Professional Documents
Culture Documents
I. INTRODUCTION
TABLE IV TABLE VI
SHAFT STRESSES SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY FOR ANALYSIS
A. Methodology
Combining all of these stresses leads to a methodology
that falls into two categories. The first deals with failure
modes/classes and failure patterns, as shown in Table VI, which
can serve as a check-off sheet when conducting an inspection
of the failed motor. The second category deals with the motor
appearance, application, and maintenance history. This will be IV. METHODOLOGY CHECKLIST
covered in Section IV of the paper. A. Appearance of Motor and System
As the second part of the methodology, this section will serve
B. The Motor and System as a check-off list to be used to gather critical information per-
Although a complete system analysis is beyond the scope of taining to the appearance, application, and maintenance history
this paper, when conducting a root cause failure analysis, it is of the motor and other related equipment Some of these ques-
important to recognize that the motor is only one component of tions overlap.
a system. Many factors affecting the system will also affect the When coupled with the class and pattern of failure, the gen-
motor and may contribute to the motor failure and vice versa. eral motor appearance usually gives a clue as to the possible
Fig. 1 shows a typical system. Note it also includes the process cause of failure. The following checklist will be useful in eval-
requirement. uating assembly conditions.
BONNETT: ROOT CAUSE AC MOTOR FAILURE ANALYSIS 1437
Fig. 1. Typical motor system including the power supply and driven equipment.
• Does the motor exhibit any foreign material? • Are any mechanical parts missing, such as balance
• Are there any signs of blocked ventilation passages? weights, bolts, rotor teeth, fan blades, etc., or has any
• Are there signs of overheating exhibited by insulation, contact occurred between rotating parts that should
lamination, bars, bearings, lubricant, painted surfaces, maintain a clearance?
etc.? • What is the condition of the coupling device, driven equip-
• Has the rotor lamination or shaft rubbed? Record all loca- ment, mounting base, and other related equipment?
tions of rotor and stator contact. • What is the condition of the bearing bore, shaft journal,
• Are the topsticks, coils, or coil bracing loose? seals, shaft extension, keyways, and bearing caps.
• Are the rotor cooling passages free and clear of clogging • Is the motor mounted, aligned, and coupled correctly?
debris? • Is the ambient usual or unusual?
• What is the physical location of the winding failure? Is it • Do the stress risers show signs of weakness or cracking?
on the connection end or opposite connection end? If the (The driven end shaft keyway is a weak link.)
motor is mounted horizontally, where is the failure with When analyzing motor failures, it is helpful to draw a sketch
respect to the clock? Which phase or phases failed? Which of the motor and indicate the point where the failure occurred,
group of coils failed? Was the failure in the first turn or first as well as the relationship of the failures to both the rotating and
coil? stationary parts, such as shaft keyway, etc. A picture is worth a
• Are the bearings free to rotate and operate as intended? thousand words.
• Is there any sign of moisture present on the stator, rotating
assembly, bearing system, or any other parts? B. Application Considerations
• Are there any signs of movement between rotor and shaft
or bar and lamination? Usually, it is difficult to reconstruct conditions at the time of
• Is the lubrication system as intended or has there been failure. However, a knowledge of the general operating condi-
lubricant leakage or deterioration? tions will be helpful. The following items should be considered.
• Are there any signs of stalled or locked rotor? • What are the load characteristics of the driven equipment
• Was the rotor turning during the failure? and the loading at time of failure?
• What was the direction of rotation and does it agree with • What is the operating sequence during starting?
the fan arrangement? • Does the load cycle or pulsate?
1438 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 36, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2000
C. Maintenance History
Fig. 2. Typical motor shaft configurations. From top to bottom: large motor
An understanding of the past performance of the motor can spider shaft; vertical motor hollow shaft for pumps; totally enclosed fan-cooled
give a good indication as to the cause of the problem. Again, a shaft; open dripproof shaft; close-coupled shaft for pumps; and splined or geared
checklist may be helpful. take-off shaft.
TABLE VII
COMMON STEELS AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS
Fig. 3. Overhung load. Failure mode: bending fatigue and shaft rub. The force
may be in any direction of the 360 .
TABLE VIII
CAUSES OF SHAFT FAILURES (ADAPTED FROM [18]
D. Causes of Failure
Studies have been conducted to try to quantify the causes of
shaft failures. One industry study provided the results for ro-
tating machines shown in Table VIII.
There are other informal studies that suggest that fa-
tigue-caused failures are much higher. For motor applications,
it climbs into the 90% range when the effects of corrosion and Fig. 6. Typical rotor assembly cross section. All of the highlighted areas create
new stress raisers are considered. Hence, the main focus of this stress raisers. Points F, H, I, and J are usually the most vulnerable areas because
paper will be failures associated with fatigue. of the shaft load at these points. A shaft is unlikely to fracture at points A, B, C,
D, or E.
Fig. 7. Peeling-type cracks in shafts usually originate at the keyway. Fig. 8. S–N diagram for 1040 steel.
TABLE IX
COMMON CAUSES OF SHAFT FAILURES FOR MOTORS
I. Failure Mode
As stated previously, for motor shafts, 90% of all failures can
be placed into the fatigue modes shown in Table IX. If the shaft
is not designed, manufactured, applied, or used properly, a pre-
mature failure can occur with any of the failure modes.
The shaft fatigue failures can be classified as bending fa-
tigue, torsional fatigue, and axial fatigue. In the case of axial fa- Fig. 9. Surface of a fatigue fracture displaying two distinct regions.
tigue for motors, the bearing carrying the load will fatigue (con-
tact fatigue) before the shaft does. This is usually evidenced by
spalling of the bearing raceways. In the bending mode, almost The failure process consists of the following.
all failures are considered “rotational” with the stress fluctuating • The fatigue leads to an initial crack on the surface of the
or alternating between tension and compression. This is a cy- part.
cling condition that is a function of the shaft speed. Torsional • The crack or cracks propagate until the remaining shaft
fatigue is associated with the amount of shaft torque present and cross section is too weak to carry the load.
transmitted load. • A sudden fracture of the remaining area occurs.
Understanding fatigue strength and endurance limits is im- Fatigue-type failures usually follow the weak-link theory.
portant because most shaft failures are related to fatigue associ- That is, the cracks form at the point of maximum stress or
ated with cyclic loading. These limits are expressed by an S–N minimum strength. This is usually at a shaft discontinuity
diagram, as shown in Fig. 8. between the edge of the rotor core shaft step and the shaft
For steel, these plots become horizontal after a certain number coupling.
of cycles. In this case, a failure will not occur as long as the stress
is below 27 klbf/in , no matter how many cycles are applied. K. Appearance of Fatigue Fractures
However, at 10 cycles, the shaft will fail if the load is increased The appearance of the shaft is influenced by various types of
to 40 bf/in . The horizontal line in Fig. 8 is known as the fatigue cracks, beach marks, conchoidal marks, radial marks, chevron
or endurance limit. For the types of steels commonly used for marks, ratchet marks, cup and cone shapes, shear lip, and a
motors, good design practice dictates staying well below the whole host of other topologies [17]. Some of the most common
limit. Problems arise when the applied load exceeds its limits ones associated with motor shafts that have failed are due to ro-
or there is damage to the shaft that causes a stress raiser. tational, bending fatigue. The surface of a fatigue fracture will
usually display two distinct regions as shown in Fig. 9. Region
J. Defining the Fatigue Process A includes the point of origin of the failure and evolves at a rel-
Fatigue fractures or damage occur in repeated cyclic stresses, atively slow rate (seconds through years) depending on the run-
each of which can be below the yield strength of the shaft ma- ning and starting cycle and of course the load. Region B is the
terial. Usually, as the fatigue cracks progress, they create what instantaneous or rapid growth area (cycles through seconds) and
is known as ratchet marks. exhibits very little plastic deformation. The shape and spacing
BONNETT: ROOT CAUSE AC MOTOR FAILURE ANALYSIS 1441
TABLE X
SURFACE FINISH AND FATIGUE LIFE IN CYCLES (ADAPTED FROM [19])
M. Corrosion Failures
In corrosion failures, the stress is the environment and the
reaction it has on the shaft material. At the core of this problem
is an electrochemical reaction that weakens the shaft. Pitting is
one of the most common types of corrosion, which is usually
confined to a number of small cavities on the shaft surface. Only
a small amount of material loss can result in perforation, with a
Fig. 10. View of slow growth and instantaneous regions.
resulting failure in a relatively short period of time without any
advanced warning. On occasion, the pitting has caused stress
raisers that result in fatigue cracks.
APPENDIX A
COMMON SHAFT FAILURES Fig. 18 is a shaft material that is unknown, but possibly 4100
high tensile steel alloy. The failure is a fatigue failure due to
Figs. 12 and 13 are of a 1045 carbon steel motor shaft that reversed torsional loading.
failed due to rotational bending fatigue. The point of failure was Figs. 19 and 20 are of a 1051 carbon steel turbine shaft that
at the shoulder of the customer take-off end failed due to rotational bending fatigue. There were also signs
Figs. 14 and 15 are of a 1040 carbon steel motor shaft that of minor torsional fatigue. Cracks initiated at the toe of a cou-
failed due to rotational bending fatigue. The point of failure was pling weld. This material has poor weldability characteristics.
at the bearing journal shoulder. There were also signs of misalignment. Note the surface pit and
Figs. 16 and 17 are shafts that failed due to high-impact grinding marks; both of these conditions can weaken the shaft.
loading. The material is 1045 carbon steel, which has good Fig. 21 is an example of extreme corrosion, wear; and
ductility, which allowed for the severe twisting. cracking on a pump shaft; the material is unknown.
1446 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 36, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2000
Fig. 36. Typical cast air-ducted rotor; any damage to the fans, end rings, or air
ducts can cause overheating and damage to the cage.
Fig. 35 is the same stator shown in Fig. 34. The actual ground
fault can be seen. Note that the turn-to-turn shorting occurred
180 opposite the grounded coil.
APPENDIX D
COMMON TYPES OF ROTOR FAILURES
See Figs. 36–41.
REFERENCES
[1] R. J. Nailen, “Stop rotor troubles before they start,” Plant Eng., Dec.
1966.
[2] G. C. Soukup, “Design of large induction machinery using fabricated
aluminum rotor cages,” M.S. thesis, Univ. Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Dec.
1974.
[3] R. L. Nailen, “The cause of rotor pullover—And how to cure the
problem,” Elect. App., Nov. 1980.
[4] E. F. Merrill and C. R. Olson, “Sparking of A-C motor rotors and its
effect on division 2 application,” presented at the IEEE PIC, Aug. 24,
1959.
[5] J. L. Craggs, “Fabricated aluminum cage construction in large induction
motors,” presented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1975, Paper PCIC-75-8.
[6] P. G. Cummings, J. R. Dunki-Jacobs, and R. H. Kerr, “Protection of
induction motors against unbalanced voltage operation,” presented at
Fig. 39. Typical aluminum squirrel cage without the lamination. Any damage the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1983, PCIC-83-3.
to the cage will affect the motor performance. [7] R. L. Nailen, “What high torque? Consider the double cage motor,”
Power Eng., Apr. 1971.
[8] , “New concept in rotor bar shape solves pipeline motor acceler-
ation problem,” presented at the 1972 IEEE Summer Power Meeting,
Paper 72-CP527-PWR.
[9] A. H. Bonnett, “A comparison between insulation systems available for
PWM inverter FED motors,” presented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1996,
Paper PCIC-96-7.
[10] J. F. Calvert, “Forces in turbine generator stator windings,” AIEE Trans.,
vol. 50, pp. 178–196, 1931.
[11] A. H. Bonnett, “The cause of winding failures in three phase squirrel
cage induction motors,” presented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1976, Paper
PCIC-76-7.
[12] , “Analysis of winding failures in three phase squirrel cage induc-
tion motors,” presented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1977, Paper PCIC-77-4.
[13]
[14] A. H. Bonnett and G. C. Soukup, “Rotor failures in squirrel cage
induction motors,” presented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1985, Paper
PCIC-85-24.
[15] , “Analysis of rotor failures in squirrel cage induction motors,” pre-
sented at the IEEE PCIC, Sept. 1987, Paper PCIC-87-2.
[16] , “The causes and analysis of stator and rotor failures in A.C. ma-
Fig. 40. Overheated aluminum fabricated rotor bars. chines,” in Proc. Maintenance and Reliability Conf., Knoxville, TN,
May 20, 1997, p. 29.01.
[17] Metals Handbook—Volume 10: Failure Analysis and Prevention, 8th
ed., American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH, 1966.
[18] C. R. Brooks and A. Choudhury, Metallurgical Failure Analysis. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
[19] V. J. Colangelo and F. A. Heiser, Analysis of Metallurgical Fail-
ures. New York: Wiley, 1974.
[20] A. Das, Metallurgy of Failure Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1996.
[21] N. Sachs, “Failure analysis of mechanical components,” Maintenance
Technol., Sept. 1993.
[22] C. Y. P. Qiao and C. S. Wang, “A taxonomic study of fractograph as-
sisted engineering materials failure analysis,” in Proc. Maintenance and
Reliability Conf., Knoxville, TN, May 20–22, 1997, p. 501.
[23] O. V. Thorsen and M. Dalva, “A survey of faults on induction motors in
offshore oil industry, petrochemical industry, gas terminals, and oil re-
fineries,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 31, pp. 1186–1196, Sept./Oct.
1995.
[24] J. C. Berren, “Diagnosing faults in rolling element bearings—Part II:
Alternative analytical methods,” Vib., vol. 4, no. 2, June 1998.
Fig. 41. Broken and loose aluminum fabricated rotor bar. [25] “Bearing failure analysis and preventive maintenance,” Bearing Divi-
sion, NSK Corp., Ann Arbor, MI, ca. 1993.
[26] “Bearing failure and their causes,” SKF Catalog, Gothenburg, Sweden,
In Fig. 34, the pattern is nonsymmetrical with grounding; one Form 310M, 10000-11-75GP, 1974.
[27] A. H. Bonnett, “Cause and analysis of anti-friction bearing failures in
coil is grounded and there is multiple turn-to-turn shorting. The A.C. induction motors,” IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Newslett., Sept./Oct.
cause of failure was damaged cell wall. 1993.
1448 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 36, NO. 5, SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2000