LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

Do aluminum rockers ever break from fatigue?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-16-2006, 12:15 AM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
JP95ZM6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 746
Do aluminum rockers ever break from fatigue?

I have been advised that if I use aluminum rockers, I should check them periodically because they can fatigue and break. Or better yet, replace them at intervals. While I know very well that aluminum has a fatigue life that depends on the stress level on the part, I think (?) GM used aluminum rockers on the LT4, so they must be ok in that application for well over 100k miles. Also, I think the only visible sign of pending failure would be a crack. By that time, failure would be soon, so an annual inspection wouldn't cut it.

Since the stress in the rocker depends on cam/springs/rpms, etc, I would think somebody may have run their motor enough miles to have this happen. But maybe the problem gets blamed on something else. Or, the rockers are overdesigned enough that it 'never' happens. The fact that highly built engines tend to run low-mileage lives may offset the fatigue risk, too. I plan on Pro Magnums to avoid this issue, they are steel.

Has anybody ever found cracks or broken an aluminum rocker?
Do folks change them out for new ones when they get old, like valve springs? How old?

To help identify a fatigue failure as opposed to an overload failure: there would be very little deformation of the part, and the broken surface would have a scalloped appearance. There is a pretty good picture of the typical fracture pattern here, 2nd item down: http://www.testlabs.ca/tech-ref.html
JP95ZM6 is offline  
Old 11-16-2006, 08:58 AM
  #2  
Registered User
 
Sweetred95ta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: High Ridge, MO
Posts: 2,193
Personally, I've never heard of an aluminum rocker breaking without some outside influence; ie. incorrect valve train geometry, incorrect valve lash adjustment, etc. I've never actually seen one that snapped in half. Most likely, with aluminum being as soft as it is, it would most likely bend or deform before it would 'snap'. If one did deform, you would hear it in the valve train and more times than not, it won't cause any harm to internal components (unless you were at 6k+ rpm when it decided to let go, but as long as the springs don't float, you'd probably be alright here as well). HTH
Sweetred95ta is offline  
Old 11-16-2006, 09:55 AM
  #3  
Moderator
 
rskrause's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Buffalo, New York
Posts: 10,745
I've used them for years on street and race cars with no issues. If I had a setup with a huge SR using mega springs (750+lbs) I would consider something different. But otherwise, they are fine for general race or performance use.

Rich
rskrause is offline  
Old 11-16-2006, 11:24 AM
  #4  
Registered User
 
evilundisguised's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by Sweetred95ta
Most likely, with aluminum being as soft as it is, it would most likely bend or deform before it would 'snap'. If one did deform, you would hear it in the valve train and more times than not, it won't cause any harm to internal components (unless you were at 6k+ rpm when it decided to let go, but as long as the springs don't float, you'd probably be alright here as well). HTH

Fatigue failure can occur without reaching stress levels that would typical deform the bulk material. Cyclical stress is the culprit- repetitively pulling on a pre-existing flaw (crack, pore, inclusion) can eventually lead to its growth into a macro-scale defect.
evilundisguised is offline  
Old 11-16-2006, 11:56 AM
  #5  
Registered User
 
MeanGreen97Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: TX
Posts: 3,523
Originally Posted by evilundisguised
Fatigue failure can occur without reaching stress levels that would typical deform the bulk material. Cyclical stress is the culprit- repetitively pulling on a pre-existing flaw (crack, pore, inclusion) can eventually lead to its growth into a macro-scale defect.
Is that english? LOL Those are some nice words....
MeanGreen97Z is offline  
Old 11-16-2006, 12:15 PM
  #6  
Registered User
 
Sweetred95ta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: High Ridge, MO
Posts: 2,193
Originally Posted by evilundisguised
Fatigue failure can occur without reaching stress levels that would typical deform the bulk material. Cyclical stress is the culprit- repetitively pulling on a pre-existing flaw (crack, pore, inclusion) can eventually lead to its growth into a macro-scale defect.
That's the key word there. The thing is, it doesn't matter which material you deal with (steel or aluminum), if there is a pre-existing flaw, crack propogation from cyclical loading is a possibility (just depends on how much loading there is). I took Fracture Mechanics, so I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't have any reference material here, but does a crack propogate through aluminum faster and at a lower cyclical load than steel?

Last edited by Sweetred95ta; 11-16-2006 at 01:00 PM. Reason: Fixed a word.
Sweetred95ta is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 07:39 PM
  #7  
Registered User
 
evilundisguised's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by Sweetred95ta
That's the key word there. The thing is, it doesn't matter which material you deal with (steel or aluminum), if there is a pre-existing flaw, crack propogation from cyclical loading is a possibility (just depends on how much loading there is). I took Fracture Mechanics, so I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't have any reference material here, but does a crack propogate through aluminum faster and at a lower cyclical load than steel?
Well I'm no fracture expert, merely a self-proclaimed materials geek - I actually work with ceramics where there is no such thing as fatigue

However the material does matter; saying that it doesn't is like saying you could use either wood or titanium to make head bolts, because either will break if you pull hard enough on them. Back to fatigue, there are properties intrinsic to each material (fatigue/enduance limit is probably most relevant,
fatigue strength also) which would affect their performance, along with physical characteristics such as surface finish and of course design of the part. I can't tell you for sure why X-brand aluminum rockers are better than Y-brand steel ones, but it lies somewhere in there.
evilundisguised is offline  
Old 11-17-2006, 09:57 PM
  #8  
Registered User
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,800
I have heard of the bearing giving up on some aluminums but never a body failure unless the bearings only failed because of body deformation but never saw anyone claim that.

I ran a set of ProForm 1.5 SA rollers for like 50K much of that with upgraded cam and complimentary springs, they survived just fine. For the new setup I went with ProMagnums though.
96capricemgr is offline  
Old 11-18-2006, 10:12 AM
  #9  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
JP95ZM6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 746
Steel parts can be designed to have infinite fatigue life if the part operating stress (material strain to be exact; think of it as how far the part flexes on each cycle) levels are low enough, below the endurance limit. The strain needs to be in the low, flat part at the right hand end of the S-N curve, as I recall from about 20 years ago. Aluminum has no such 'infinite life' design point, so aluminum parts will all fail eventually by fracturing if they run long enough, the question is how many cycles. That's why race parts and airplanes get retired after a certain amount of use, even if they are visually ok.

I am trying to get a feel for whether the aluminum rocker arm cycle life ever falls within the useful life of a motor, expecially in the more highly stressed applications. It is starting to sound like the answer is no.
JP95ZM6 is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 12:08 PM
  #10  
Registered User
 
engineermike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Posts: 2,743
JP95ZM6, your last post is dead-on. However, aluminum rockers do break sometimes. One of my friends owns an engine shop that builds dirt-track engines (Late Model SUPR mostly). He's broken lots of aluminum rockers and has switched to the Pro-Magnums as a result. However, he's using spring pressures of 275 on the seat minimum. I've heard him talk about going well over 300 also.

Mike
engineermike is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 12:44 PM
  #11  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
JP95ZM6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 746
Thanks mike! Thats the kind of info I am looking for.
JP95ZM6 is offline  
Old 11-19-2006, 04:37 PM
  #12  
Registered User
 
johnny3986's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rolla/Blue Springs, Missouri
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by evilundisguised
Fatigue failure can occur without reaching stress levels that would typical deform the bulk material. Cyclical stress is the culprit- repetitively pulling on a pre-existing flaw (crack, pore, inclusion) can eventually lead to its growth into a macro-scale defect.
Haha, I haven't heard that since I was in my Metallurgical Engineering class

...but he is right..
johnny3986 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
pimpen1024
General 1967-2002 F-Body Tech
12
08-19-2015 08:36 PM
9t4lt4z28
Parts Wanted
1
07-19-2015 06:16 PM
94Form
LT1 Based Engine Tech
12
07-17-2015 10:56 PM
Slayer
Parts For Sale
0
07-04-2015 03:06 PM



Quick Reply: Do aluminum rockers ever break from fatigue?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34 PM.