International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijfatigue

High cycle fatigue, low cycle fatigue and failure modes

of a carburized steel
S. Farfán a, C. Rubio-González b,
, T. Cervantes-Hernández b, G. Mesmacque c
a
Instituto Tecnológico de Morelia, Av. Tecnológico 1500, Morelia Mich 58120, Mexico
b
Centro de Ingenierı́a y Desarrollo Industrial, Pie de la cuesta No. 702, Desarrollo San Pablo, Querétaro, Qro., 76130, Mexico
c
Laboratoire de Méchanique de Lille, Université de Lille 1, Villeneuve d’Ascq 59650, France

Received 27 March 2003; received in revised form 13 June 2003; accepted 5 September 2003

Abstract

An experimental investigation is conducted for better understanding fatigue and fracture of carburized steel used in the con-
struction of vehicle transmission elements such as gears and shafts. Fatigue tests of case hardened specimens are carried out in
low and high cycle regimes. The effect of hard layer thickness in fatigue life and fatigue strength is investigated. It is observed that
case depth has influence in fatigue properties of carburized steels. The greater the case depth the higher the fatigue strength. The
analysis of the fracture surface shows a combination of fracture mechanisms, i.e. brittle fracture is observed in the hard layer and
ductile fracture is observed at specimen core. Fatigue properties developed here, are needed in fatigue crack initiation models for
carburized steels used in the design methodologies of gears and shafts.
# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Fatigue test; Carburized steels; Failure mechanisms

1. Introduction material behavior. Layers with different material

properties make the analysis of mechanical components
Life expectancy of mechanical systems is always more difficult. Furthermore, uncertainty in the expec-
dependent on the most critical component of the sys- ted loading conditions makes life predictions less
tem. In power transmission this is usually the gear. reliable. Therefore, a deep understanding of fatigue
Gear design is commonly bounded by the requirements behavior of gear materials is needed in order to pro-
that gear should carry high loads at high speeds with perly design them.
minimal size and weight. Therefore, a correct predic- A common failure mode in gears has been shown to
tion of possible gear failure already in the gear design be tooth bending fatigue. For example, tooth bending
phase is needed for optimum gear design. fatigue accounted for 32% of all failures in an analysis
From the practical point of view, it would be desir- of over 1500 gear failures [1,2]. An obvious result is
able to have reliable methodologies for proper design that fatigue should be considered in the gear design.
of transmission components such as gear and shafts. Gears are designed to reduce the stress concentration
Those methodologies should provide relations for opti- that give rise to fatigue. Gears are also heat treated,
mum dimensioning, material selection, life prediction shot peened, carburized to resist fatigue. Many other
and failure probabilities of the mechanical components actions may be taken to enhance gear fatigue strength,
mentioned. Case hardening technology is used to for example, presetting [2].
obtain parts with very high fatigue and contact fatigue The influence of core hardness and peening opera-
strength. This fact introduces a complex way to model tions on fatigue properties and residual stress of car-
burized steels has been investigated in [3,4]. The effect


Corresponding author. Fax: +52-442-211-9839. of shot peening parameters on fatigue life of carburized
E-mail address: crubio@cidesi.mx (C. Rubio-González). helical gears was investigated in [5–7]. The experi-
0142-1123/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2003.08.022
674 S. Farfán et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678

mental observations and mechanisms for the effect

of retained austenite including intergranular crack
initiation and arrest are investigated in [8]. This has
been done in direct quenched and reheated series of
five 0.8C–Cr–Ni–Mo steels. The specimens were sub-
jected to compression, tensile cyclic stress–strain and
bending fatigue testing.
Carburization is a surface hardening process where
surface layer carbon content is increased by heating the
component below its melting point with carbonaceous
matter. This technique is applied for low carbon steels.
By a posterior quenching process, it is possible to cre-
ate a ductile core with hard surface. Typical values of
hard layer thickness in gears for automotive industry
are between 0.8 and 1.4 mm.
In this paper, an experimental investigation is carried
out to asses fatigue properties of AISI 8620 carburized
steel. First, a complete characterization is presented,
chemical composition and mechanical properties are
determined. Next, high cycle fatigue tests are conduc- Fig. 1. Micro hardness patterns for AISI 8620 steels with different
ted and the influence of the hardened layer thickness is hard layer thickness.
evaluated. Then low cycle fatigue tests are performed
and results are presented, again the influence of case
depth is investigated. The Coffin–Manson model is Table 2
used to describe these results. Finally, fracture surfaces Different specimen groups used in the experiments
are analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. Differ- Group Hard layer thickness (mm)
ent fracture mechanisms are found and explained in
G1 0.4
this section. G2 1.0
G3 1.1
G4 1.35
2. Specimen preparation

Specimens of commercial AISI 8620 steel were heat

hardness is almost the same for each group, around
treated in a carbonaceous atmosphere for different
485 HV.
times to get different hard layer thickness. The larger
Carbon content at surface of carburized samples was
time the greater diffusion and the greater case depth.
also determined using a spark emission spectrometer.
Specimens were sent to a heat treatment company to
The results are: 0.8%, 4.1%, 4.3% and 1.65% for groups
carry out the surface treatment according to its own
G1, G2, G3 and G4, respectively. Note that there is no
procedure. The chemical composition of the untreated
steel is reported in Table 1. These values were obtained a clear trend in carbon content.
by using a spark emission spectrometer. Fig. 2 shows the specimen used in rotating bending
Micro hardness patterns were obtained and are tests while Fig. 3 illustrates specimens used in the strain
shown in Fig. 1. Hard layer thickness is defined as the
depth from surface where hardness reaches a value of
550 HV. Four groups with different hard layer thick-
ness were considered and they are labeled as G1, G2,
G3 and G4. Hard layer thickness for each group is
shown in Table 2. Note in Fig. 1 that surface hardness
is not too different for each group. That value is
between 810 and 850 HV. In addition, note that core

Table 1
Chemical Composition of the untreated material

C Si Mn P S Cr Mo Ni
wt.% 0.183 0.324 0.620 0.017 0.027 0.481 0.243 1.768 Fig. 2. Specimens used in the high cycle fatigue tests. Dimensions in
mm.
 S. Farfán et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678 675

Fig. 5. Stress versus life (S–N) curves from rotating bending tests of
smooth specimens of AISI 8620 carburized steel with different hard
layer thickness.
Fig. 3. Low cycle fatigue test specimens. Dimensions in mm.

P2032 was employed. Smooth specimens as shown in

Fig. 2 were tested. The specimens had 6.7 mm diameter
at center. Frequency of the test was 102 Hz. A com-
pletely inverted load was applied, that is R ¼
Smin =Smax ¼ 1 (zero mean stress) for all the tests. In
order to investigate the effect of hard layer thickness on
fatigue properties, the four groups mentioned above
were tested, i.e. the groups G1, G2, G3 and G4.
Results are shown in Fig. 5 where the four S–N
curves are displayed. Note that fatigue limits, Se, are
approximately 870, 820, 920, 970 MPa for the groups
G1, G2, G3 and G4, respectively. The arrows in Fig. 5
mean that test was stopped because specimen did not
fail at life greater than 1.0Ee06 cycles.
Note that by increasing hard layer thickness, h,
greater fatigue limit, Se, is observed. For small values
of h, the trend of Se is opposite, i.e. the greater h the
Fig. 4. Monotonic stress–strain curves. Case hardened 8620 steel. lower Se, see Fig. 6.
Different case depth. A well known estimate of fatigue limit is the half of
the ultimate stress Su. Recalling values of Su from
Fig. 4 it is noted that Se values obtained from the
controlled fatigue tests. Because the high strength and
rotating bending tests are higher than the estimates.
surface hardness of carburized steel, threaded speci-
That is, the measured fatigue limits are between 80%
mens were used to avoid grip slip.
and 90% of the tensile strength.
The monotonic stress–strain curves were obtained in
the MTS 810 machine using the specimens shown in
Fig. 3. Results are shown in Fig. 4. The measured
Young modulus is E ¼ 200 GPa. Note a small influ-
ence in the stress–strain curve due to hard layer thick-
ness. The ultimate strength is very similar in each case
as well. Ultimate tensile strength is between 1000 and
1100 MPa for the carburized steel, and approximately
750 MPa for the untreated steel. Fig. 4 also shows the
stress–strain curve for the untreated material. Note
how the heat treatment increases strength.

3. High cycle fatigue tests

The rotating bending test was used to determine the Fig. 6. Fatigue limit variation with hard layer thickness. Rotating
S–N curve. The SHENCK machine, model PUNN bending tests.
676 S. Farfán et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678

4. Low cycle fatigue tests Table 3

Strain life parameters for AISIS 8620 carburized steel with different
Strain controlled fatigue tests were performed on an case depth
MTS 810 machine. The test methodology follows Group r0f (MPa) b e0f c
recommendations of the ASTM E606 standard [9,10]. G1 566 0.0085 1.68 0.8835
Strain–life curves were obtained applying completely G2 853 0.0523 0.0107 0.229
reversed (R ¼ 1) uniaxial cyclic load between con- G3 1182 0.07603 0.008 0.175
stant strain limits. Smooth specimens with 6.3 mm
diameter at center were used, see Fig. 3. Cyclic loading
was applied with a frequency of 1 Hz. Wave form was worth noting that sudden fracture was observed, non
sinusoidal. Again the effect of case depth on fatigue visible surface microcracks were apparent prior failure.
properties was investigated. Three specimen groups
were tested, i.e. the groups G1, G2 and G3. Results are
shown in Fig. 7 where the three e–N curves are dis- 5. Failure modes
played. Note that as case depth is increased fatigue
The three most common fracture mechanisms in
strength is increased as well.
metals and alloys are ductile fracture, cleavage and
The strain–life method (e–N) is usually used to deter-
intergranular fracture [12]. The first case is the result of
mine the number of stress cycles Ni required for fatigue nucleation, growth and coalescence of microscopic
crack initiation. In this work, the model for fatigue voids that initiate at inclusions and second phase par-
crack initiation applied to carburized steels is the Cof- ticles. Cleavage fracture involves separation along
fin–Manson. This model is based on the continuum specific crystallographic planes; fracture path is trans-
mechanics approach, where it is assumed that the granular. Intergranular fracture occurs when the grain
material is homogeneous and isotropic and is given by boundaries are preferred failure path in the material.
the equation [11] There are a variety of situations that can lead to
r0f cracking on grain boundaries, including:
ea ¼ ð2Nf Þb þe0f ð2Nf Þc ð1Þ
E
. Precipitation of a brittle phase on the grain bound-
where ea is the strain amplitude, E is the young modu- ary.
lus, r0f is the fatigue strength coefficient, b is the . Hydrogen embrittlement and liquid metal embrittle-
exponent of strength, e0f is the fatigue ductility coef- ment.
ficient and c is the fatigue ductility exponent. The last . Environmental assisted cracking.
four parameters were determined by fitting the experi- . Intergranular corrosion.
mental results with the Coffin–Manson Eq. (1). These . Grain boundary cavitation and cracking at high
values are presented in Table 3 for each group. It is temperatures.

Figs. 8–10 show scanning electron microscope

(SEM) fractographs of fracture surfaces of high cycle
fatigue specimens. Note that three zones are identified:
one with intergranular fracture mechanism (the outt-
est), another with ductile fracture (at the core) and at
the middle a combined mode is observed. The first
zone, the intergranular one, may be resulted because
brittle cementite is deposited at grain boundaries. The
ductile fracture zone is due to nucleation, growth and
coalescence of microscopic voids that initiate at inclu-
sions as observed in Fig. 8(d) and Fig. 10(d). Using
energy dispersion spectrum (EDS) technique, it was
determined that inclusions were of MnS and MnSCa.
Since failure mode on the hard layer is different, the
inclusions are not exposed in Fig. 8(b) and Fig. 10(b).
They are more evident when ductile fracture occurs as
observed on the specimen nucleus. A transition zone is
observed where a combination of fracture mechanisms
Fig. 7. Strain–life curves (e–N) for AISI 8620 carburized steel with is observed, there are some ductile fracture and brittle
different hard layer thickness. intergranular fracture. Fig. 9(d) shows some micro-
 S. Farfán et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678 677

Fig. 8. (a) SEM micrographs of group G1. Fracture surface of high cycle fatigue specimens; (b) part E-detail; (c) part F-detail; (d) part G-detail.

cracks on the core ductile zone. Transition zone is well ent hard layer thickness. It has been observed that
defined and in fact some cracks were developed which the larger the case depth the greater the fatigue limit,
separate ductile and intergranular fracture zones as except for very thin hard layers. Even though stress–
observed in Fig. 9(c) and Fig. 10(c). strain curves do not exhibit dependence on case depth
as shown in Fig. 4, it has been demonstrated that fati-
gue strength does depend on hard layer thickness. This
6. Conclusions may be due to the residual stress field induced during
heat treatment. This possibility is being investigated at
An experimental investigation has been conducted to this moment.
evaluate fatigue properties of carburized steels and the Strain-controlled fatigue tests were performed as
effect of case depth. High cycle fatigue tests were per- well. Strain–life curves were obtained for carburized
formed on a rotating bending apparatus. S–N curves specimens with different layer thickness. It was
were determined for carburized specimens with differ- observed that the larger the case depth, the greater the

Fig. 9. (a) SEM micrographs of group G2. Fracture surface at high cycle fatigue specimens; (b) part E-detail; (c) part F-detail; (d) part G-detail.
678 S. Farfán et al. / International Journal of Fatigue 26 (2004) 673–678

Fig. 10. (a) SEM micrographs of group G3. Fracture surface at high cycle fatigue specimens; (b) part E-detail; (c) part F-detail; (d) part G-detail.

fatigue strength. Using these experimental results, fati- [2] Woods JL, Daniewicz SR, Nellums R. Increasing the fatigue
strength of carburized spur gear teeth by presetting. Int J Fati-
gue crack initiation model parameters (Coffin–Manson)
gue 1999;21:549–56.
were determined. Strain life parameters for AISI 8620 [3] Funatani K. Residual stress and fatigue strength of carburized
carburized steel are important in order to develop a steels and gears. SAE Technical paper series 2002-01-1559, 2002.
more efficient design methodology of power trans- [4] Genel K, Demirkol M. Effect of case depth on fatigue perform-
ance of AISI 8620 carburized steel. Int J Fatigue 1999;21:207–12.
mission components such as gears and shafts. [5] Garibay RP, Chang NS. Improved fatigue life of a carburized
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) fractographs gear by shot peening parameter optimization. In: Krauss G, edi-
were obtained from fatigue fracture surfaces of high tor. Carburizing, processing and performance. Proceedings of an
International Conference. ASM International; 1987.
cycle fatigue specimens. Combination of fracture
[6] Zurn Z, Razim C. On the fatigue strength of case hardened
mechanisms was observed. Mechanisms of ductile frac- parts. In: Krauss G, editor. Carburizing, processing and per-
ture at the core and intergranural fracture at the hard formance. Proceedings of an International Conference. ASM
layer were observed. In addition, a well defined tran- International; 1987.
[7] Benedetti M, Fontanari V, Hohn B, Oster P, Tobie T. Influence
sition zone is noted where some micro-cracks have of shot peening on bending tooth fatigue limit of case hardened
been developed. gears. Int J Fatigue 2002;24:1127–36.
[8] Zaccone MA, Kelly JB, Krauss G. Strain hardening and fatigue
of simulated case microstructures in carburized steel. In: Krauss
Acknowledgements G, editor. Carburizing, processing and performance. Proceedings
of an International Conference. ASM International; 1989.
Support for this work provided by Centro de Inge- [9] ASTM 2002 Annual book of ASTM Standards, vol. 03.01, No.
nierı́a y Desarrollo Industrial (CIDESI) is gratefully E606 Constant amplitude low-cycle fatigue testing.
acknowledged. [10] ASTM 2002 Annual book of ASTM Standards, vol. 03.01, No.
E739 Standard practice for statistical analysis of linear or linear-
ized stress-life (S–N) and strain-life (e–N) fatigue data.
[11] Dowling NE. Mechanical behavior of materials. Engineering
References methods for deformation, fracture and fatigue. Prentice-Hall;
1999.
[1] Alban LE. Number 1 gear failure-tooth bending fatigue. SAE [12] Anderson TL. Fracture mechanics, fundamentals and
paper 841088, 1988. applications. New York: CRC Press; 1995.