NAME: JOHN EBO ANDORFUL

COURSE: ME 582 (ENGINEERING RESEARCH

METHODS)

EXAM NUMBER: PG 1177413

STD REF: 20287729

ASSIGNMENT

APPRAISAL OF WELDED LEAF SPRING

BY:
ANDORFUL J. E.
KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
P.O.BOX SK 554
SAKUMONO.TEMA
GHANA
jakena2001@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
The use of repaired fractured leaf springs; either by welding and/or forging
rather than a full replacement with a new one has become accepted by the
general populace. This repair which is carried out by numerous artisans
with

years

of

artisanal

experience

is

without

any

Science

and/or

Engineering. This paper seeks to bring to light the effects of welding on the
strength and quality of the leaf spring; thereby leading to a change in
approach to tackling the issue of fractured leaf springs.

KEYWORDS
Leaf spring, Welding, Strength, Hardness

INTRODUCTION
The quest to carry more load than required by vehicles plying our roads is leading to
frequent breakdowns and in some cases causing accidents on our roads. Key parts like
the leaf spring which support the vehicle are thus made to carry more than what they are
made to support with most leading to fracturing of this member. This brings into focus
such parts of vehicles which are repaired to save cost and time. Repair works include
either welding or forging or in some cases a combination of both. This project therefore
aims at finding out the effects of welding, on the quality of leaf springs which have been
welded after fracturing since welding will in the end affect the original properties of the
leaf spring.
Specimens from the original and the welded parts of the leaf spring would be acquired,
tested and analysed in the materials laboratory. After the analysis, the samples would be
appraised and suggestions made as to how best to improve the indigenous technology

through the application of materials know-how principles. The laboratory analysis will
involve:
1. Chemical Composition of the specimens (from the original and the welded leaf
springs)
2. Hardness test

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two samples were cut from the un-welded part and two from the welded part for
experimentation. The surfaces of the samples were then prepared for experimentation by
grinding and polishing. Below are the pictures of the samples before the surface
preparation.

Un-welded
B

Welded

Figure 1

Samples before Grinding and Polishing

Grinding and Polishing

Apparatus

Four (4) grades of silicon carbide paper (180,220,240 and 400) for grinding the
surfaces of the samples.

Rotating wheel with Emory cloth fixed on it.

Procedure
Each sample was ground on four different grades of Silicon carbide paper, beginning
with the coarsest, which is the 180 grade through to the finest, which is the 400 grade.
Only one face of the samples was to undergo the grinding process. Initially, the 180

grade was to remove the much darker scratches on the surfaces of the samples. The
samples were then polished on Emory cloth which is fixed on a rotating wheel with a
solution of aluminium powder as a lubricant. The polishing was done by holding the
specimens face down on the rotating wheel and slowly moving around in opposite
direction to the rotation of the wheel. The aluminium powder solution was poured on
the rotating wheel at specific times so as to avoid local heating of the sample specimen
which would have destroyed the microstructure of the sample specimen. When the
surfaces of the samples were mirror bright and showed no scratches they were cleaned
in water.
Precautions taken were:

During grinding, water was poured on the sample intermittently to reduce heat
due to friction which would have altered the structure and properties of the
sample.

The grinding process was done in one particular direction to improve on the
sample surface smoothness.

During polishing, the solution of aluminium powder was used not only to serve
as lubricant, but also to aid polishing.

The surface of the sample was lifted up during polishing from time to time to
avoid the build up of heat in it.

Below are the pictures of the samples after the surface preparation.

Unwelded

Welded

Figure 2

Samples after Grinding and Polishing

Chemical Composition of Samples

Apparatus
Thermo spectrometer
Procedure
The sample was placed in the spark chamber of the thermo spectrometer 4 mm away from a
positively charged tungsten electrode. Thus the sample became negatively charged. Heat and
polychromatic light were evolved from the sample when the instrument was sparked. The light

was diffracted when incident on 775 grooves/mm3 prisms unto the Charged Couple Device
(C.C.D). The light energy which varies for each element was then converted into electrical
energy with its intensity read as compositional values.
Observation
For accuracies of 0.02 within elemental content values, the Strohlein Apparatus is highly
recommended instead of the Thermo spectrometer.
The precaution taken was:

Due to its extra sensitivity the thermo spectrometer was carefully operated in order to
avoid any disturbance which could have affected the values.

Hardness (Brinell) Test

Apparatus
Brinell hardness tester
Procedure
The sample was placed on a wheel and the wheel rotated. A load in the form of a ball was then
applied to cause indentation during the rotation. A dial gauge attached to the tester measured the
indentation in millimetres. This measured value was then used in calculating the Brinell
hardness number (BHN) as compared to standard values.
Below is the formula for calculating the Brinell hardness number:

HB = 2F/ D [D- (D2-d2)]

where F= load; D= diameter of the ball in millimetres

d= mean diameter of the indentation in millimetres

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1 shows the elemental analysis of the un-welded and welded samples.
Table 1: Results from the Chemical Composition and Hardness Test
Sample
Identification

Date Id

C%

Mn%

Si%

S%

P%

Hardness BHN

03/04/0

0.696

0.942

0.29

0.01

0.01

341

0.28

0.01

0.02

0.23

0.01

0.01

0.23

0.01

0.01

Welded
B

03/04/0

0.701

0.928

6
C

03/04/0

0.595

0.864

UnD

03/04/0

0.600

0.859

341

363

363

welded
6

Table 2: Average chemical compositional values

Samples

C%

Mn%

Si%

S%

P%

Welded

0.596

0.862

0.239

0.014

0.015

Un-welded

0.699

0.936

0.286

0.0165

0.0205

ANALYSIS
Samples A and B are the samples from the un-welded part and samples C and D are the
samples from the welded part.

Since the samples were taken from different portions of the leaf spring, a true reflection
of the compositional values would be obtained from the average.
The average carbon percentages of the un-welded samples (0.699%) fall within the
range, 0.6%-0.8% indicates that they are high carbon steels.
The average carbon percentages of the welded samples (0.596%) which fall within the
range, 0.3%-0.6% indicates that they are medium carbon steels.
From the hardness values obtained, it can be deduced that the welded samples have a
Brinell hardness value of 363 which is much higher than the Brinell hardness value of
341 for the un-welded samples.
However by virtue of their high carbon contents, samples A and B are supposed to be
harder than samples C and D, but they have rather been toughened by Tempering to suit
their function as leaf springs.
This fact is buttressed below by the mechanism behind Tempering.
At the tempering temperature, martensite which is the hardest structure promoting
hardness in the high carbon steel decomposes into ferrite and the precipitation of fine
particles occurs. (Evans, 1971) The fine granular structures formed which are the
secondary troosite results in some toughening at the expense of hardness.
When the tempering temperature is increased from 100-200C to 450-650C, the
carbide particles coalesce to form fewer and larger particles which provide fewer
obstacles to dislocation movement. This result in a further decrease in strength and
hardness while toughness is further increased. (Davies, 1972)

Samples C and D whose strength and hardness increase after welding, with a possibility
of non-metallic inclusions due to atmospheric exposure become brittle. This makes
them fracture easily and as such unsuitable for applications where toughness is needed.
The other elements are in their right percentages therefore their presence is not harmful.
CONCLUSION
The welded portion out of which samples C and D were obtained, is very brittle because
hardness has increased. As such it is highly susceptible to failure upon minimum
loading in the form of impact, which leads to vehicular break down resulting in
accidents

RECOMMENDATION
The best thing to do after a leaf spring has failed is to obtain a new piece than weld it
because the welding hardens the metal and as such increases brittleness at the expense
of ductility, toughness and tensile strength required to withstand impact. In cases where
welding have to be carried out, cooling air also referred to as normalising should be
employed. (William D. Callister, 1991)
In order to obtain accuracies of 0.02 within elemental content values the Strohlein
Apparatus is highly recommended for the chemical analysis of metals.
An ore microscope should be made available to students to enable them obtain
photographs of the material surfaces during microstructure analysis.

REFERENCES

Davies, A. (1972). The Science and Practice of Welding, 6th Edition,. Cambridge,
University Press.
Evans, D. U. (1971). Fundamentals of Engineering Metallurgy. Edward Arnold
Publishers limited.
William D. Callister, J. (1991). An Introduction to Materials Science and Engineering
Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc., .

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

AUTHORS GUIDELINE

GENERAL
The Journal of Science and Technology (JUST) aims primarily to publish articles
resulting from original research
pure or applied in the various aspects of academic endeavour broadly classified as
science (physical, biological),
technology and the humanities. The primary criteria will be that these papers contribute
to the advancement of
knowledge in the respective fields. Papers submitted to other publishing houses will not
be accepted although
manuscripts published in un-refereed magazines, proceedings, etc, may be accepted
subject to satisfying the
requirements for publishing in the JUST.

JUST also publishes technical notes and reviews. Technical notes give opportunity to
present preliminary but
meaningful results or purely practical papers on how certain problems are solved.
Reviews give opportunity to
experts to provide readers with a thorough review and analysis of issues in a subject
area of relevance.

MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION

Preparation

Manuscripts should generally be arranged in the following order: title page, abstract,
introduction, materials and
methods (or Methodology or Procedure), results, discussion (or results and discussions),
conclusion (or conclusion
and recommendations) acknowledgements, and references. However, papers in the
humanities and the technological
fields may follow rules differing from the above but must remain logical.

Submission
Manuscripts, preferably in English, should be submitted via the online system of JUST.
Manuscripts must be typed
double-spaced on A4 size paper with at least 3cm margins on either side of the paper;
double spacing applies to text
only and NOT to tables, references and figure legends. It is recommended that
prospective authors use numbered
pages. Papers that fail to meet the JUST style and form will be rejected outright.

Returning revised manuscripts should also be via the online system of JUST. Scripts
should be typeset in MS Word
format. Submission of papers to JUST is understood to mean that the author(s) agree to
transfer copyright of the
article solely to the publisher to facilitate the widest possible dissemination.

Title page

The first page of any manuscript shall include the title, name(s) of authors, their
institutional affiliations and
addresses, city and country (zip codes, if applicable). The title of the article is typed in
bold capitals using font size
14 Times New Roman; abbreviations are not allowed. Title must be within one hundred
characters (including
spaces) and descriptive of the contents of the manuscripts. Authors should be listed with
surnames first followed by
their initials in font size 12 Times New Roman. Addresses (including emails) should be
listed under the names of
authors. Where authors work at different addresses, they should be identified by
numbered superscripts against their
names. References to professional qualifications/titles are not required. The first author
will be assumed to be the
contact person unless otherwise stated. The title page should also have a running
heading of 50 characters or less,
including spaces placed at the top of the page.

Abstract
The abstract heading should be typed in font size 12 Times New Roman in bold
UPPERCASE. The text of the
abstract should be typed in font size 12 Times New Roman and in italics. The abstract is
a concise abbreviated
version of the paper which tells the reader whether the paper is worth reading at all; it
must therefore be informative

with respect to aim, methods, procedures, results, discussion, and conclusion. An

abstract should not exceed 300
words.

Keywords
Heading should be 12 points Times New Roman bold. A maximum of five keywords
(separated by comma) that best
describe the material being presented must follow the abstract.

Introduction
The heading should be typed in font size 12 Times New Roman in bold UPPERCASE.
The introduction should
follow the key words and should be as brief as possible; it should concern itself with a
clear justification for the
work undertaken and the underlying theory and hypothesis; a short review of literature
in the field of study is
obligatory although any exhaustive review properly belongs to the Discussion section.
The introduction is limited to
not more than two pages double spaced.

Materials and Methods

The heading should be typed with font size12 Times New Roman and in bold
UPPERCASE. This section describes

concisely the methodology/procedures employed so that anyone wishing to replicate the

trial can do so and obtain
comparable results. Provide sufficient detail so as to remove any possible ambiguities
with respect to design,
treatments, measurements, analysis, etc. Where methods employed are commonly
known in a given field details
should be omitted and the reference given instead. Modifications to known
methodology must however be clearly
described and explained.

Results and Discussion

This section describes clearly the observations made and their concise interpretation; the
discussion is probably the
single most important section. While the two sections (Results and Discussion) may be
separated, it is generally
advisable to combine them to facilitate easy discussion of the results without having to
repeat the results. Results
should be presented in tables and/or figures whenever possible, but should be clearly
explained in the text taking
care to avoid unnecessary repetition of tabular data. Information presented in tables
should not be repeated in
figures, or vice versa. Standard deviations/errors help the reader to follow the trend of
results and should be supplied
whenever appropriate. The discussion should interpret observations i.e. explain the
causes of events and not

simply state the obvious. The discussion should include references to earlier or
contemporary literature relevant to
the topic studied; this way, a reviewer can decide on the merits of the manuscript.

Tables
Tables are to be numbered according to their sequence in the text and should also be
referred to in the text before
they are placed. The Tables should be inserted at the exact positions where they belong
in the body of the paper.
Size and layout limitations of JUST do not allow for large tables. All Tables must have
short but self-explanatory
titles. Table numbers and titles should be placed at the top left of the Tables. Arabic
numerals are to be used. Tables
should have only three horizontal lines; however in certain circumstances an additional
horizontal line may be
applicable. Tables should be numbered from Table 1 and continued serially to 2, 3, etc.
As much as possible avoid
numbering unrelated tables as (a), (b), e.g. Table 3(a), Table 3(b).

Figures
Figures should be inserted at the exact positions where they belong in the body of the
paper and should also be
referred to in the text before they are placed. They should be clearly captioned and
numbered in sequence below

each figure. Line drawings must be done in black ink. Photocopies/scanned copies are
not acceptable. Photographs
(good, glossy black and white) and line drawings should not be mounted. Colour
illustrations may be reproduced at
the author's expense. Figures may not be used to duplicate data already presented in
tables or text or vice versa.
Photographs and illustrations other than tables are considered as figures and should be
referred to as such. Figures
should be numbered from 1 and continued serially to 2, 3, etc. As much as possible
avoid numbering unrelated
figures as (a), (b), e.g. Fig. 3(a), Fig. 3(b).

Footnotes
Footnotes to tables should be superscript numbers (1
) while superscript letters (a
) should be reserved for statistical
analysis; asterisks (*) are reserved for probability values. Footnotes to the title page
(including title, authors, 3

addresses, etc) are numbered sequentially from the beginning. Footnotes should be used
sparingly and only if
absolutely required, otherwise the information should be embodied in the text of the
paper.

References

References to literature in the body of the manuscript are cited by author(s), followed by
year. Authors are cited by
their surnames only, e.g., Andam (1999) or (Andam, 1999) depending on sentence
structure.

Andam (1999) stated that archival collections present an impartial body of information.
Archival collections present an impartial body of information (Andam, 1999).

However in case of a direct quote, the page number is added to the above style; e.g.
Andam (1999, 25) or (Andam,
1999:25).

Distinguish between different papers by the same author(s) in the same year by
postscript letters e.g. Ayim, 1994a,
1994b, and 1994c. In the body of the paper, where a paper has more than two authors,
give only the name of the first
author followed by et al. (e.g. Ayim et al., 1999, see full reference below) or Ayim et al.
(1999). Unpublished
papers must also be listed in the References section, while personal communications
must be referred to only in the
text (A. M. Ayim, personal communication).

All literature mentioned in the text should be listed in alphabetical and chronological (if
same authors have more
than one paper cited) order at the end of the paper under References. The year of
publication (in brackets) must

follow the names of authors who should be listed surname first followed by initials. The
use of et al. in the
references section is not allowed. Provide the full title of the paper in the original
language or in an English
translation.

For Journals, use the proper journal abbreviations; if in doubt, quote the full name of the
journal. The name of the
journal, volume and pages should be typed in italics. Follow the title with the volume
number in Arabic numerals
and the first and last pages of the article. Issue numbers are not necessary except for
journals where continuous
pagination is not used. Only proper nouns in titles of papers and books need to be
capitalized; for example:
Osei, S. A., Okai, D. B. and Tuah, A. K. (1999). Quality protein maize as the sole
source of amino acids in the
diets of starter pigs: a preliminary study. Journal of the University of Science and
Technology 19(2): 1 4

For books, the full citation should also include the title, edition number (if more than
one), name of publishers, city
of publication and country (if city cannot be easily identified by readers):
Cryer, P. E., (1976). Diagnostic Endocrinology. Oxford University Press, New York.

Where the book is edited, a reference to part of it must be given the normal literature
citation but the title of the

article is followed by the word In: and then the name of editor, book title, publishers,
city of publication
Baker, D. H. (1977), Amino acid nutrition of the chick. In: Draper, H. H. (Editor)
Advances in Nutrition
Research. Plenum Press, New York.

For references to conference and seminar papers, the citation should include the title of
the paper, the theme of the
conference/seminar, editors, place where it was held and date (days and month, e.g., 19
21 May).

Latin Words and Phrases

Latin words used to identify biological structures or entities are always italicised;
similarly phrases like et al., in situ,
in vivo, versus, per se. On the other hand, commonly used abbreviations such as etc.,
viz. and e.g. do not require
italicisation.

Numbers
As a rule, numerals are not used to start sentences; words are preferred. In addition,
words should be used for all
numbers less than 10 and numerals for those greater than 10. In the situation where a
sequence of numbers is given 4

with some less and others more than 10 (e.g. 150, 90, 45, 17, 9, 3), the use of numerals
for all is advised. If a number

is followed immediately by a unit of measurement, use the numeral, e.g., 2g; 3cm.

Units of Measurement
The metric system (SI) of measure is obligatory.

Peer Review
All manuscripts are subject to review by at least two referees knowledgeable in the
author's field of study. These
reviewers ensure the accuracy, currency and relevance of papers and their comments aid
the Editor-in-Chief in
deciding on the acceptability or otherwise of submitted manuscripts. Based on their
comments, authors may be
required to make alterations to their papers before final acceptance. The Editor-in-Chief
and the Editorial Board
make the final decision on any paper, irrespective of comments of reviewers.

Proofs
Galley proofs of all accepted manuscripts are sent to the senior author (or as indicated in
the original manuscript)
who should check for typographical errors and answer queries raised by the Editor-inChief. The checked proofs
should be returned to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal online system of JUST.
Extensive alterations to the galley
proof beyond those demanded by the Editor-in-Chief may require further review and
will attract a surcharge.

Copy of the Published Paper

Authors whose papers are accepted for publication will be sent one copy of the volume
of the JUST in which their
papers appeared. Additional copies will be sent only upon receipt of the payment of the
appropriate fees. Authors
will also receive a pdf version of their published paper via email.

Originality of Manuscripts
The Editorial Board of JUST assumes no responsibility for statements made or opinions
expressed by authors who
should ensure that all submitted manuscripts have resulted from their own original
work.

Manuscript Length
Research papers submitted for publication should be between 1,500 and 6,000 words (or
between 6 and 22 pages
long when typed in double spacing), including tables and figures. Technical notes
submitted for publication should
be up to a maximum of 3,000; while Reviews submitted for publication should be
between 3,000 and 6,000. All
articles should remain within these limits to be accepted for publication!

Ethics in Publishing
Authors MUST follow ethical means of undertaking the research, acquiring the data,
and presenting information

especially, on personal issue and peoples picture. In such cases, Authors must state
categorically how they have
followed ethically accepted means of reporting the information.