FATIGUE FAILURE CRITERIA

FOR FLUCTUATING STRES

ANDERSON HERRERA Y CARLOS DUARTE | DISEÑO 1 | 05/05/2019

Now that the various stress components associated with parts subject to fluctuating
stress have been defined, it is desired to vary the average stress and its amplitude or
alternating component, to learn about the resistance to fatigue of parts subjected to
these stresses. Three methods to graph the results of the tests with the aforementioned
characteristics are of general use. The modified Goodman diagram shows the average
stress plotted along the abscissa and all the other stress components in the ordinate with
the 1xceded in the positive direction. The fatigue resistance 1xceded1 the finite life
resistance, as the case may be, is plotted on the ordinate above or below the origin. The
straight line of 1xcede stress in a straight line at 45 º from the origin to the resistance to
the 1xceded of the part. The modified Goodman diagram consists of straight lines that
are traced to Se (or Sf) above and below the origin. Note that the creep resistance is also
plotted on both axes, because creep would be the failure criterion if σmax 1xceded s and

Goodman modificado

PÁGINA 1
The figure illustrates another way of representing the results of the tests. Here the abscissa
represents the ratio of the average resistance Sm to the last resistance, with the tension plotted to the
right and the compression to the left. The ordinate is the relationship between the alternating
resistance and the limit of resistance to fatigue. Then, line BC represents the modified Goodman
criterion of failure. Note that the existence of medium stress in the compression region has little
effect on the fatigue resistance limit.
The following diagram is very ingenious and is unique because it represents four of the components
of the effort, as well as the two stress relationships. A curve representing the limit of fatigue strength
for values of R, which starts at R = -1 and ends with R = 1, starts at Se on the axis and ends at Sut on
the axis σm has also drawn curves .

Of constant life for N = 10 ^ 5 and N = 10 ^ 4 cycles. Any state of effort, as indicated in A, can be
described by the minimum and maximum components, or by means of the middle and alternating
components. And safety is indicated when the point described by the stress components is below the
constant lifeline.

PÁGINA 2
When the average stress is compression, the failure occurs σa = Se or when σmax = Sye as indicated
on the left side, it is not necessary to make a fatigue diagram or develop any other failure criteria. In
Figure 6-27, the tensioned side of Figure 6-25, half resistances has been plotted again, instead of
using resistance ratios, with the same modified Goodman criterion along with four additional failure
criteria. Often, the diagrams are drawn for analysis and design purposes, are easy to use and the
results are scaled directly.
The initial point of view that was expressed in a diagram σa σm implied that there was a locus that
divided the safe and unsafe combinations of σm σm
The resulting proposals included the parable of gerber (1874), the straight line of Goodman (1890)
and the straight line of soderberg (1930). As more data became generalized it became evident that
instead of geometrical fatigue, instead of being a “fence”, it was more like a zone or band where the
probability of failure could be estimated. Goodman’s failure criterion includes why:
It is a straight line and algebra is linear and easy.
It is easily plotted, for each problem.
It exposes subtle aspects of discernment in fatigue problems.
The answers can be scaled from the diagrams, such as an algebra check.
It also warns that it is deterministic, but the phenomenon is not. This bias can not be quantified. It is
not conservative. It is a help for understanding: it is history. And to read the work of other engineers
and have meaningful oral exchanges with them, it is necessary to understand that Goodman’s method
could arise.
The criterion equation of the soderberg line is:
𝑆𝑎 𝑆𝑢𝑡
+ =1
𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑦

Similarly, it is found that the modified Goodman relation is

𝑆𝑎 𝑆𝑚
+ =1
𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑡

The analysis of the figure proves that a parabola and an ellipse have a better chance of passing
between the data and allowing the quantification of the probability of failure. The gerber failure
criterion is written as

𝑆𝑎 𝑆𝑚 2
+( ) =1
𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑢𝑡

PÁGINA 3
And the ASME-elliptical is expressed as
𝑆𝑎 2 𝑆𝑚
( ) +( )=1
𝑆𝑒 𝑆𝑦

The geometrical criterion of fluence to the first langer cycle is used in connection with the fatigue
locus:
Sa+Sm=Sy

The efforts nσa and nσm can replace Sa ySm where n is the design or safety factor then, the equation
𝑆𝑎 𝑆𝑢𝑡
𝑆𝑒
+ 𝑆𝑦
= 1 the soderberg line, becomes:

𝝈𝒂 𝝈𝒎 𝟏
Soderberg: + =
𝑺𝒆 𝑺𝒚 𝒏

The modified Goodman line, becomes:

𝝈𝒂 𝝈𝒎 𝟏
Mod-goodman 𝑺𝒆 + 𝑺𝒖𝒕 = 𝒏

The gerber line, becomes:

𝒏𝝈𝒂 𝒏𝝈𝒎 𝟐
Gerber: 𝑺𝒆 + ( 𝑺𝒖𝒕 ) = 𝟏

The ASME-eliptic line, becomes:

𝒏𝝈𝒂 𝒏𝝈𝒎
ASME-eliptic( 𝑺𝒆 )^𝟐 + ( 𝑺𝒚
)^𝟐 =𝟏

The desing equation for langer first-cycle-yielding is

𝑆𝑦
Langer static yield 𝜎𝑎 + 𝜎𝑚 = 𝑛

TOMADO DEL LIBRO SHIGLEY`S MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DSING

Pag 311 a 316

PÁGINA 4