EXPERIMENT 2: Fractorgraphy using SEM

Name :_TAN SHI KUN Date:_______________ UNSIM Adm No: K1115176 Class:_____________________

Write down what you think would be the most likely type of fracture (ductile or brittle) for the respective characteristic marking of dimples, cleavage and intergranular ? Ductile fracture exhibit characteristic: - Dimples Brittle Facture often showed 2 Characteristic features: - Cleavage (river like pattern) - Intergranular Identify the characteristic markings observed using SEM in samples 1,2 and 3. Sample No 1 exhibiting ductile fracture where mutiple hemispherodial cavities dimples are formed due to plastic deformation and often particles were seen inside the dimples (Figure 1 A & B). Sample 2 show cleavage by river line pattern (Figure 2 - C). The river patterns represent steps between different local cleavage facets and join like river tributaries in the direction of crack propagation. Sample 3 show intergranular (crack along the grain boundaries path). Intergranular cracks (resulted from brittle fracture) is identify by the presence of separated-grain facets and where three triple points grain boundaries meet. (Figure 3 - Arrows)

Write down the visual comparison features of samples 1, 2 and 3. Sample No. 1 (Figure 1 - A & B). It exhibit gross large plastic deformation during fracture, providing fibrous and dull fracture surfaces. The fracture surfaces also exhibit a called cup and cone appearance (necking phenomenon) showing gross plastic deformation on both half of the fracture surfaces. Thus it also suggested that the crack propagation is slow and predictable. With the aid of SEM image, it indicates clear evident of ductile fracture as the surface consist multiple dimples. Sample No. 2 (Figure 2 - C) It exhibit limited plastic deformation, flat surfaces and shiny crystalline appearance. Thus it also suggested that the crack propagation is rapid. Investigation under SEM image, it shows the typical appearance of cleavage (river like patterns) Sample No. 3 (Figure 3 - Arrows) Like sample 2, it exhibit limited plastic deformation, flat surfaces and shiny crystalline appearance. Likewise, it suggested that the crack propagation is rapid. However investigation under SEM image, it shows the intergranular fracture from brittle separation of grain boundary.

Attach the SEM micrographs in samples No.1 to No.3

Figure 1 Ductile fracture which characterized by multiple dimples

Figure 2 Brittle fracture which characterized by Cleavage (river like pattern)

Figure 3 Brittle fracture which characterized by intergranular features

Write down the learning points you have gathered in todays lab Ductile Fracture Fracture Physical Appearance Under Microscope Large deformation Trangranular cracks Cup and Cone structure Under SEM Fibrous and rough appearance (dull) Multiple dimples like pattern Brittle Facture Fracture Physical Appearance Under Microscope Little deformation Intrangranular cracks Chevron pattern Under SEM Flat and Crystalline appearance (shiny) Cleavage (river-like pattern) Summary table of identifying ductile and brittle fracture From the summary table above, brittle fracture and ductile fracture can be identified by observing the features on the failed surface by naked eyes. However with the usage of Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), we able to have a more conclusive failure analysis by exploring whether the specimens have been failed in brittle cleavage, ductile or intergranular failure. Why use SEM? We learnt the difference in SEM and microscope The microscopes utilize the transmission of light through a sample to resolve an image and SEM uses the transmission of electrons through a sample to resolve an image. The advantage of SEM over microscope, it has a large depth of field allowing more of a specimen to be focus at one time and provide much higher resolution image. Moreover an interesting add-on function, Energy-Dispersive X-ray (EDX), is capable to provide composite content of an unknown metal. However disadvantage of SEM machine is expensive. Within the short learning period our group learnt simple procedure, with the Lab Technician assistance, on how to operate the SEM machine. The Lab provided us basic fractography skills involving visual inspection and SEM techniques so we could use it for sequent lab experiment or even in future as forensic examination (failure analysis) on failed material which failure mode are not obvious or apparent. It gives us some important background introduction about fractography investigation and a good understanding of different types of fracture characteristic in the material. Some mistake made, there was a tendency to feel the roughness of fracture samples surface. However we are told not to do so by the Lab Technician because there will be dirt (ie from human skin) on the fracture surface left behind by our fingers which will be later capture by the SEM. Also the fracture samples surfaces should be kept away from moisture to prevent oxidation on the surface. During the process of analysis, our group had a small debate and realised that the whole process of failure analysis requires experiences and good knowledge to interpret an accurate judgment on the characteristic marking shown on the SEM image. Thereafter with the information obtained from fracture surfaces, we able to analyse the failure causes and factors affecting such failures and thus leads to the prevention of failures in the future.