0
Research Papers: Contact Mechanics

A Damage Mechanics Approach to Simulate Butterfly Wing Formation Around Nonmetallic Inclusions

[+] Author and Article Information
Sina Mobasher Moghaddam

School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907
e-mail: smobashe@purdue.edu

Farshid Sadeghi

Cummins Distinguished Professor of Mechanical Engineering,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Purdue University,
West Lafayette, IN 47907
e-mail: sadeghi@ecn.purdue.edu

Nick Weinzapfel

Schaeffler Group USA, Inc.,
Troy, MI 48083
e-mail: Nick.Weinzapfel@schaeffler.com

Alexander Liebel

Advanced Bearing Analysis,
Schaeffler Technologies GmbH & Co. KG,
Herzogenaurach DE-91074, Germany
e-mail: liebeaex@schaeffler.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received April 20, 2014; final manuscript received September 17, 2014; published online November 6, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Robert Wood.

J. Tribol 137(1), 011404 (Nov 06, 2014) (13 pages) Paper No: TRIB-14-1092; doi: 10.1115/1.4028628 History: Received April 20, 2014; Revised September 17, 2014

Nonmetallic inclusions such as sulfides and oxides are byproducts of the steel manufacturing process. For more than half a century, researchers have observed microstructural alterations around the inclusions commonly referred to as “butterfly wings.” This paper proposes a model to describe butterfly wing formation around nonmetallic inclusions. A 2D finite element model is developed to obtain the stress distribution in a domain subject to Hertzian loading with an embedded nonmetallic inclusion. It was found that mean stress due to surface traction has a significant effect on butterfly formation. Continuum damage mechanics (CDM) was used to investigate fatigue damage and replicate the observed butterfly wing formations. It is postulated that cyclic damage accumulation can be the reason for the microstructural changes in butterflies. A new damage evolution equation, which accounts for the effect of mean stresses, was introduced to capture the microstructural changes in the material. The proposed damage evolution law matches experimentally observed butterfly orientation, shape, and size successfully. The model is used to obtain S-N results for butterfly formation at different Hertzian load levels. The results corroborate well with the experimental data available in the open literature. The model is used to predict debonding at the inclusion/matrix interface and the most vulnerable regions for crack initiation on butterfly sides. The proposed model is capable of predicting the regions of interest in corroboration with experimental observations.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Jalalahmadi, B., Sadeghi, F., and Bakolas, V., 2011, “Material Inclusion Factors for Lundberg-Palmgren–Based RCF Life Equations,” Tribol. Trans., 54(3), pp. 457–469. [CrossRef]
Takemura, H., 2001, “Development of New Life Equation for Ball and Roller Bearings,” SAE Paper No. 2000-11-2601, pp. 2117–2118.
Kerrigan, A., Jc, K., Gabelli, A., and Ioannides, E., 2013, “Cleanliness of Bearing Steels and Fatigue Life of Rolling,” ASTM International, 3(6), pp. 2–7. [CrossRef]
Schlicht, H., Schreiber, E., and Zwirlein, O., 1988, “Effects of Material Properties on Bearing Steel Fatigue Strength,” Effect of Steel Manufacturing Processes on the Quality of Bearing Steels, J. J. C.Hoo, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, ASTM STP 987, pp. 81–101.
Tricot, R., Monnot, J., and Lluansi, M., 1972, “How Microstructural Alterations Affect Fatigue Properties of 52100 Steel,” Met. Eng. Q, 12.2, pp. 39–47.
Styri, H., 1951, “Fatigue Strength of Ball Bearings Races and Heat-Treated 52100 Steel Specimens,” Proceedings of the American Society for Testing and Materials, Vol. 51, pp. 682–700.
Niu, L. J., Velay, X., and Sheppard, T., 2012, “On Material Flow and Aspects of Structural Modification During Direct and Indirect Extrusion of Aluminium Alloy,” Mater. Sci. Technol., 28(4), pp. 397–405. [CrossRef]
Evans, M.-H., 2012, “White Structure Flaking (WSF) in Wind Turbine Gearbox Bearings: Effects of ‘Butterflies' and White Etching Cracks (WECs),” Mater. Sci. Technol., 28(1), pp. 3–22. [CrossRef]
Bhadeshia, H. K. D. H., 2012, “Steels for Bearings,” Prog. Mater. Sci., 57(2), pp. 268–435. [CrossRef]
Becker, P. C., 1981, “Microstructural Changes Around Non-Metallic Inclusions Caused by Rolling-Contact Fatigue of Ball-Bearing Steels,” Met. Technol., 8(1), pp. 234–243. [CrossRef]
Tricot, R., Monnot, J., and Lluansi, M., 1972, “How Microstructural Alterations Affect Fatigue Properties of 52100 Steel,” Met. Eng. Q., 12.2, pp. 39–47.
Evans, M.-H., Walker, J. C., Ma, C., Wang, L., and Wood, R. J. K., 2013, “A FIB/TEM Study of Butterfly Crack Formation and White Etching Area (WEA) Microstructural Changes Under Rolling Contact Fatigue in 100Cr6 Bearing Steel,” Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 570, pp. 127–134. [CrossRef]
Grabulov, A., and Zandbergen, H. W., 2007, “TEM and Dual Beam (SEM/FIB) Investigations of Subsurface Cracks and White Etching Area (WEA) Formed in a Deep Groove Ball Bearing Caused by Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF),” Proceedings of VHCF-4 Conference.
Grabulov, A., Ziese, U., and Zandbergen, H. W., 2007, “TEM/SEM Investigation of Microstructural Changes Within the White Etching Area Under Rolling Contact Fatigue and 3-D Crack Reconstruction by Focused Ion Beam,” Scr. Mater., 57(7), pp. 635–638. [CrossRef]
Errichello, R., Budny, R., and Eckert, R., 2013, “Investigations of Bearing Failures Associated With White Etching Areas (WEAs) in Wind Turbine Gearboxes,” Tribol. Trans., 56(6), pp. 1069–1076. [CrossRef]
Evans, M.-H., Richardson, A. D., Wang, L., and Wood, R. J. K., 2013, “Effect of Hydrogen on Butterfly and White Etching Crack (WEC) Formation Under Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF),” Wear, 306(1–2), pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
Oila, A., Shaw, B. A., Aylott, C. J., and Bull, S. J., 2005, “Martensite Decay in Micropitted Gears,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part J, 219(2), pp. 77–83. [CrossRef]
Sharma, V., 1984, “Roller Contact Fatigue Study of Austempered Ductile Iron,” Journal of Heat Treating, 3(4), pp. 326–334. [CrossRef]
Loy, B., and McCallum, R., 1973, “Mode of Formation of Spherical Particles in Rolling Contact Fatigue,” Wear, 24(2), pp. 219–228. [CrossRef]
Grad, P., Reuscher, B., Brodyanski, A., Kopnarski, M., and Kerscher, E., 2012, “Mechanism of Fatigue Crack Initiation and Propagation in the Very High Cycle Fatigue Regime of High-Strength Steels,” Scr. Mater., 67(10), pp. 838–841. [CrossRef]
Kang, J.-H., Hosseinkhani, B., Williams, C. A., Moody, M. P., Bagot, P. A. J., and Rivera-Díaz-del-Castillo, P. E. J., 2013, “Solute Redistribution in the Nanocrystalline Structure Formed in Bearing Steels,” Scr. Mater., 69(8), pp. 630–633. [CrossRef]
O'Brien, J., and King, A., 1966, “Electron Microscopy of Stress-Induced Structural Alterations Near Inclusions in Bearing Steels,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 88(3), pp. 568–571.
Polonsky, I., and Keer, L., 1995, “On White Etching Band Formation Bearings,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 43(4), pp. 637–669. [CrossRef]
Oila, A., and Bull, S. J., 2005, “Phase Transformations Associated With Micropitting in Rolling/Sliding Contacts,” J. Mater. Sci., 40(18), pp. 4767–4774. [CrossRef]
Glaeser, W., and Shaffer, S., 1996, “Contact Fatigue,” Fatigue Fract, ASM Handbook Volume 19: Fatigue and Fracture, ASM International, pp. 331–336.
Sauger, E., Fouvry, S., Ponsonnet, L., Kapsa, P., Martin, J., and Vincent, L., 2000, “Tribologically Transformed Structure in Fretting,” Wear, 245(1–2), pp. 39–52. [CrossRef]
Lewis, M., and Tomkins, B., 2012, “A Fracture Mechanics Interpretation of Rolling Bearing Fatigue,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part J, 226(5), pp. 389–405. [CrossRef]
Grabulov, A., 2010, “Fundamentals of Rolling Contact Fatigue,” Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
Umezawa, O., “Modeling of Crack Generation and Growth Under Rolling Contact Fatigue in Martensite Steels,” Processing and Fabrication of Advanced Materials XVIII, pp. 555–564.
Evans, M.-H., Wang, L., Jones, H., and Wood, R. J. K., 2013, “White Etching Crack (WEC) Investigation by Serial Sectioning, Focused Ion Beam and 3-D Crack Modelling,” Tribol. Int., 65(2), pp. 146–160. [CrossRef]
Grabulov, A., Petrov, R., and Zandbergen, H. W., 2010, “EBSD Investigation of the Crack Initiation and TEM/FIB Analyses of the Microstructural Changes Around The Cracks Formed Under Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF),” Int. J. Fatigue, 32(3), pp. 576–583. [CrossRef]
Stiénon, A., Fazekas, A., Buffière, J.-Y., Vincent, A., Daguier, P., and Merchi, F., 2009, “A New Methodology Based on X-Ray Micro-Tomography to Estimate Stress Concentrations Around Inclusions in High Strength Steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 513, pp. 376–383. [CrossRef]
Guy, P., and Meynaud, P., 1997, “Sub-Surface Damage Investigation by High Ultrasonic Echography Aring Steel Frequency on l00Cr6,” Tribol. Int., 30(4), pp. 247–259. [CrossRef]
Alley, E. S., and Neu, R. W., 2010, “Microstructure-Sensitive Modeling of Rolling Contact Fatigue,” Int. J. Fatigue, 32(5), pp. 841–850. [CrossRef]
Vincent, A., Lormand, G. I., Lamagnbre, P., Gosset, L., Girodin, D., Dudragne, G., and Fougres, R., 1998, “From White Etching Areas around Inclusions to Crack Nucleation in Bearing Steels Under Rolling Contact Fatigue,” Bearing Steels: Into the 21st Century, J. J. C.Hoo, and W. B.Green, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM STP 1327.
Melander, A., 1998, “Simulation of the Behaviour of Short Cracks at Inclusions Under Rolling Contact Fatigue Loading-Specially the Effect of Plasticity,” Bearing Steels: Into the 21st Century, J. J. C.Hoe, and W. B.Green, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM STP 1327.
Melander, A., 1997, “A Finite Element Study of Short Crack With Different Inclusion Types Under Rolling Contact Fatigue Load,” Int. J. Fatigue, 19(1), pp. 13–24. [CrossRef]
Jiang, Y., and Sehitoglu, H., 1999, “A Model for Rolling Contact Failure,” Wear, 224(1), pp. 38–49. [CrossRef]
Lemaître, J., 1992, A Course on Damage Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
Xiao, Y., Li, S., and Gao, Z., 1998, “A Continuum Damage Mechanics Model for High Cycle Fatigue,” Int. J. Fatigue, 20(7), pp. 503–508. [CrossRef]
Bomidi, J. A. R., 2013, “Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Torsion Fatigue of Bearing Steel,” ASME J. Tribol., 135(3), p. 031103. [CrossRef]
Bomidi, J. A. R., Weinzapfel, N., Sadeghi, F., Liebel, A., and Weber, J., 2013, “An Improved Approach for 3D Rolling Contact Fatigue Simulations With Microstructure Topology,” Tribol. Trans., 56(3), pp. 385–399. [CrossRef]
Bomidi, J. A. R., Weinzapfel, N., Wang, C.-P., and Sadeghi, F., 2012, “Experimental and Numerical Investigation of Fatigue of Thin Tensile Specimen,” Int. J. Fatigue, 44(3), pp. 116–130. [CrossRef]
Bolotin, V. V., and Belousov, I. L., 2001, “Early Fatigue Crack Growth as the Damage Accumulation Process,” Probab. Eng. Mech., 16(4), pp. 279–287. [CrossRef]
Evans, M.-H., Richardson, A. D., Wang, L., and Wood, R. J. K., 2013, “Serial Sectioning Investigation of Butterfly and White Etching Crack (WEC) Formation in Wind Turbine Gearbox Bearings,” Wear, 302(1–2), pp. 1573–1582. [CrossRef]
Lund, T. B., Beswick, J., and Dean, S. W., 2010, “Sub-Surface Initiated Rolling Contact Fatigue—Influence of Non-Metallic Inclusions, Processing History, and Operating Conditions,” J. ASTM Int., 7(5), p. 102559. [CrossRef]
Lund, T. B., 2012, “Sub-Surface Initiated Rolling Contact Fatigue—Influence of Non-Metallic Inclusions, Processing History, and Operating Conditions,” J. ASTM Int., 7(5), p. 12. [CrossRef]
Huwaldt, J. A., 2013, “PlotDigitizer”, Available: http://plotdigitizer.sourceforge.net/, Accessed May 6.
Shimizu, S., Tsuchiya, K., and Tosha, K., 2009, “Probabilistic Stress-Life (P-S-N) Study on Bearing Steel Using Alternating Torsion Life Test,” Tribol. Trans., 50(6), pp. 807–816. [CrossRef]
Melander, A., and Ölund, P., 1999, “Detrimental Effect of Nitride and Aluminium Oxide Inclusions on Fatigue Life in Rotating Bending of Bearing Steels,” Mater. Sci. Technol., 15(5), pp. 555–562. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Normalized stress history experienced by a point located at 0.5b under a bearing surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of a typical pair of butterfly wings: note the ORD.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of the domain with relative dimensions (inclusion location and diameter vary in different cases)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Centerline stresses for two domains with (jagged) and without (smooth) an inclusion for a 16 μm diameter inclusion located at 0.5b. Dashed lines mark the inclusion/matrix interface.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Shear stress variations around the inclusion as the Hertzian load passes over the surface. x/b indicates the relative location of the center of the Hertzian pressure distribution.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Effect of surface traction on amplitude and mean value of shear stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Shear stress amplitude, mean, and their summation during one load pass over pristine domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

(a) Chronological order in butterfly evolution: (1) beginning of the microstructural change, (2) microstructural alteration near the inclusion/matrix interface, (3) formation of the actual body of the wings, and (4) fully formed butterfly wings. (b) Grayscale spectrum showing the butterfly evolution versus number of cycles (Pmax = 2.0 GPa).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Butterfly wings formed around an inclusion (a) as observed by Grabulov et al. [14] (b) as predicted by the model (figure on left is flipped as opposed to the original to set the ORD consistent with the simulation).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Effect of inclusion depth on butterfly wing development: (a) as observed by Evans [16] (b) as predicted by the model (some of the figures on left are flipped as opposed to the original to set the ORD consistent with the simulation).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Butterfly wings formed around (a) 2 μ and (b) 16 μ inclusions. Note that the relative wingspan to inclusion size is larger for the smaller inclusion.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Wingspan to inclusion diameter ratio versus the inclusion size variation according to experimental observations [27] and current model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Color spectrums illustrating butterfly formation growth versus number of cycles at different load levels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

S-N curve for butterfly formation. Experimental data are extracted from Ref. [2].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Schematic showing the stresses resolved along the inclusion matrix interface. Maximum shear along the interface dominates the debonding regions.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of the debonding and deformation regions at inclusion/matrix interface (a) as observed by Grabulov et al. [31] and (b) Simulation results.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Maximum tensile stress acting on butterfly/matrix interface. Bold dashed lines show where the model predicts the cracks to grow.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In