RELIABILITY AND FAILURE ANALYSIS OF

CRITICAL COMPONENTS OF A DRAGLINE

By
Pranami Rajkhowa (15MT000522)
Maintenance Engineering and Tribology

Under the guidance of

Prof. Somnath Chattopadhyaya (Associate Professor)
Prof. Dr. Sc. Drazan Kozak
(Head of Department of Mechanical Design, J.J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Croatia)
Dr. Dipankar Ray (System Programmer)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, Jharkhand
1
 Introduction

Literature review

Research Objectives

Outline for presentation Methodology

Experimental work

Conclusion and future work

References

Publications

2
INTRODUCTION

•Reliability

•Draglines

•Why draglines are chosen over other mining equipments: fast controlling, less requirement of manpower, less
production cost, high production rate and flexibility.

Fig 1. Functions of a dragline

3
LITERATURE REVIEW

1. Bandopadhyay & Ramani :(1985) developed a simulation model , concluded that availability and cycle
time affects the productivity.
2. Guan et al. :(1999) stress monitoring along the boom; identified the importance of the operating
performance on machine availability.
3. Silviu: (2000) component’s failure leads to major breakdown of the system.
4. Demirel et al. :(2014) estimated the lifetime of the components which helped to estimate the possible
failures.
5. Rai, Trivedi & Nath: (2000) analyzed the cycle time and the idle time frequency distribution.
6. Townson, Murthy & Gurgenci: (2003) effect of load and operator efficiency on the availability,
maintenance and output.

4
 • To evaluate the reliability of the
critical components and to estimate
the overall reliability of the dragline.

• To estimate the MTBF for 90%

Research Objectives reliable life.

• To provide a comparative analysis of

the reliability of the components.

• To conduct the failure analysis of the

critical component.

5
Criticality Analysis of the Subsystems

450

400
Series1
350
Expon. (Series1)
300

250
RPN

200

150

100

50

0
Bucket and Drag Chain Ropes Gear Motor and Swing Walk Structure Lubrication
Accessory Assembly Generator Mechanism Mechanism
Sub Systems

Fig 2. Criticality analysis of the subsystem

6
METHODOLOGY

Determination of the best

Data Collection fit statistical distribution

Fig 3. Trend test of TBFs data for bucket

I II III II IV

Determination of Presence Reliability Analysis

of Trend and Correlation
(IID)

Fig 4. Correlation test of TBFs data for bucket

7
 Table 1. Parameters of distributions for the Dragline

Subsystems MTBF (Days) K-S Test (D value) Best fitment of curve

Bucket and accessory 5.175 99.984 Lognormal

Drag chain 9.659 89.760 Lognormal

Gear assembly 36.960 9.038 Lognormal

Motor generator 17.481 35.446 Lognormal

Ropes 20.291 21.051 Gamma

Others 20.291 92.976 Gamma

Table 2. MTBF for 90% reliable life of the components of the dragline
Components Bucket and Drag chain Gear assembly Motor Ropes Other
accessory generator componnets

MTBF (Days) 25.046 43.383 13.906 25.445 39.315 22.235

8
Fig 5. Reliability Vs Time graph for all the critical components Fig 6. Reliability Vs Time graph for the dragline

9
Accessories attached
to a bucket

Main body

Hoist chain

Dump block

Tooth and adapter

Hitch shackle

Fig 7. Bucket and its accessory

10
Hitch shackle of a dragline

Fig 9. Hitch shackle

11
Fig 8. Shackle of a dragline
 Collection of background information
Failure analysis Preliminary visual inspection

of hitch shackle Modeling

Surface and subsurface inspection using

NDTs
Faculty of Mechanical Design, J.J. Strossmayer Metallographic Examination
University of Osijek, Slavonski Brod, Croatia.

Faculty of Mechanical and Naval Architecture, Destructive Tests

University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Chemical Composition

12
 Preliminary visual inspection of the component

Specimen for further analysis was cut using a oxy-

acetylene flame.

Fig 10. Specimen of shackle

13
Modeling

Fig11. 3D image of Shackle Fig 12. Front view of shackle

14
Fig 13. Side view of shackle

15
Surface and subsurface
inspection using NDTs

1. Computed Radiography
(CR)

Fig 14. Experimental setup for carrying out computed radiography

16
Results of Computed Radiography (CR)

Fig 15. Cracks on surface I

17
Fig 16. Cracks on surface II
18
2. Magnetic Particle
Inspection (MPI)

Fig 17. Experimental setup for Magnetic particle inspection test

19
Results of MPI

Fig 18. Magnetic particle inspection for the shackle

20
Metallographic Examination

Fig 19. Cutting samples (MC-80 Specimen cutter) Fig 20. Grinding and polishing samples (GP-2B Grinder Polisher)

21
Fig 21. Test sample for metallographic test Fig 22. Marked locations for recording microstructure

22
Microstructure
Location 1

Fig 23. Magnification: 200X (without etching) Fig 24. Magnification: 100X (after etching)

23
Location 2

Fig 25. Magnification: 50x (without etching) Fig 26. Magnification: 50x (after etching)

24
Location 3

Fig 27. Magnification: 50x (without etching) Fig 28. Magnification: 50x (after etching)
25
Location 4

Fig 29. Magnification: 50x (without etching) Fig 30. Magnification: 50x (after etching)
26
Destructive Test

• Vickers Hardness Test

Hardness Value is given by,

Here,

F: Test load applied in kgf

d: average value of the two

diagonals

Fig 31. Vickers hardness apparatus

27
Type / Load: HV 10

Table 3. Result of hardness measurement

Location 1 2 3 4 Average Rm
hardness
Test 146 146 138 141 143 470
Sample 1
Test 142 146 139 142 144 470
Sample 2

Rm : Tensile strength (MPa) calculated from the average hardness for metallic materials (DIN 50150).
28
Chemical Composition

Table 4. Chemical composition of the specimen

Weight % C Si Mn P S Cu Cr

Test
0.21 0.274 0.264 0.043 0.041 0.109 0.087
Sample

29
Conclusion and Future scope
•The Lognormal and Gamma distribution provides the best fit distribution for most of the subsystems.

•Among all the subsystems, bucket and accessory is the most vulnerable component to failure as compared to others. MTBF is
minimum for bucket and accessory (5.175 days) and maximum for gear assembly (36.960days).

•For 90% reliable life, Drag chain has the maximum service life of 43.383 hours.

•The CR, MPI images and metallographic analysis reveals the presence of cracks on both the surfaces.

•The lack of adequate data related to the loading conditions creates complexity to understand the effect of the external forces
on the deformation or failure of hitch shackle. Thus exploitation conditions can also be a major cause behind the shackle
failure.

•Also shackle can suffer damage due to external factors, not necessarily related to its operation. These may include damages
due to impact from other objects or vehicles and thermal damage caused by careless welding or metal cutting in the vicinity of
the shackle.

30
REFERENCES

[1] Ascher, H., & Feingold, H. Repairable systems reliability: modeling, inference, misconceptions and their causes.
New York: M. Dekker. (1984), p. 232
[2] Bandopadhyay, S., &Ramani, R. V. Simulation of a dragline operation in an Eastern Kentucky mine. CIM
BULLETIN,78(882) (1985),pp 52-58.
[3] Barabady, J., & Kumar, U.. Reliability analysis of mining equipment: A case study of a crushing plant at Jajarm
Bauxite Mine in Iran. Reliability engineering & system safety, 93(4), (2008), pp.647-653.
[4] Barabady, J., & Kumar, U. Reliability and maintainability analysis of crushing plants in Jajarm Bauxite Mine of
Iran. In Proceedings of the Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (2005, January) .pp. 109-115.
[5] Birolini, A. Reliability engineering (Vol. 5). Heidelberg: Springer. (2007).
[6] Demirel, N., Gölbaşi, O., Düzgün, Ş., &Kestel, S. System Reliability Investigation of Draglines Using Fault Tree
Analysis. In Mine Planning and Equipment Selection Springer International Publishing. (2014), pp. 1151-1158.
[7] Esmaeili, M., Bazzazi, A. A., & Borna, S. Reliability analysis of a fleet of loaders in Sangan iron mine. Archives
of mining sciences, 56(4), (2011). 629-640.
[8] Guan, Z., Gurgenci, H., Austin, K., & Fry, R. Optimisation of design load levels for dragline buckets. Australian
Coal Association Research Program, CSIRO Division of Exploration and Mining, Final Report, (C7003), (1999) 87.
[9] Kumar, U., Klefsjö, B., & Granholm, S. Reliability investigation for a fleet of load haul dump machines in a
Swedish mine. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 26(4), (1989)341-361.
[10] Mohammadi, M., Rai, P., & Gupta, S.. Improving productivity of dragline through enhancement of reliability,
inherent availability and maintainability. ActaMontanisticaSlovaca, 21(1), (2016)1-8.
31
PUBLICATIONS

• Sheeba Borkakoti, Anil Kumar Agrawal, Pranami Rajkhowa, “Reliability analysis for critical components of draglines”,
International Journal of Mining Science and Technology Status: Communicated and under review.

• Ankit Kotia, Pranami Rajkhowa, Gogineni Satyanarayana Rao, Subrata Kumar Ghosh, “Thermophysical and
tribological properties of nanolubricants: A review”, Heat and Mass Transfer, Status: Communicated and under review.

• Anil Kumar Agrawal, Pranami Rajkhowa, Sheeba Borkakoti, Somnath Chattopadhyaya, “Failure analysis of
components of a diesel engine” pp. 84-87, National Conference on Recent advances in Industrial Tribology and
Maintenance, February, 2017.

• Sheeba Borkakoti, Anil Kumar Agrawal, Pranami Rajkhowa, Somnath Chattopadhyaya, Alokesh Pramanik, “Risk
analysis using failure mode effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) for mining equipments” pp. 238-242, International
Conference on Evolution in Manufacturing, November, 2016.

• Ankit Kotia, Sheeba Borkakoti, Pranami Rajkhowa, Subrata Kumar Ghosh, “Experimental Investigation of Aluminium
Oxide Nanoparticle as additives of HEMM Gear Oil” National Conference on Tribology: Energy, Environment and
Efficiency organized by Tribological Society of India, Bhopal held at Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, January, 2016.

32
THANK YOU

33