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
s

• 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
National Lab.)
D.R. Diercks, Argonne 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):
s
E/10 perfect mat’l-no flaws TSengineering << TS perfect
materials materials
carefully produced glass fiber

E/100 typical ceramic typical strengthened metal

e
typical polymer
0.1
• DaVinci (500 yrs ago!) observed... Reprinted w/
permission from R.W.
Hertzberg,
-- the longer the wire, the "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 sy and TS allows less time for
-- decreases %EL dislocations to move past
obstacles.
s
TS e
sy larger

e
TS
smaller
sy
e
 Impact (high strain rate) Testing
• Impact loading (see ASTM E23 std.):
-- severe testing case (Charpy Specimen)
-- 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 < 914°C)

polymers
Brittle More Ductile

High strength materials (s 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 Fe–Mn–0.05C 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 
s m  2so    K t so
 t 

t where
t = radius of curvature of
crack tip
so = applied stress
sm = 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!
so s
max
Stress Conc. Factor, K t = s
w o
smax 2.5 smax 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., sm > sc  2E s 
sc   
or Kt > Kc  a 

where
– E = modulus of elasticity
– s = specific surface energy
– a = one half length of internal crack
– Kc = sc/s0

For ductile materials  replace s by s + p

where p is plastic deformation energy
 Fracture Toughness
Graphite/ K1c – plane strain stress
Metals/ Composites/
Alloys
Ceramics/ Polymers
fibers concentration factor – with
Semicond edge crack; A Material
100
C-C(|| fibers) 1 Property we use for design,
70 Steels
60 Ti alloys
developed using ASTM Std:
50 ASTM E399 - 09 Standard
40
Al alloys Test Method for Linear-
30 Mg alloys Elastic Plane-Strain Fracture
K Ic (MPa · m0.5 )

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 of
6 Si carbide Glass/SiC(w) 6 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 = Ys 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  K c 
sdesign  amax  
Y amax   Ysdesign 

amax
s

fracture fracture
no no
fracture amax fracture s
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... sc 
Y amax
• Key point: Y and Kc are the same in both designs!
--Result:
112 MPa 9 mm 4 mm

s c amax   s
A
c amax 
B
Answer: (sc )B  168 MPa
• Reducing flaw size pays off!

 Let’s look at Another Situation
• Steel subject to tensile
stress of 1030 MPa, it has K a  Ys 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) Y s a  a  1*1030* 3.141*.0005  40.82
long will it grow and Since K a < K1c the part won't fail!
fracture?

K1c  Y s c  a
2
 K1c 
 
2
• What crack size will result  Y s c 
54.8
a   1*1030
in failure?  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. s

smax
-- key parameters are S (stress
S
amplitude), sm, and frequency sm
smin time

• Key points when designing in Fatigue inducing situations:

-- fatigue can cause part failure, even though smax < sc.
-- 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
s max  5340  5340 5  165.99 MPa

  3.22 10
3 2
 6.4*10 2

s min  5340  5340 5  165.99 MPa

  3.22 10
3 2
 6.4*10 2

s max  s min 165.99   165.99  MPa

s m  mean stress   0
2 2
s r  stress range  s Max  s min  331.99MPa

s a  stress amplitude  S  s r 2  165.99MPa

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
• Fatigue limit, Sfat: S = stress amplitude
case for
--no fatigue failure if unsafe steel (typ.)
S < Sfat
Sfat
Fatigue Limit is defined in: safe Adapted from Fig.
ASTM D671 8.19(a), Callister 7e.
3 5 7 9
10 10 10 10
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.
3 5 7 9
10 10 10 10
N = Cycles to failure
 Let’s 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
s max  5340 2 
5340 5  165.99 MPa


 6.4*10 2
3
 3.22  10

s min  5340 2 
5340  165.99MPa
 
6.4*10 3

2  3.22 105

s max  s min 165.99   165.99  MPa

sm   0
2 2
s r  s Max  s min  331.99MPa

s a  S  s r 2  165.99MPa
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
typ. 1 to 6
da
 K 
m

dN
~ s  a
increase in crack length per loading cycle
crack origin
• Failed rotating shaft
--crack grew even though
Kmax < Kc
--crack grows faster as
• s 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 sm
crack growth) sm moderate tensile sm
Larger tensile sm

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– O–Si– segment generate two
Si–OH 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 s and T < 0.4Tm, failure stress decreases with:
- increased maximum flaw size,
- decreased T,
- increased rate of loading.
- for cyclic s:
- cycles to fail decreases as s increases.
- for higher T (T > 0.4Tm):
- time to fail decreases as s or T increases.