simplest answer.....its 70 frigging years old!![]()
Size of flaw is not so important as the shape and location. Some of the general rules are (without making a failure treatise):
How sharp is the flaw? A scratch or notch with sharp edges causes a stress concentration across the sharp edge which can lead to stresses near or greater than the material yield. This is the reason for putting as large a radius as possible on journals and a radius on the oil hole drillings.
How high is the working stress around/over the flaw? Race engines have more stress than street engines.
Where is the flaw located? A variation on #2. A scratch in the oil passage is not as important as one on the journal surface. There is zero stress in the exact axial centerline of a journal, which is why that area can be drilled out.
How hard is the material? The surface of the crank is hardened which reduces the ductility of the metal. That in turn makes crack propagation more likely. Shot peening relieves the surface stress in a part and reduces the possibility of having scratches, nicks and notches. You can't shot peen the journals, unfortunately, but its often done to the outside of con rods and other stressed parts.
These are general statements. Real world failure analysis often devolves into testing for definitive answers.
Hope this is of some interest. I recommend Shigley and Mitchell's "Mechanical Engineering Design", Mcgraw Hill, if you want more info. This is an approachable handbook that is useful for the auto enthusiast. I still have my 1983 edition and refer to it. A used one is just fine, like Machinery's Handbook, the info doesn't change very fast.
John
Maybe it was stored horizontally.
x2 aonemarine
Thanks for all the input and support and to Mark for photos.
Attached are three more close up shots of the break, not great pics, just from my phone.
Pic 1, notice small (old) hole? round that hole you might catch just a hint of a circular mark, almost looks like it has been plugged?
Next photo is the inside of that hole, note the surface, maybe evidence of repair?
Third one you might see at around 2 o'clock another small irregular hole.
Did people weld up cranks? I have no knowledge of this being dropped, it was re ground by a respected flathead builder (no longer trading) and I have every faith in him but I would have thought he would have picked up on this.
Interesting points about the radius.
As Mark pointed out it is a pretty standard motor, 4 inch crank, skimmed stock heads, plus 10 bore due to sticky piston rings but really just a refurbished engine.
I don't drive it hard but it has a columbia so I can and have sat at 65 -70 for long periods .
Not been aware of any sudden movement that could have put any serious shock or sudden twist so maybe just bad casting and bad luck.
In someways it was lucky as there does not appear to be any other damage, will have to check rods particularly the ones connected to that journal.
Gordon.