HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Guest Blogs

Understanding Overload Failures

NO RATINGS
View Comments: Oldest First|Newest First|Threaded View
Page 1/2  >  >>
Alexander Wolfe
User Rank
Blogger
Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Alexander Wolfe   3/23/2012 9:08:17 AM
NO RATINGS
Could you do an explanation in a future post of the differences between a part (say, a bracket on a car) failing due to a migrating stress fracture versus a total, quick failure where it just breaks in two? Is that the same stress dynamic in play with different outcomes, or are they different processes entirely?

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Dave Palmer   3/23/2012 10:07:35 AM
NO RATINGS
@Alex: Usually, a crack which grows over time is due to fatigue, which I'll cover in my next installment. (In plastic parts, cracks which grow over time could also be due to environmental stress cracking, which I've written about before. In metals, there is a phenomenon called stress corrosion cracking, which is analagous to environmental stress cracking; I might write about this later).

Based on what I've seen in my career, fatigue failures are actually far more common than overload failures.  However, overload failures are the easiest to understand, which is why I wanted to cover them first.

The mechanics of fatigue are a little more complicated.  As I'll discuss, a common mistake is to treat "fatigue strength" as though it's a property like yield strength or ultimate tensile strength.  It's not.  But the big picture is the same: you need to understand the forces that act on the part, and the properties of the material from which it is made -- as well as all of the variables which might cause either one to vary from its normal value.

Charles Murray
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Charles Murray   3/23/2012 6:37:37 PM
NO RATINGS
Dave: In the kinds of parts that are mentioned here, such as the brake cam, are the parts typically designed in accordance with the yield strength of the material, or is there some "allowable stress" design method that's set forth that is not dependent on yield? If yield is not used as criteria, does it make any difference in terms of failure rates?

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Dave Palmer   3/23/2012 7:30:08 PM
NO RATINGS
@Chuck: Other engineers should feel free to weigh in on this, but in my experience, it's most common to design to the yield strength, with an appropriate factor of safety. Doing this should protect you against overload failures, provided that (as I pointed out in the article) the loads are what you think they are, and the yield strength is what you think it is.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Mydesign   3/26/2012 6:05:08 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
Dave, I think the weight is eventually distributed across the area, and then it can bear more weight than concentrate to particular points. I think in most of the industrial wing, the stress tests are doing for a mass areas rather than stress test in cubic/cm sqd.

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Migrating stress cracks versus quick breaks
Dave Palmer   3/26/2012 7:07:21 AM
NO RATINGS
@Mydesign: You're right that loads redistribute to a certain extent as a result of localized yielding, so that a linear FEA which predicts a stress greater than the yield strength in a small region doesn't necessarily indicate failure of the component. This is why designing to "get the red out" of a FEA model, without any insight into the physical situation, can result in overdesign. On the other hand, stresses below the yield strength can lead to fatigue failure if they are repeatedly applied. To get a handle on fatigue, it's important to know how the loads on a part vary over time. This is what I will discuss in the next installment.

Shelly
User Rank
Iron
Vibration big cause of fatigue/crack propagation
Shelly   3/26/2012 10:21:54 AM
NO RATINGS
As mentioned earlier, repeated stresses/cycles on an assembly are a major contributor to fatigue and crack propagation.  The biggest contributor to repeated cycles is vibration.  Sometimes it's difficult to observe, but even high frequency vibration (though very small displacements) can be a fatigue factor due to their high cycle rate.

Vibration can be an issue when attaching a component to a moving machine (frequency depends on the machine dynamics), when designed to handle siesmic vibrations near fault lines (relatively low frequency <10Hz), or just designing to handle transportation to the end user (between 2-500Hz).  The frequency and amplitudes vary, but the main goal is to design components with resonant frequencies well above what the sample will see while in use or transport, and when designing machinery, to avoid stacking resonant frequencies so the components aren't exciting each other's resonant frequencies while in use.

ChasChas
User Rank
Platinum
Things break.
ChasChas   3/26/2012 10:31:31 AM
NO RATINGS
 

Great primer on overload.

My experience has been that operators have the unique ability to find every unintented use of a piece of machinery - causing real eningeering challanges when it comes time to find out what REALLY went wrong.

TJ McDermott
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Things break.
TJ McDermott   3/26/2012 10:49:20 AM
NO RATINGS
It's interesting to watch what happens when a part is redesigned, "beefed up" because it's been breaking in the field.  If the redesign works correctly, the part is no longer the "weakest link", and something else now is.

The usual progression is a series of parts end up being redesigned, one at a time, as each becomes the weakest link in turn.

ChasChas
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Things break.
ChasChas   3/26/2012 11:10:13 AM
NO RATINGS
 

Yes, very intersting TJ - read a classic engineering poem:

http://www.legallanguage.com/resources/poems/onehossshay/

Page 1/2  >  >>
Partner Zone
More Blogs from Guest Blogs
Iterative design — the cycle of prototyping, testing, analyzing, and refining a product — existed long before additive manufacturing, but it has never been as efficient and approachable as it is today with 3D printing.
People usually think of a time constant as the time it takes a first order system to change 63% of the way to the steady state value in response to a step change in the input -- it’s basically a measure of the responsiveness of the system. This is true, but in reality, time constants are often not constant. They can change just like system gains change as the environment or the geometry of the system changes.
At its core, sound is a relatively simple natural phenomenon caused by pressure pulsations or vibrations propagating through various mediums in the world around us. Studies have shown that the complete absence of sound can drive a person insane, causing them to experience hallucinations. Likewise, loud and overwhelming sound can have the same effect. This especially holds true in manufacturing and plant environments where loud noises are the norm.
The tech industry is no stranger to crowdsourcing funding for new projects, and the team at element14 are no strangers to crowdsourcing ideas for new projects through its design competitions. But what about crowdsourcing new components?
It has been common wisdom of late that anything you needed to manufacture could be made more cost-effectively on foreign shores. Following World War II, the label “Made in Japan” was as ubiquitous as is the “Made in China” version today and often had very similar -- not always positive -- connotations. Along the way, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, and other Pacific-rim nations have each had their turn at being the preferred low-cost alternative to manufacturing here in the US.
Design News Webinar Series
11/19/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
11/6/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
10/7/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Dec 1 - 5, An Introduction to Embedded Software Architecture and Design
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Last Archived Class
Sponsored by Littelfuse
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service