~)

Engineering Failure Analysis, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 81 88, 1997

Pergamon

1997 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Printed in Great Britain
1350- 6307/97 $17.00 + 0.00

PII:S 1350-6307(96)00027-1

SHEAR FAILURE OF A ROAD-VEHICLE STEERING

SHAFT
J. H. C L E L A N D
Cambcor Ltd, 30 Windsor Road, Cambridge CB4 3JW, U.K.
and
D. R. H. J O N E S *
Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, U.K.

(Received20 September 1996)

1. B A C K G R O U N D
This case s t u d y describes the failure analysis o f a f r a c t u r e d steering shaft f r o m a h e a v y r o a d vehicle
which h a d been involved in a collision. T h e investigation was c a r r i e d o u t in o r d e r to establish
w h e t h e r the failure was the cause or a c o n s e q u e n c e o f the accident.
F i g u r e s 1 a n d 2 are scale d r a w i n g s o f the steering shaft. T h e shaft was s u p p o r t e d b y two needle

.-~..~.--~
~0

15

250

L=35

Fig. 1. Side view of the steering shaft. Dimensions in mm.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
81

82

J.H. CLELAND and D. R. H. JONES

I

250

i
F
Fig. 2. End view'of the steering shaft. Dimensions in mm.

roller bearings. Between the bearings was a toothed sector, which was driven by a worm connected
to the steering wheel. The steering arm, which transmitted movement to the track rods, was attached
to the end of the shaft by a splined connection. As shown in Fig. 3, the steering shaft had been
subjected to a torsional overload. As a consequence of the overload, the splined section of the shaft
had been twisted permanently (the ends of the splines were offset by 1.3 mm), and the shaft had
fractured where it met the toothed sector. The twisted splines are shown in Fig. 4, and the matching
fracture surfaces are shown in Fig. 5. Most of the fracture surface was relatively flat and smooth,
but there was a region near the centre which was comparatively rough. Figure 6 is a view taken in
the scanning electron microscope of the flat part of the fracture surface, which shows the classic
features of shear failure. Figure 7 is a scanning electron micrograph taken from the rough part of
the fracture surface, which shows the classic features of fibrous tensile failure. There were no
indications of prior defects on the fracture surface.

Torsional
overload~

Fracture
Fig. 3. Side view of the shaft, showing the plane of the fracture and the region of torsional overload.
Dimensions in ram.

Shear failure of road-vehiclesteering shaft

83

Fig. 4. Photograph of the splined section of the steering shaft, showing the twisted splines.

Fig. 5. Photograph of the matching fracture surfaces.

2. M E T A L L U R G Y OF T H E S H A F T
The shaft was manufactured from a nickel--chromium-molybdenum steel, and was subsequently
case hardened. The specified composition is given in Table 1. The specified properties of the core in
the quenched condition were as follows: yield stress, 736MPa minimum; tensile strength, 10791324 MPa; elongation, 8 % minimum; impact energy, 59 J cm-2 minimum. The case was required to
have a Rockwell C-scale hardness of 59-63, equivalent to a Vickers hardness (HV) of 680-780 [1].
A thin slice was cut out of the shaft using a high-speed abrasive disc and a copious supply of
coolant. One side of the slice was ground and polished for metallographic examination and hardness
testing. Figure 8 is a macrograph of the polished cross-section after etching in 2% nital. The case-

84

J.H. CLELAND and D. R. H. JONES

Fig. 6. Scanning electron micrograph taken from

failure. Magnification: 153 times.

Fig. 7. Scanning electron micrograph taken from the fibrous part of the failure. Magnification: 292 times.
Table 1. Composition specification for shaft
Element
Carbon
Silicon
Manganese
Sulphur

Weight %

Element

Weight %

0.17
0.25
0.5
0.035 maximum

Phosphorus
Chromium
Molybdenum
Nickel

0.035maximum
1.6
0.3
1.55

h a r d e n e d layer shows up clearly as a d a r k etching skin ( a b o u t 1.5 m m thick) on the outside o f the
shaft.
T h e Vickers hardness was m e a s u r e d on the polished surface as a function o f the r a d i a l distance r
from the centre o f the shaft (see T a b l e 2). Each result in T a b l e 2 is the average o f eight s e p a r a t e
readings t a k e n from sites that were spaced u n i f o r m l y a r o u n d a concentric circle.
F i g u r e 9 shows the c o n t i n u o u s c o o l i n g t r a n s f o r m a t i o n (CCT) d i a g r a m for the steel o f the shaft.
A s s u m i n g that the shaft was oil-quenched, the d i a g r a m indicates t h a t the structure at the centre
should be 10% m a r t e n s i t e + 90% bainite with a hardness o f H V 340. As shown in T a b l e 2, the

Shear failure of road-vehicle steering shaft

85

Fig. 8. Polished cross-sectionthrough the shaft, showing the case-hardened layer.

Table 2. Hardness measurements on shaft cross-section as a function

of radial distance from the centre
r (mm)

HV

trvs (MPa)

ku (MPa)

0
10
17.5
22.5
Case

350
360
375
400
880

1120
1152
1200
1280
2816

700
720
750
800
1760

measured hardness at the centre is H V 350, which agrees well with the predictions of the C C T
diagram. It is normal practice to temper case-hardened components in the range 150-180C in
order to improve the toughness [3]. Only if tempering had been carried out above 300 C would there
have been any significant decrease in the hardness of the core. Accordingly, the close correspondence
between the measured hardness and the predicted as-quenched hardness does not necessarily indicate
that the shaft had been inadequately tempered.
Table 2 shows that the hardness of the case (HV 880) is significantly higher than that specified
(HV 680-780). However, there was no indication that this contributed to the failure. As shown in
Figs 3 and 4, the splines were able to withstand a considerable shear strain even though they were
case-hardened. The m a x i m u m engineering shear strain suffered by the splines was
7 = 1.3 mm/15 m m =0.087 = 8.7%,

(1)

equivalent to a plastic strain in uniaxial tension [4] of

s.0%

(2)

3. E S T I M A T I N G T H E F A I L U R E T O R Q U E
Referring to Fig. 10, it can be seen that the torque required to cause the shear fracture of a narrow
concentric band of the cross-section is

86

J . H . C L E L A N D and D. R. H. JONES
900
A3

800
~.,

700 _-------As

?"
D

600

;,
..

400

90 - /

. . . . . . .

30O

2OO _

MF - - ~

100
0
0.1 0.2 0.5 I

Air

l ]

10 20

I f I

50 100200 5001000

I I I

Ill

J i

i0

20

50

I00

200300

500

Oil

i I

It20

10
t

20

50

i00

200 300

500

f I

Bar diameter (ram)

800
~
o

~00

600
"~

500
400

300
200
100

As

cooled

Fig. 9. Continuous cooling transformation diagram for the steel of the shaft [2]. Belk~requenching, the samples
were first heated at 900 C for 4 h.

Shear stress k u

Fig. 10. Calculation of torsional moment.

dI- = 2~ck,r: dr.

(3)

w h e r e ku is the u l t i m a t e s h e a r stress. T h e u l t i m a t e s h e a r stress c a n be e s t i m a t e d f r o m the e m p i r i c a l

e x p r e s s i o n [4]
k,,

~TS/1.6.

(4)

Shear failure of road-vehicle steering shaft

2000

87

r= 25.0ram ~
IS00
r = 23.5 mm

,Id

1.5 mm -.-D

II

I000 --

k. (MPa) = 700
+ 8.78 x 10-3 (r/nnn) 3

10

20

30

r (ram)

Fig. 11. Plot of ultimate shear stress against radial distance from the centre of the shaft.
where trTs is the tensile strength. The tensile strength can in turn be estimated from the hardness
data using the empirical expression [4]
aa-s(MPa) = 3.2 x HV.

(5)

Values of tensile strength and ultimate shear stress were estimated from the hardness measurements using Eqns (4) and (5), and are listed in Table 2. The ultimate shear stress is plotted against
radial distance from the centre of the shaft in Fig. 11. As Fig. 11 shows, the ultimate shear stress
can be described by the empirical expression
ku (MPa) = 700 + 8.78 x 10-3(r/mm) 3

(6)

over the core of the shaft (the region from the centre of the shaft to the inner edge of the case). The
torque required to cause shear fracture of the core is then given by
23.5 mm

F = 2re S

(700+8.78

lO-3r3)r2drNmm=2.06 107Nmm.

(7)

The torque required to cause shear fracture of the case can be found from the standard expression
[4]

2zcku(r~- r 3)
r -

'

(8)

where rl ( = 25 mm) is the outer radius of the case, and r 2 ( = 23.5 mm) is the inner radius of the case.
Since ku ~ 1760 M P a for the case, the failure torque is 0.98 x 107N mm.
The total torque is therefore (2.06 + 0.98)= 3.04 x 107N mm. It is interesting to notice that, even
though the case is only 1.5 m m thick, it is responsible for nearly one-third of the total torsional
strength. This is partly because the case is more than twice as strong as the core, and partly because
the torsional strength depends on the cube of the radius.
It should be stressed that the present analysis provides an upper-bound estimate for the failure
torque since it assumes that all parts of the cross-section reach the failure strain at the same instant.
In practical terms, this is unlikely unless the failure strains of the core and the case are similar.

4. E S T I M A T I N G T H E A P P L I E D F O R C E
We assume that the torque on the shaft was produced by applying a lateral force F to the end of
the steering arm as shown in Fig. 2. Taking moments about the axis of the steering shaft, we have

88

J.H. CLELAND and D. R. H. JONES

F x 2 5 0 m m = 3.04 x 107 N ram,

(9)

giving F = 12.4tf. A force of this magnitude can readily be generated in a major collision. If we
assume a vehicle weight of 20 t and a modest deceleration of 59, then the collision force is 100tf.
This is 8 times the force required to shear the shaft, so the steering arm need only be subjected to
one-eighth of the collision force to cause the failure.

5. C O N C L U S I O N S
The steering shaft had been subjected to a large axial torque, sufficient to cause gross yielding of
the cross-section and fracture by a ductile mechanism. There were no indications that failure was
promoted by prior defects or inadequate mechanical properties. If a small fraction of the likely
collision force had been applied to the end of the steering arm, this would have been sufficient to
cause failure. We therefore conclude that the failure was a consequence of the accident, and not its
cause.

REFERENCES
1. Smithells' Metals ReJorence Book, 7th edn. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1992.
2. Atkins, M., Atlas of Continuous Cooling TransJbrmation Diagrams for Engineering Steels. British Steel Corporation,
Swinden, 1980.
3. Parrish, G. and Harper, G. S., Production Gas Carburisin 9. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1985.
4. Jones, D. R. H., Engineerin 9 Materials 3. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1986.