ELSEVIER

Scanning Electron Microscope Fractography in

Failure Analysis of Steels
R. Wouters and L. Froyen
Department of Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, B-3001
Leuven, Belgium

For many failure cases, macroscopic examination of the fracture surface permits discrimi-
nation of fatigue fractures from overload fractures. For clarifyingfatiguejructtlues, the practi-
cal significance of microfractography is limited to an investigation of the crack initiation ar-
eas. Scanning electron microscopy is successfully used in tracing local material abnormalities
that act as fatigue crack initiators. The task for the scanning electron microscope, however,
is much more substantial in failure analysis of overloadfractures, especially for steels. By re-
vealing specific fractographic characteristics, complemented by information about the ma-
terial and the loading conditions, scanning electron microscopy provides a strong indica-
tion of the probable cause of failure. A complete dimplefiacture is indicative of acceptable
bulk material properties; overloading, by subdimensioning or excessive external loading,
has to be verified. The presence of cleavagefructure makes the material properties question-
able if external conditions causing embrittlement are absent. Intergranular brittlefracture re-
quires verification of grain-boundary weakening conditions-a sensitized structure,
whether or not combined with a local stress state or a specific environment. The role of
scanning electron microscopy in failure analysis is illustrated by case histories of the afore-
mentioned fracture types. 0 Elsevier Science Inc., 1996

INTRODUCTION and exclusive role of the scanning electron

Failure analysis basically tries to correlate
failure appearance with failure cause. How-
ever, this correlation is rarely unambigu-
ous. Fractography atlases and failure analy-
sis handbooks, which precisely describe the
relation between cause and appearance, can
be used for solving failure problems [l-5].
However, their accessibility is sometimes
limited because they are based on one-way
classifications of all possible failure mecha-
nisms. An efficient use of these sources
therefore requires a minimal presumption
about the possible failure cause. The aim of
this contribution is to supply this first indi-
cation of probable cause of failure in steels,
based solely on the observation of primary
microfractographic features, and thereby to
demonstrate, for certain cases, the specific
MATERIALS CHARACTERIZATION
0 Elsevier Science Inc., 1996
655 Avenue of the Americas, New York,
microscope (SEM).
INVESTIGATION OF FATIGUE FRACTURE
BY SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY
In most cases, fatigue failures can be easily
and correctly identified from macrofracto-
graphical features. The presence of a well-
defined, flat fracture area with a clear
beach-mark pattern and a sharp transition
to the final fracture part is often sufficient
for fatigue identification. Moreover, the mac-
roscopic appearance of the fatigue fracture
surfaces can yield information about load-
ing conditions and stress state [l]. How-
ever, questionable cases do occur; thin sec-
tioned fractures, for instance, as well as flat
fracture surfaces with no plastic deforma-
357
36357-364 (1996)
10445803/96/$15.00
NY 10010 PII SlO44-5803(96)00070-S
358
tion and with absence of any overload frac-
ture part, can be ambiguous and require in-
vestigation with the SEM for confirmation
or exclusion of a suspected fracture mecha-
nism. Examples are shown in Figures 1 and
2. At the occasion of an unexpected failure
of the shear pin shown in Fig. l(a), some
doubts did arise about its proper function-
ing; a possible rupture of the pin by fatigue
instead of overload, for which it was de-
signed, had to be checked. Scanning elec-
tron microscopy cleared up the situation: a
complete dimple shear fracture was ob-
served and, therefore, any fatigue mecha-
nism could be excluded.
The failure shown in Fig. 2 concerns a
broken component from a high-pressure
pump, made from a hardenable chromium
stainless steel. The ambiguous appearance
(a)
(b)
FIG. 1. Fracture surface (a) and fractograph
broken shear pin; shear dimples.
R. Wouters and L. Froyen
of the fracture surface shown in Fig. 2(a)
(flat and without any macroscopic plastic
deformation), as well as the previous his-
tory of similar components that showed
embrittlement due to careless heat treat-
ment, required an investigation with the
SEM. Fatigue characteristics were observed
all over the fracture surface [see Fig. 2(b)].
This failure mechanism was explained by
an annealing treatment of the component,
which overcame the embrittlement prob-
lems but lowered the fatigue resistance.
In an analysis of unambiguous fatigue
fractures, the SEM can be used to trace the
initiation areas. Fatigue cracks starting
from discrete notches not related to a geo-
metrical origin are suspected of being
(a)
(b)
FIG. 2. Fracture surface (a) and fractograph (b) of a
part from a high-pressure pump (hardenable chro-
mium stainless steel: 0.2% C, 17% Cr, 2% Ni). Fatigue
(b) of a striations can be observed (b); they indicate the crack
propagation direction (see arrow).
SEM Fractograpky in Failure Analysis

caused by a local material defect. For dis-

playing the typical microfractographic fea-
tures of several material defects, such as
porosity, inclusions, material overlaps, sur-
face defects, and so forth, SEM fractogra-
phy is an excellent technique; it is also use-
ful because of its microanalytical possibilities.
Figure 3 shows, for example, casting poros-
ity that started a fatigue crack. Structure-
related material defects require, in most
cases, metallographical assistance for their
identification or clarification. The intergran-
ular cracks shown in Fig. 4, for example, FIG. 4. Quench crack in the initiation area of the frac-
were found in the initiation areas of the frac- ture surface of a shaft (17 CrNiMo 6 casehardened
steel).
ture surface of a shaft. The shaft was bro-
ken in a section transition area and the in-
tergranular cracks were identified as quench
dicative of acceptable bulk material proper-
cracks caused by a careless masking proce-
ties. If the dimple structure is pure and
dure before carburizing.
covers the whole fracture surface, over-
loading either by subdimensioning or by
excessive external loading is to be expected.
INVESTIGATION OF OVERLOAD
The dimple characteristics provide, in some
FRACTURES BY SCANNING ELECTRON
cases, relevant information concerning the
MICROSCOPY
material (e.g., an excessive inclusion con-
tent, as in Fig. 5) or the loading mode (e.g.,
In the absence of fatigue conditions, the
as in Fig. 6). The overloaded steel screws
fracture surface of a mechanically loaded
shown in Fig. 6 fractured along the first
component appears as a dimple structure,
thread near the screw head. The different
as cleavage or quasi-cleavage, as intergran-
orientations of the dimples in the core [Fig.
ular, or as a mixture of these characteristics.
6(a)] and in the outer case [Fig. 6(b)] indi-
cate torsional rather than tensile loading.
INTERPRETATION OF DIMPLE FRACTURE
From this analysis, it was concluded that
Because a pure dimple structure is a trans- the screw failed during tightening and not
granular mode of ductile fracture, it is in- during service.

FIG. 3. Shrinkage porosity in a steel casting (G-X 12 Cr FIG. 5. Fractograph of an overloaded tool steel con-
14) that initiated fatigue fracture. taining manganese sulfide stringers.
360 X. Wouters and L. Froyen

(a) (a)

(b) (b)
FIG. 7. Fractograph (a) and microstructure (b) of a
FIG. 6. Fractographs of overloaded steel (0.2% C)
12% Cr martensitic steel component with intergranu-
screws: normal dimples in the core (a) and shear dim-
lar dimple fracture characteristics (a), caused by a tem-
ples in the case (b).
pered martensite microstructure with carbide string-
ers along the prior austenite grain boundaries (b).

An exception to the usual transgranular

dimple structure is the intergranular dim- form, frequently together with dimples) on
ple variant. It is rarely found because it is broken steel components indicates brittle
indicative of a specific metallographic struc- behavior. This can be caused either by ex-
ture. An example is shown in Fig. 7. A 12% ternal conditions (low temperature, impact
Cr martensitic steel failed prematurely be- loading, presence of notches) or by an unfa-
cause of an intergranular dimple fracture vorable material condition, often caused by
[Fig. 7(a)] due to unfavorable grain-bound- an inadequate heat treatment. The metallo-
ary precipitation: carbide strings were graphic structure, as a translation of the
formed along the large prior austenite heat treatment state of the material, must
grain boundaries during tempering [Fig. be checked. A typical example is the insuf-
7(b)]. ficient tempering of hardenable steels (Fig. 8).
Other unfavorable structural characteris-
tics are a large grain size, the presence of an
INTERPRETATION OF CLEAVAGE
excessive amount of inclusions of unfavor-
FRACTURE
able orientation, and certain kinds of pre-
The presence of cleavage or quasi-cleavage cipitates. An example, shown in Fig. 9, is a
fracture characteristics (pure or in mixed thin-walled hollow shaft that failed be-
SEM Fvactograpky in Failure Analysis
(a)
(b)
FIG. 8. Fractograph (a) and microstructure (b) of a case-
hardened shaft (2OCrMo5 steel); partially brittle fracture
(quasi-cleavage) (a) due to insufficient tempering (b).
cause of cleavage fracture due to the pres-
ence of needle-shaped iron nitrides all over
the wall thickness. This was caused by an
incorrect steel selection; a 0.15% carbon
steel without Al or Cr addition was used
for nitriding.
In the case of acceptable material proper-
ties, the presence or the influence of exter-
nal brittleness enhancers, such as impact
loading, temperature, or a multiaxial stress
state should be checked.
INTERPRETATION OF INTERGRANULAR
FRACTURE
In general, intergranular fracture implies
grain-boundary weakening. This weaken-
ing can be caused by one or a combination
of three factors: metallographic structure,
361
(a)
(b)
FIG. 9. Fractograph (a) and microstructure (b) of a
hollow shaft (0.15% carbon steel), showing cleavage
fracture (a) due to the presence of needle-shaped iron
nitrides in a ferrite-pearlite structure (b).
specific environment, and stress. The task
of the SEM is to detect the intergranular
fracture and to demarcate the extent of the
intergranular part in the whole fracture
surface, because these data can provide in-
formation about the role of the factors that
cause weakening.
A complete intergranular rupture under
a mechanical load is rather rare and points
in most cases to an undesirable microstruc-
ture of the bulk material. Examples are
overheating, temper embrittlement, and so
forth. In Fig. 10(a), a broken crush roller
shows complete intergranular fracture, with
grains that are visible to the naked eye. From
the metallographic structure [Fig. 10(b)], it
is clear that the component was over-
heated; large grains containing pearlite in a
362
(a)
(b)
FIG. 10. Fracture surface (a) and microstructure (b) of
a broken crush roller (0.66% carbon steel), showing (a)
complete intergranular fracture caused by overheat-
ing and (b) large grains containing pearlite with a fer-
rite network.
ferrite network (the material was a hypoeu-
tectoid steel with 0.66% carbon).
Small sectioned components that have
been exposed to a specific environment
sometimes show an intergranular fracture
over the whole fracture surface. A well-
known example is the galvanized screw
that fails owing to hydrogen embrittlement.
A fracture surface with a well-defined inter-
granular border is a normal pattern for sur-
face-treated steels by carburization both for
overload and for fatigue failures. The sharp
transition between the intergranular bro-
ken case and the dimple core of an over-
R. Wouters and L. Froyen
FIG. 11. Overload fracture of a casehardened compo-
nent with a sharp transition between an intergranular
broken carburized case and the dimple core.
loaded, casehardened component is shown
in Fig. 11.
The appearance of limited local inter-
granular areas on a fracture surface is in-
dicative of a sensitized structure that has
been exposed to a local stress state or an ag-
gressive environment or both. Examples
are quench cracks, grinding cracks, stress
corrosion cracking, liquid metal embrittle-
ment, and knife-line attack. These inter-
granular cracks are often identified as initi-
ation sites either for fatigue ruptures,
because they act as notches, or for overload
fractures, because they reduce the loaded
cross section. The added value of the SEM
derives from its capacity to reveal specific
characteristics such as grain decohesion,
crack branching, crows-foot marks, or
chemical attack and from its capacity to
provide microanalytical information con-
cerning corroding agents or an unfavorable
structure (examples are shown in Figs.
12-14).
The intergranular fracture shown in Fig.
12(a) is a broken martensitic stainless steel
component that had been exposed to a cor-
rosive water environment containing chlo-
ride and sulfates at room temperature. The
grain boundaries were found to contain
large carbides [Fig. 12(a)] and further met-
allographic examination revealed an inter-
granular attack of the sensitized structure
SEM Fractography in Failure Analysis 363

(a) FIG. 13. Corroded intergranular fracture area of a

martensitic stainless steel component attacked by
stress corrosion cracking.

CONCLUSIONS

Microfractography provides a first indica-

(b)
FIG. 12. Intergranular fracture area (a) and scanning
electron micrograph of a metallographic section (b) of
a broken martensitic stainless steel component with
chromium-rich precipitates located on the grains [see
arrows on (a)]. In metallographic section (b), inter-
granular attack along the chromium-rich precipitates
can be observed.
tion of causes of failure in broken steel
parts. Scanning electron microscopy has
proved to be, as evidenced by the examples
presented herein, a valuable instrument for
fracture failure analysis. In summary, the
role of scanning electron microscopy is (1)
to clarify fatigue initiation if not related to
geometrical notches and (2) to distinguish
among dimple, cleavage, and intergranular
fracture when dealing with overload cases.
Each of the fracture types gives specific in-
dications about the probable cause of frac-
ture of the steel part.

at locations of maximum stress. In Fig.

12(b), the intergranular attack along the
chromium carbides is shown in a metallo-
graphic section. This case is an illustration
of the combination of all three factors:
stress, a sensitized microstructure, and to a
minor extent the environment, leading to
intergranular cracking. Figure 13 shows a
corroded intergranular fracture area of a
martensitic stainless steel component. In
this case, an overload fracture was induced
by stress corrosion cracks that reduced the
effective section of the component. Figure
14 shows an example of intergranular frac- FIG. 14. Intergranular fracture due to a hydrogen em-
ture by hydrogen embrittlement: the mate- brittlement; note the grain decohesion and the crows-
rial is a casehardened steel. foot marks on the grains.
364 R. Wouters and L. Froyen

References roskopische Untersuchungen von Metallschaden,

1. Failure analysis and prevention, in Metals Hand-
book, 9th Ed., Vol. 11, American Society for Metals,
Metals Park, OH, p. 111 (1986).
2. Fractography, in Metals Handbook, 9th Ed. Vol. 12,
American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH
(1986).
3. L. Engel, and H. Klingele, Rasterelektronenmik-
Carl Hanser Verlag, Mtinchen (1982).
4. Systematische Beurteilung technischer Schadens-
falle, G. Lange, ed., DGM Verlag, Oberursel(1992).
5. R. Mitsche, ua., Anwendung des Rasterelektronen-
mikroskopes bei Eisen- und Stahlwerkstoffen, Ra-
dex Rundschau, Montanuniversitlt Leoben (1978).
Received February 1996.364