Failure analysis of a coupled shaft from a shredder

Carlos M. S. Vicente, Manuel Sardinha and Luís Reis*

IDMEC, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Av Rovisco Pais, 1049─001 Lisbon, Portugal

*e-mail: luis.g.reis@tecnico.ulisboa.pt

Abstract:
In this work the failure analysis of a coupled shaft from a shredder is presented. The failure analysis was performed using
both experimental methods (visual and microscopic inspection, tensile and hardness tests) and theoretical calculations
(stress analysis) aiming to determine the root causes of failure of the coupled shaft. The failure of the shaft occurred due
to fatigue, on a perpendicular plane to the rotation axis, in the region of the coupling transverse hole. The shaft fracture
surface presents characteristics of fatigue due to torsion combined with bending high loads, with an associated strong
plastic deformation. The contribution of bending solicitations related with radial misalignment between the shaft and the
shredder module was evaluated. The radial misalignment plays an important role on the failure of the shaft. For the reported
life service of the shaft under maximum torsional moments, and considered working conditions, the design guidelines of
radial misalignments compromise the structural integrity of the shaft in the shredder system. Recommendation regarding
the design and assembly of the shaft are also presented.

Keywords: shaft, fatigue, fatigue failure, machinery failure, stress analysis

Highlights:

• The root causes of failure of the coupled shaft are determined.

• The shaft fractured surface was investigated by visual and microscopic examination.
• The fracture presents features of fatigue associated with high plastic deformation.
• The radial misalignment is quantified and plays an important role on the failure.

Declarations of interest: none

Corresponding Author: Luís Filipe Galrão dos Reis

E-mail: luis.g.reis@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Phone: +351 218417481
Mobile: +351 966415585

1
1. Introduction

The failure analysis has always been a source of interest for the technical and scientific community as a way through to
collection and analysis of data, determine the cause and prevent mechanical failure, with the associated safety and economic
benefits [1]. Mechanical failure can thus be defined as any change in size, shape or materials properties of a structure,
machine or machine part that renders it incapable of satisfactorily performing his intended function [2].

A shredder is a very common equipment in different industries, designed to grind objects or materials such as paper,
metals or plastics. The structural characteristics of a shredder will vary depending on their functions and even within the
same industry, the characteristics of a shredder may differ. In the plastics industry for instance, it is possible to find
shredders with an axle of rotary blades combined with a set of fixed blades or shredders with two rows of movable blades.
In both configurations the construction of a shredder implies the rotation of blades. The rotation of blades can be provided
by a shaft, which is a rotating member usually of circular cross-section (solid or hollow), which is used to transmit power
and angular motion in machinery and mechanical equipment [3]. Generally, shafts are not of uniform diameter but are
stepped to provide shoulders for locating gears, pulleys and bearings, which act like stress concentrating factors [4].
Therefore, the failure of the shaft usually implies the failure of the associated mechanical system. One systematic study of
failure mechanism in motor shafts was the work of A.H. Bonnet [5]. In this work the author concluded that in the majority
of cases, the main mechanism for failure in a motor shaft is fatigue, whether the load to which it is subjected is axial,
torsion, bending or (on a more realistic assumption) a combination of loads. In the past an extensive work has been carried
on the field of failure analysis in order to elucidate the nature of fatigue failures of shafts using analytical, semi-empirical
and experimental methods [6,7]. Many causes of fatigue failure in motor shafts are related with torsion-bending fatigue
[8], improper fastening of support [9] or high stresses, friction and fretting [10–12]. Some methodologies to prevent the
fatigue failure of shafts implies a better knowledge of mechanical design [13], stress concentration factors [14] and crack
initiation and propagation mechanisms [15].

This work presents the failure analysis of a motor shaft of a shredder machine, which occurred during the service period
of the machine. The presented failure analysis holds the following steps: description of the failure situation, investigation
of the failure mechanism (visual inspection, materials properties and stress analysis), stablish a hypothesis for the root
cause of failure, discuss the results aiming to support the proposed hypothesis and finally give recommendations to prevent
futures failures.

2. Shredder system and shaft

On Fig. 1a is displayed the photograph of the plastic shredder system together with the identification of its main
components, feed hopper, motor/reducer, grinding chamber, shaft and support. The shaft is the element responsible for
transmitting power from the motor to the rotating blades, Fig. 1b.

2
 Fig.1 Photographs of (a) the plastic shredder system with the identification of the main components: 1 – Feed hopper,
2 – Moto–reducer, 3 – Grinding chamber, 4 – Shaft, 5 – Support frame, (b) Assembly of the shaft with the shredding blades.

The blades should rotate with the shaft without slipping and, for this, a non-circular section has been chosen to couple
the blades to the shaft. However, attention must be paid to the number of possible contact points between the blades and
the shaft - the larger the number of possible contact points, the smaller the gap increases the load transferred from the
blades to the shaft. On Fig. 2 are displayed the geometric dimensions of the shaft.

Fig.2 Geometric dimensions of the shaft (mm). Grey shadowed areas correspond to the regions where the shaft is supported on
bearings. Orange shadowed area show the region where the set of blades are located.

The electric motor is a three-phase electric motor, with four poles, power of 2.2 kW and maximum rotating speed of
1390 rpm (ALREN, Type ALH–100L 1–4), which is coupled to a moto reducer with a transmission relation of 1:20. The
material employed on the construction of the shaft, blades and gridding chamber was the low carbon, non-alloyed structural
steel S275JR [16].

The mechanical properties of the steel: ultimate tensile strength (Su), yield stress (σy), elastic modulus (E) and extension
on fracture (εF) were determinate by uniaxial tensile tests. Tensile tests were performed according ASTM E8/E8M 16a [17]
using a universal testing machine (INSTRON 3369) with a load cell of 50 kN and crosshead speed of 0.8 mm.min–1. Due
to material availability limitations, only two cylindrical specimens were produced and tested.

3
 Vickers indentation test was conducted according to the ASTM E 92 - 17 standard [18] in order to evaluate the Vickers
hardness (VH) of the shaft, on a Mitutoyo AVK-C2 equipment. The cross-sectional surface of the shaft was firstly polished
by sandpaper to obtain a good surface regarding the accuracy in the test results. The compressive force imposed on the
specimen was 9.8 N, during 15 s. The indentation test was conducted in 10 different locations of the surface, thus
representing the average hardness of the steel.

On Table 1 are presented the experimental mechanical properties of the steel and compared with the reported values for
the steel S275JR.

Table 1
Mechanical properties of the structural steel S275JR.

Su (MPa) σy (MPa) E (GPa) εF (%) VH

Experimental 422 287– 332 185 22 164

Bibliography 410–560 [16,19] 265 [16,19] ; > 300 [20] 210 [19,21] 20 [16,19] 132 [22]

From the collected data, we can verify that in general the experimental values are in reasonable accordance with the data
reported in the bibliography for the steel S275JR. The experimental values of E and VH are slightly lower than the ones
collected from the bibliography, see Table1.

In order to characterize the material of the shaft, a metallographic examination was made on a slice of material cut from
the shaft. The metal was polished with traditional sandpapers, silicon carbide sandpapers and diamond paste (5-1 µm) for
final finishing. After the polishing process the metal sample was etched with a solution of Nital (3%). The surface of the
metallic sample was observed on scanning electron microscope (SEM). SEM images were obtained with a field emission
type microscope (Hitachi®–S2400) operating at 20.0 kV, in secondary electron emission mode. The chemical composition
of the shaft was estimated from energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) data, collected with a Bruker probe (SFlash Detector
5010).

3. Results and discussion

3.1 Visual and microscopic investigation of the fracture surface

On Fig.3 are displayed the photographs of the shaft after fracture, together with the top view of fracture surfaces.

4
 Fig.3 Photographs of (a) general view of the fractured shaft; (b) detail of the transverse hole region; (c) and (d) top view of fractured
surfaces evidencing ratchet marks, fatigue propagation (FP) and rapid fracture (RF) zones.

On Fig. 3a it is possible to observe that the fracture occurred in the transverse hole region, on a perpendicular plane with respect
to the rotational axis of the shaft, with an associated strong plastic deformation, Fig.3b, due to high loads in torsion combined with
bending loads [5]. On Fig. 3c one can observe on the outer perimeter of the fracture surface, small marks that vanish when moving
towards the interior (rachet marks), where the initiation of cracks was began. These rachet marks are typical of fatigue crack
initiation failure.

The ductile nature of the fatigue induced fracture is also confirmed by the morphology of the SEM images, Fig.4.

Fig.4 SEM images of the fractured surface of the shaft on regions 1 (a) and 2 (b).

On Fig.4 are present the typical features of ductile fracture namely dimples and stretch marks [23]. The voids are
generated around the inclusions, where stress is maximized (inset of Fig.4a). The effect of torque (T) on plastic deformation
is observed by the direction of the stretch marks, which are aligned with the developed torsional shear stresses (τ), Fig.4a
and Fig.4b.

5
3.2 Material characterization

On Fig. 5a are displayed the microstructure of the shaft material, together with the EDS spectra and elemental
composition, Fig. 5b.

Fig.5 (a) SEM micrograph revealing the microstructures of the shaft material (2000 ×) and (b) EDS spectra of the shaft material and
elemental composition.

The metallographic analysis reveals a typical microstructure from a low carbon non-alloyed steel composed by ferrite
(α) and perlite (P) phases, containing residual graphite (g) within the ferrite domains, Figure 5a. The presence of small
amounts of perlite phase (in relation to the ferrite phase), indicates the low amount of carbon of the steel.
It is also possible to observe some inclusions on the matrix (inset of Fig.5a). The EDS spectra of the steel reveals the
elemental composition of the matrix of the steel and inclusions, Table 2.

Table 2
Chemical composition of the steel S275JR.

Chemical Element (%)

Rest C Mn S Cu

Maximum values [24] 97.71 0.21 1.50 0.035 0.55

Matrix 98.20 – 1.22 – 0.58

Inclusions 52.00 – 28.51 24.49 ̶

Through the EDS data analysis, it was verified that the inclusions are mainly composed in a large amount by manganese
and sulfur, possible due to manganese sulfide (MnS) precipitation, a common (but not desirable) phenomenon that occurs
during the cooling process of low carbon steels [25], and affects the mechanical properties, failure and fatigue of steel parts
[26, 27].

6
3.3 Stress analysis of the shaft

Static analysis in torsion

In this section a preliminary analysis of the shaft failure regarding the torsion efforts assuming static conditions is
performed. In a first approach, the maximum shear stress caused by torsion is calculated taking in account the fractured
surface location and the resultant shear stress due to torsion as follows.

The torque (T) in a rotating shaft of an electric motor at the rated power (P) and rotational speed (ω) can be defined by
Eq. (1):

𝑃
𝑇= (1)
𝜔

Taking in account that the electric motor it is coupled to a right angle gearbox with a gear ratio of 1:20 (G R=0.05) and
typical power efficiency of 90 % (η=0.90), the output torque on the gearbox shaft is:

𝜂. 𝑃
𝑇= (2)
𝐺𝑅. 𝜔

Thus, following the specifications of our electric motor, the maximum torque applied in the shaft will be 272 N.m.
According to the standard IS-IEC 60034-1 [28] the breakdown torque (1.6×T) of our shaft should be 387 N.m
The maximum shear stress (𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 ), for a solid rod is computing as:

𝑇𝐷
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = (3)
2𝐽

where D is the diameter of the rod and J the second polar moment of area [29], defined for a round shaft with a transverse
hole with diameter d, as is this case, by:

𝜋𝐷3 𝑑𝐷2 𝐷
𝐽=[ − ]∙ (4)
16 6 2

Computing equations (3) and (4), the value of the maximum shear stress will be 262 MPa, greater than the yield shear
stress resultant from the von Mises criterion, with a magnitude of 160 MPa for the steel of the shaft. Therefore, considering
a static analysis in pure torsion the shaft does not verify safety (without a safety factor ponderation) for a maximum torque
of 272 N.m.

Knowing that the equipment has worked for a 3h period, one can estimate the torque that the shaft was subjected to
under the working conditions. The resistance to motor power will be carried mainly by material being shredded. The torque
used in the previous analysis considers that the 12 shredder blades are cutting material simultaneously. From the geometry

7
of the blades, Fig.1b, it is possible to observe that each blade position is out of phase relative to an adjacent one, imposing
a physically impossible event to have the 12 blades cutting simultaneously. Furthermore, an observation of the actual
machine under working conditions shows that the maximum number of blades working at the same time is 4, taking in
consideration that the feed rate of material being shredded in real conditions is very small, that the necessary strength to
cut the materials in question is around 370 N [30], and evaluating the dimensions and properties of shredded material,
recalculating for a majored resisted torque of 90 N.m, the estimated maximum shear stress developed solemnly by torsion
is 80 MPa, inferior to the defined yield shear stress of 160 MPa.

Influence of the radial misalignment on the shaft life

The fatigue strength analysis will be performed considering that in coupled rotary elements the fatigue phenomena
occurs due to combined torsion and bending requests. In the considered set-up, based on local analysis, a coupling
misalignment was detected between the rotating axis of the motor output and grinding chamber, due to an imprecise manual
assembly, as shown in the scheme of Fig. 6. This study focused only in the radial misalignment since it is from it that
bending efforts arise.

Fig.6 Scheme of the radial misalignment between two rotating elements.

The proposed analysis considers the efforts from the rotational reversed bending, and consequent stresses on the shaft
fracture location. The influence of these additional stresses is studied together with the torsional moment from the motor
torque. To evaluate the influence that the misalignment could have had on the component’s life, it is considered that the
machine worked for at least 3 hours, as proposed by the machine’s operator. Considering its regular rotational speed (ω)
of 70 rpm, the estimated number of completed cycles (N) will be 1.26 x 104. Using the modified Goodman criterion [29]:

̅̅̅𝑎 ̅̅̅̅
𝜎 𝜎𝑚
+ =1 (5)
𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑢

where 𝜎̅𝑚 is the equivalent midrange stress, ̅̅̅

𝜎𝑎 the equivalent alternating stress, 𝑆𝑒 the endurance limit and 𝑆𝑢 the
ultimate tensile strength. The equivalent midrange stress contemplates the midrange components of the load case, i.e.:

𝜎𝑚 = √3(𝜏𝑚𝑇 + )2
̅̅̅̅ (6)

The global alternating stress contemplates the alternating components of the load:

8
 2
̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌4 𝑌5
𝜎̅𝑎 = √𝜎+
𝑎𝑀 = 𝐹 × (𝐾𝑓 3 ) (7)
𝜋𝐷 𝑑𝐷2
[( 32 ) − ( 6 )]

where 𝐾𝑓 is the fatigue stress concentration factor for bending, that has a value of 1.8, Table A.15 [29]. The misalignment
is obtained as a function of F through the expression of the deflection of a simple supported beam with an overhanging
load:

2
𝐹 ∙× ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌3 𝑌5
𝛥𝑧 = ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌2 𝑌5 (8)
3𝐸𝐼

where ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌3 𝑌5 and ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝑌2 𝑌5 are the considered lengths shown in the scheme of Fig. 2, E the elasticity modulus of the material
and I the inertia moment of the shaft.
In a finite life approach, the fatigue strength 𝑆𝑓 is used to calculate the necessary stress for an estimated number of
cycles (N) [29]:

𝑆𝑓 = 𝑎𝑁 𝑏 (9)
(𝑓𝑆𝑢 )2 1 𝑓𝑆𝑢
where 𝑎 = and 𝑏 = − 𝑙𝑜𝑔 ( )
𝑆𝑒 3 𝑆𝑒

with 𝑓, the fatigue strength factor equal to 0.875, for 1.26 x 10 4 cycles. The endurance limit can be estimate through the
Marin equation [28]:

𝑆𝑒 = 𝐾𝑎 𝐾𝑏 𝐾𝑐 𝐾𝑑 𝐾𝑒 𝐾𝑓 𝑆𝑒′ (10)

In this case 𝐾𝑐 , 𝐾𝑑 , 𝐾𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐾𝑓 take the value of 1.0, 𝐾𝑎 = 0.869 and 𝐾𝑏 = 0.899. 𝑆𝑒′ is the rotary-beam test specimen
endurance limit. 𝑆𝑒 can then be computed to achieve a value of 165 MPa and the fatigue strength calculated is 275 MPa.

Since the misalignment of the axis will only interfere with the alternated parcel of the fluctuating stresses (the shear
effort is negligible in this case), depending on the magnitude of the torsion imposed on the shaft, critical values of the
misalignment can be computed as shown in Table 3.

9
Table 3
Critical values of alternating stress, load and axial misalignment for different values of torque considering a shaft life of 1.26 x 104
cycles.

Torque [N.m] 20 40 60 80

̅𝝈̅̅̅𝒂 𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 [MPa] 240 202 165 126

𝑭𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 [N] 1030 868 706 544

𝜟𝒛𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒂𝒍 [mm] 0.52 0.44 0.35 0.27

Fig. 7 demonstrate how different combinations of torque and misalignment in this analysis contribute to failure of the
shaft.

Fig.7 Failure assessment diagram, considering a shaft life of 1.26 x 104 cycles.

4. Conclusions
The failure mechanism of a coupled shaft from a shredder was investigated trough the analysis of the components of the
mechanical system, visual and microscopic investigation of the fractured surface of the shaft, mechanical tests, material
microstructure and stress analysis. The diagnose shows that the failure of the shaft occurred due to fatigue induced by high
torsion combined with bending loads, on a perpendicular plane to the rotation axis, in the region of the coupling transverse
hole. The fractured surface presents signs of fatigue crack initiation and propagation, and strong plastic deformation
indicating high intensity loads. The fatigue analysis results considering both torsional and bending efforts demonstrates the
influence of radial misalignment on the development of high intensity stresses. The established scenario of the loading
cases, derived from a range of working conditions for the reported life service of the shaft (3 hours, 1.26 x 104 cycles),
show that the critical radial misalignment values are between 0.27 and 0.52 mm. The observed misalignment values exceed
the design rules guidelines, for the typical accepted radial misalignments (<0.25 mm), potentiating the mechanical failure
of the shaft.

10
 Additionally, in order to correct the problematic detailed, the authors propose the following corrections: increase of the
shaft diameter; decrease the grinding chamber volume (since the feed rate of material is not proportional) and exchange of
coupling method from transverse hole to keyseat or flexible coupling. The suppression of the inaccurate assembly
conditions should be considered the most important proposed correction. This can be achieved, as an example, through the
use of jigs and fixtures or replacing the grinding chamber and motor base plate by a single component, reducing the
misalignment contributions to stresses.

Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Fundação para a Cíência e Tecnologia, through IDMEC, under LAETA project,
UID/EMS/50022/2019. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the funding of FIBR3D project, Reference
SAICTPAC/0036/2015, financed by European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) through the Lisbon Regional
Operational Programme 2020 and by FCT national funds (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia), Project POCI-01-0145-
FEDER-016414.

Bibliography

[1] William T. Becker and Roch J. Shipley, ASM Handbook Volume 11: Failure Analysis and Prevention, ASM International,
Ohio, 2002.
[2] J.A. Collins, Failure of materials in mechanical design : analysis, prediction, prevention, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York, 1993.
[3] S.P. Raut, L.P. Raut, A Review of Various Techniques Used for Shaft Failure Analysis, Int. J. Eng. Res. Gen. Sci. 2 (2014)
159–171.
[4] M.G. Deepan Marudachalam, K. Kanthavel, R. Krishnaraj, Optimization of shaft design under fatigue loading using
Goodman method, Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 2 (2011) 1–5.
[5] A.H. Bonnett, Cause, analysis and prevention of motor shaft failures, in: Conf. Rec. 1998 Annu. Pulp Pap. Ind. Tech. Conf.,
IEEE, 1998: pp. 166–180. doi:10.1109/PAPCON.1998.685518.
[6] R.C. Rice, B.N. Leis, D. Nelson, SAE., Fatigue Design Handbook, 2nd ed., Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale
PA, 1988.
[7] C.C. Osgood, Fatigue Design, 2th ed., Pergamont Press, Oxford, 1982.
[8] A. Göksenli, I.B. Eryürek, Failure analysis of an elevator drive shaft, Eng. Fail. Anal. 16 (2009) 1011–1019.
doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2008.05.014.
[9] S. Cicero, R. Cicero, R. Lacalle, G. Díaz, D. Ferreño, Failure analysis of a lift gear shaft: Application of the FITNET FFS
procedure fatigue module, Eng. Fail. Anal. 15 (2008) 970–980. doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2007.10.013.
[10] X. Xu, Z. Yu, H. Ding, Failure analysis of a diesel engine gear–shaft, Eng. Fail. Anal. 13 (2006) 1351–1357.
doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2005.10.015.
[11] J. Jian Ping, M. Guang, Investigation on the failure of the gear shaft connected to extruder, Eng. Fail. Anal. 15 (2008) 420–
429. doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2007.01.010.
[12] C.E. Truman, J.D. Booker, Analysis of a shrink–fit failure on a gear hub/shaft assembly, Eng. Fail. Anal. 14 (2007) 557–572.
doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2006.03.008.
[13] J.F. Darlington, J.D. Booker, Development of a design technique for the identification of fatigue initiating features, Eng. Fail.
Anal. 13 (2006) 1134–1152. doi:10.1016/J.ENGFAILANAL.2005.07.006.
[14] N.A. Noda, Y. Takase, K. Monda, Stress concentration factors for shoulder fillets in round and flat bars under various loads,
Int. J. Fatigue. 19 (1997) 75–84. doi:10.1016/S0142-1123(97)82050-6.
[15] M. de Freitas, L. Reis, M. da Fonte, B. Li, Effect of steady torsion on fatigue crack initiation and propagation under rotating
bending: Multiaxial fatigue and mixed–mode cracking, Eng. Fract. Mech. 78 (2011) 826–835.
doi:10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2009.12.012.
[16] J. Bringas, Handbook of Comparative World Steel Standards, 5th Edition, ASTM International, Philadelphia, 2016.
doi:10.1520/DS67D-EB.
[17] ASTM, ASTM E8/E8M – 16a Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, (2016).
[18] ASTM, ASTM E92 – 17 Standard Test Methods for Vickers Hardness and Knoop Hardness of Metallic Materials, (2017).
[19] The European Union Per Regulation, EN 1993–1–1: Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1–1: General rules and
rules for buildings, (2005).
[20] F.S. Kelly, W. Sha, A comparison of the mechanical properties of fire-resistant and S275 structural steels, J. Constr. Steel

11
 Res. 50 (1999) 223–233. doi:10.1016/S0143-974X(98)00252-1.
[21] J. Brnic, G. Turkalj, J. Niu, M. Canadija, D. Lanc, Analysis of experimental data on the behavior of steel S275JR – Reliability
of modern design, Mater. Des. 47 (2013) 497–504. doi:10.1016/J.MATDES.2012.12.037.
[22] N. Torić, J. Brnić, I. Boko, M. Brčić, I.W. Burgess, I.U. Glavinić, Development of a high temperature material model for
grade S275JR steel, J. Constr. Steel Res. 137 (2017) 161–168. doi:10.1016/J.JCSR.2017.06.020.
[23] G.A. Pantazopoulos, A Short Review on Fracture Mechanisms of Mechanical Components Operated under Industrial Process
Conditions: Fractographic Analysis and Selected Prevention Strategies, Metals (Basel). 9 (2019) 148.
doi:10.3390/met9020148.
[24] European Committee for standardization, BS EN10025-2:2004 Hot rolled products of structural steels, (2004).
[25] L.K. Bigelow, M.C. Flemings, Sulfide inclusions in steel, Metall. Trans. B. 6 (1975) 275–283. doi:10.1007/BF02913570.
[26] J. Maciejewski, The Effects of Sulfide Inclusions on Mechanical Properties and Failures of Steel Components, J. Fail. Anal.
Prev. 15 (2015) 169–178. doi:10.1007/s11668-015-9940-9.
[27] M. Sohaciu, C. Predescu, E. Vasile, E. Matei, D. Savastru, A. Berbecaru, Influence of MnS inclusions in steel parts on fatigue
resistence, Dig. J. Nanomater. Biostructures. 8 (2013) 367–376.
[28] Bureau of Indian Standarts, IS/IEC 60034-1: Rotating electrical machines, Part1: Rating and performance, 2004.
[29] R. Budynas, K. Nisbett, Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design, 9th ed., McGraw Hill Professional, 2010.
[30] S. Meissner, Mechanics of a shear cutting process, Rochester Institute of Technology, 1997.

12