shaft
--crack grew even though
Kmax < Kc
--crack grows faster as
increases Adapted from
from D.J. Wulpi,
crack gets longer Understanding How
loading freq. increases. Components Fail,
American Society for
Metals, Materials Park,
OH, 1985.
Figure 8.11 An illustration of how repeated stress applications can generate
localized plastic deformation at the alloy surface leading eventually to sharp
discontinuities.
Figure 8.12 Illustration of crack growth with number of stress cycles, N, at two
different stress levels. Note that, at a given stress level, the crack growth rate,
da/dN, increases with increasing crack length, and, for a given crack length such as
a1, the rate of crack growth is significantly increased with increasing magnitude of
stress.
 Improving Fatigue Life
1. Impose a compressive S = stress amplitude
Adapted from
surface stresses Fig. 8.24, Callister 7e.

(to suppress surface Increasing

near zero or compressive m
crack growth) m moderate tensile m
Larger tensile m

N = Cycles to failure

--Method 1: shot peening --Method 2: carburizing

shot
C-rich gas
put
surface
into
compression

2. Remove stress bad better

concentrators. Adapted from
Fig. 8.25, Callister 7e.
bad better
Figure 8.17 Fatigue strength is increased by prior mechanical deformation
or reduction of structural discontinuities.
 Other Issues in Failure Stress Corrosion
Cracking
Water can greatly accelerate
crack growth and shorten life
performance in metals,
ceramics and glasses

Other chemicals that can

generate (or provide H+ or O2-)
ions also effectively reduce
fatigue life as these ions react
with the metal or oxide in the
material
Figure 8.18 The drop in strength of glasses with duration of load (and without
cyclic-load applications) is termed static fatigue.

(From W. D. Kingery, Introduction to

Ceramics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York, 1960.)
Figure 8.19 The role of H2O in static fatigue depends on its reaction with the
silicate network. One H2O molecule and one Si OSi segment generate two
SiOH units, which is equivalent to a break in the network.
Figure 8.20 Comparison of (a) cyclic fatigue in metals and (b) static
fatigue in ceramics.
 SUMMARY
Engineering materials don't reach theoretical strength.
Flaws produce stress concentrations that cause
premature failure.
Sharp corners produce large stress concentrations
and premature failure.
Failure type depends on T and stress:
- for noncyclic and T < 0.4Tm, failure stress decreases with:
- increased maximum flaw size,
- decreased T,
- increased rate of loading.
- for cyclic :
- cycles to fail decreases as increases.
- for higher T (T > 0.4Tm):
- time to fail decreases as or T increases.