Engineering Fracture Mechanics Vol. 50, No. 4, pp.

425-430, 1995
~ Pergamon 0013-7944(94)00247-9
Copyright 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0013-7944/95 $9.50+ 0.00

INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT USING LOADS ON THE

SPREAD OF LIFETIME
HENDRIK SCH,ABE
An der Josefsh6he 2! D-53117, Bonn, Germany

A ~ t r a c t - - I n this paper we study the influence of the spread of lifetimes induced by different using
conditions. We use linear damage accumulation theory, thus neglecting memory and training effects. We
show how, even under the assumption of linear damage accumulation, a difference in using conditions
can lead to a spread of lifetimes that is much larger than under sinusoidal load with constant amplitude.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
IT IS WELL-KNOWNthat the spread of lifetimes of items subject to a stochastic or deterministic load
with varying amplitude is larger than the spread of lifetimes of items subject to a sinusoidal load
with constant amplitude [1].
This effect is due to training and memory effects, i.e. the material "remembers" the history
of the load process it was subjected to. Linear damage accumulation theory is not able to take into
account these effects so nonlinear theories have to be used [2, 3]. These theories, however, involve
additional parameters.
In this paper we will demonstrate that a certain spread of various using conditions, modelled
by various stochastic loads, can lead to a much larger spread of lifetimes than under sinusoidal
load with constant amplitude. We use linear damage accumulation theory, thus not taking into
account training and memory effects. The various using conditions are modelled by a distribution
function of the load amplitudes that depends on an additional parameter which indexes similar but
differing load conditions.

2. A S S U M P T I O N S
Let us suppose the following model assumptions.
Under sinusoidal load with constant amplitude v the lifetime X of the considered items has
distribution
F ( x ] v ) = F ( x / g (t,)),
where g (v) is a scale factor increasing as v decreases and reaching infinity as v tends to zero and
vice versa. The distribution function F(.) fulfils

F(0)=0, x dF(x)= 1, (x - 1 ) 2 d F ( x ) = a 2. (1)

Hence, the mean life under sinusoidal load with amplitude v is

E(Xlv) = g(v).
Particularly, g (v) is often used in the form of the power law
g (v) = A v - ~. (2)
Other functions for g (v) are possible [4, 5].
The lifetime distribution of specimens subject to fatigue can be described by the Weibull
distribution
r ( x ) = 1 - exp{ - ( x / ~ )b}, (3)
425
426 H. SCH.~BE

where ( = I/F(I + 1/b) in order to fulfil eq. (1). The complete Gamma function F(x) is defined as

F(x) =
f; tP-Je-'dt.

The use condition is characterized by a stochastic load, described as a sequence of random

amplitudes I1"1, V2. . . . being statistically independent and distributed according to a distribution
function H(v). Particularly, we will use a distribution of the form

H(v) = 1 - exp{-(v/QP}. (4)

The linear damage accumulation theory [6-11] leads to a lifetime distribution under stochastic load
described by

F(xIH(v))=F(xlL), (5)
where the mean life L is obtained from

I/L = d H (v).

The lifetime distribution (5) is conditional on the particular use condition characterized by a specific
distribution H (v).
The various use conditions will be indexed by a parameter T of the load amplitude distribution
H (v), so we denote different use conditions by H~ (v). The coinciding lifetime distribution (1) will
be denoted by F (x IH~ (v)).
Let the parameter z have distribution rI(z), with density ~ (~). Then the unconditional lifetime
distribution is

F(x)= F(xIH~(v))zc(z)dz= F x dH~(v ~(z)d~. (6)

Particularly, we choose the distribution H(z) in the form

H(z) = 1 - exp{ - (z/)~}, (7)
i.e. in the form of a Weibull distribution.

3. COMPUTATION OF DISTRIBUTION UNDER USE CONDITIONS

In this section we will compute the distribution F (x) given by eq. (6) with the particular choice
of eqs (2)-(4), and eq. (7) for the functions g(v), F ( x Iv), H(v) and I-I(Q.
We can compute

1/L = zeF(1 + ~)/fl)/A.

Hence
F(xlH,(v)) = 1 - exp{ - (xz+r(1 + 4,//~)/(-4~ ))%
Then

F(x) = (1 - e x p { - (xz*r(1 + ck/B)l(A())b}) d(1 - e x p { - (~/)~}). (8)

The kth moment of this distribution can be evaluated as follows. First, we compute the conditional
moments.

~:{XklH~(v)} =
f; x k d(l - exp{ - (xz*F(1 + 4~/fl )/(A~ ))b})

= [AU(~*F(1 + //~))]kr(1 + klb).

 Influence of different using loads on the spread of lifetime 427

Then the unconditional moments are

E{X k} = E{XklH~(v)}dl-I(~)

= [AU(~*r(1 + 4, /8 ))lkr(1 + k/b) d(1 - exp { - ( ~ / ) ' } )

= JAr(1 + l / B ) / r ( 1 + /~)lkr(1 + k/b)O-~/*r(1 -k/(oh,)).

These moments exist, provided k < 4~7.
Let us now compute the variation coefficient defined by
v = ( ~ { x 2} - ~ { x }b'/~/E{x },
i.e.

v2 = E { X 2 } I ( E { X } 2) - 1. (9)
We obtain

v2 = r ( 1 + 2 / b ) F ( 1 - 2/(4h,)) 1. (10)
F(1 + l i b ) T O -- l/(q~y)) 2

The variation coefficient under sinusoidal load with constant amplitude can be computed from
F(x) given by eq. (3). We denote this characteristic by v0. We obtain
v2 = r(1 + Z/b) 1.
(r(1 + lib)) 2

4. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
In this section we will study the change of the spread of lifetimes if the item is subject to
stochastic use conditions. The spread will be measured by the coefficient of variation. Equations
(9) and (10) give the variation coefficient under use conditions and under sinusoidal load with
constant amplitude, respectively. Remember, that use conditions differ and are characterized by
a parameter z which is random. Let us denote by c the factor
c = (1 - 2/(4>~))1F(1 - 1/(4~)) 2. (ll)
Then we have
v 2+ 1 = (v0z + l)c,
so that

v=@vo +c-1
Lemma 1
If ~ and y are finite and fulfil 47 > 2, then

v ~v o.

Proof
The Frechet distribution is given by

G ( y ) = exp{ -(s/y)'},
where s is the scale and is the shape parameter. The k th moment of this distribution is
skF(l - k / ~ ) ,
428 H. SCH,~BE

provided k < a. If a > 2, then the variance exists and reads

s2(F(1 - 2/~) - F(1 - 1/~) 2) > 0.
F o r a Frechet distribution with unit mean there is
sF(1 - l/a) = 1,
and hence the variance is
F(1 - 2 / a ) / F ( I - 1/a)2 _ 1 > 0.
Setting ~ = q~? we arrive at
c--l>0.
This proves the lemma.
N o w we will select an appropriate interval for c, taking into account the meaning o f the
parameters ~b and 7. Parameter q~ is a parameter describing the dependency o f the mean life on
the load. It can vary within the interval [3, 7]. Parameter ? is the shape parameter o f the distribution
function l-I(~), as given by eq. (7). Depending on the value o f V the use load conditions have various
spreads. The larger the parameter ?, the smaller the spread o f using conditions. Particularly, in the
limit 7 --~ ~ , there will be no spread at all. If on the other hand, V = l, distribution rI(T) becomes
an exponential distribution with variation coefficient 1. Hence, it is useful to select for ? an interval
o f [1, oo). Then, for fly we have the interval [3, oo). Using eq. (1 l) we obtain for c the interval
[1,F(1/3)/F(2/3)21.
Computing
F(1/3)/F(2/3) 2 = (4/3)F(4/3)/(F(5/3) 2) = 1.465,
we see that c can be considered to lie in the interval [1, 1.5]. The quantity o f interest is now the
quotient V/Vo, i.e.
x/cv~ + c - 1/Vo. (12)
Obviously, for c = 1 we have v = v0.
Figure 1 shows curves for the quotient (12), depending on v0 in the interval [0.1, 1.1]. The
curves coincide with values 1.1, 1.3 and 1.5 for c.

7.2

v/vO

5.96

4.72

3,48

2.24

1.
I I ! I

0.! 0.3 0.5 0.7 0,9

Fig. 1. C u r v e s for c = 1.1, 1.3, 1.5.

 Influence of different using loads on the spread of lifetime 429

The following tendencies can be observed.

(1) With increasing c the curve becomes higher, i.e. the larger the spread of use conditions, the
larger the ratio of variation coefficients and hence, the larger the spread of lifetimes under using
conditions. The upper curve in Fig. 1 coincides with c = 1.5. For this curve, for v0 = 0.1, the
variation coefficient under use condition becomes 7.2 x larger, i.e. 0.72.
(2) As v0 decreases, i.e. with decreasing spread of lifetimes under sinusoidal load with constant
amplitude, the ratio of the variation coefficients increases.
Analogously we can consider the influence of c on the mean life. The mean life is
rF{x} = [ A F ( I + 1//7)/1"(1 + @//7)]F(1 + i / b ) F ( i - 1/(4,~,))/ <~.
We will compare this mean with the mean for ~, ---+ oo, i.e. if there is no spread of using conditions.
Then we have to consider the quotient
r-{Xl~,}lr-{Xl? --> oo} = F(I - 1 / ~ ) .
Figure 2 shows this quotient for different values of ~ = ~ within the interval [3, 13]. It can be seen
that depending on the exponent ~ and parameter ~, the expected lifetime under using conditions
increases as the spread of using conditions increases, i.e. ~ decreases. The same holds if the exponent
decreases, i.e. the influence of a change in the load affects the mean lifetime under sinusoidal
load with constant amplitude less seriously.

CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we have shown how a spread of using conditions increases the spread and
expectation of the lifetime under using conditions. Computations have been made with the help
of the simple linear damage accumulation hypothesis, thus neglecting training and memory effects.
It has been shown that due to different use conditions the spread of lifetimes can drastically increase
compared with the situation under sinusoidal load with constant amplitudes.
Often results of lifetime experiments carried out under sinusoidal load with constant amplitude
are hard to extrapolate to real use conditions. This study shows that a certain variance of use
conditions leads to an increase of the spread of lifetimes even under linear damage accumulation.
Considering e.g. the application within automobile technology, we are not able to find two vehicles
that are exploited under the same conditions. Their exploitation conditions must be characterized

]
1.4

OUOt.

! .32

t . 24

I. 16

! .08

t.
I I I I I

3. 5. 7. 9. tl.

Fig. 2. Quotient of expected lifetimes.

430 H. SCH.~BE

by different distribution functions H~(v) of the stochastic load amplitudes. Consequently, it is only
natural that under use conditions the spread of lifetimes becomes larger than under testing
conditions.
Nevertheless, effects of increase of spread due to training and memory effects have to be
studied in the future, since the linear damage accumulation theory cannot completely explain the
above-mentioned effect.

REFERENCES
[1] W. Schiitz, Fatigue Life Prediction by Calculating Facts and Fantasies. Presented at 6th International Conference on
Structural Reliability ICOSSAR, 9-13 August 1993, Innsbruck, Austria.
[2] J. Kallenberg, Mathematical model of nonlinear damage accumulation (in German). Bergakademie Freiberg (1989).
[3] H. Sch/ibe, On the construction of a nonlinear damage accumulation hypothesis. Engng Fracture Mech. 45, 627-636
(1993).
[4] H. Seh/ibe, Parameter estimation for a model of accelerated life testing (in German). Institut fiir Mechanik der
Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR, Preprint P-MECH-01/85 (1985).
[5] M. Shaked, W. J. Zimmer and C. A. Ball, A nonparametric approach to accelerated life testing. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc.
74, 6944599 (1979).
[6] W. Gnilke, Lifelength computation of machine parts (in German). VEB Verlag Technik Berlin (1980).
[7] S. Hohn and J. Mare, A simple model for fatigue life. 1EEE Trans. Reliability 37, 314-322 (1987).
[8] C. Lange and H. Friedrich, Failure probabilities for stochastically loaded mechanical systems, failing due to damage
as well as due to crossing of a critical level (in German). AdW der DDR, Institut f/Jr Mechanik Berlin and
Karl-Marx-Stadt, FMC-Series 12 (1984).
[9] H. Sch/ibe, Life length calculation with linear damage accumulation. Inst. f. Mech., AdW d. DDR, S-Reihe, 8, 221-226
(1986).
[10] H. Sch/ibe, Lifetime computation using linear damage accumulation (in German). lfL-Mitteilungen 26, 181-187 (1987).
[11] H. Sch/ibe, Lifelength computation using linear damage accumulation hypothesis (in German). FMC-series, Akademie
d. Wiss. d. DDR, Inst. f. Mechanik Karl-Marx-Stadt, 46, 43-66 (1990).

(Received 31 March 1994)