Fatigue Strength Diagrams EU Presentation

Presentation of Research Project
Replacement approach of the fatigue strength diagrams for cold-formed helical

compression springs in DIN EN 13906-1 with a methodical and computational approach
IGF 19693 BR | 01.10.2017 – 30.09.2020
M. Sc. Martin Petrich, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ulf Kletzin
Slide 1 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

27.04.2021 Machine Elements Group / Research Group Wire and Springs Institute for Design and
Precision Engineering
Replacement of the fatigue strength diagrams in DIN EN 13906-1
Structure
1. Welcome and code of conduct
2. Research motivation und aims
3. Project overview
4. Calculation of fatigue strength lines for compression springs
5. Development and validation of the new fatigue strength diagrams
6. Method of transferring fatigue strength for different compression springs
7. Conclusion
8. Acknowledgements and Outlook

Code of conduct and antitrust information

Welcome to TU Ilmenau – Machine Elements Group!
Wöhlerdiagramm DF263
400
n1/n2 S
E
D
F
W
350 8/8
K
W
S
F
d
τka in MPa
L
300 8/8 n
S
τ
 Decades of research on wire and

8/8 A
M
L
W
250 0/8 K
N
N
spring technology ND NGrenz

k
τ
L
n
n
200 0/8
N
 Head of Research Center since 2007:

1,0E+04 1,0E+05 1,0E+06 1,0E+07
18.12.2019
Schwingspielzahl N
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ulf Kletzin

 Established corporations with research
Bauteil-Wechselfestigkeit (kugelgestrahlt) τ WK,ks = τ WK /K WK +672,9
∆τ ES MPa Ergebnis
Bestimmung der Amplitude der Bauteil-Dauerfestigkeit τ AK,ks
Mittelspannung τ km 749,1 MPa Eingabe
associations like VDFI, ESV, FKM, FSV, … Mittelspannungsfaktor

Amplitude der Bauteil-Dauerfestigkeit
Schwingspielzahl Dauerfestigkeit
K AK,τ,ks 0,72611964
τ AK,ks = τ WK,ks · K AK,τ488,6 MPa
N Dτ 1.000.000
Wenn ks
Ergebnis
in Germany Betriebsfestigkeitsfaktor
Amplitude der Bauteil-Betriebsfestigkeit
K BK,τ =
WENN N<
τ BK = τ AK · K BK,τ
0,9120
445,6 MPa Ergebnis
Sicherheitsfaktor höhere Zuverlässigkeit jS 1,000 Ergebnis
 Additional university-related service Gesamtsicherheitsfaktor j ges

Ermüdungsfestigkeitsnachweis
1,000 Ergebnis
company „STZ Federntechnik“

zulässige Spannungsamplitude tBK,zul=tBK/jges 445,6 MPa Ergebnise
vorhandene Spannungsamplitude τ ka 225,0 MPa Eingabe
Auslastungsgrad a BK,τ = τ ka / (τ BK,ks
0,505/ j ges ) Ergebnis

Welcome to TU Ilmenau – Machine Elements Group!
video is not included in the PDF Slides

Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

2. Research motivation and aims
SPRING DESIGN
What constitutes a good design ? What is harmful?
Sources: unknown

2. Research motivation and aims Research focus: Determination of the permissible
Introduction stresses and presentation of these in the form of
easy-to-use fatigue strength diagrams
 Existing stress  Permissible stress ?
Torsional stress τ
 𝑵 = 𝟏𝟎𝟔
Maximum stress τko Stress amplitude τka Stress range τkh
→ L2 / F2
 𝑵 = 𝟏𝟎𝟕
Mean stress τkm
Minimum stress τku

→ L1 / F1
Time t
𝜏ku 𝜏km −𝜏ka
Stress ratio 𝑅 = =
𝜏ko 𝜏km +𝜏ka Goodman diagram
DIN EN 13906-1

Initial situation
 State of the art in Europe
• Equations and fatigue strength diagrams in

the standard DIN EN 13906-1 form the essential basis for
the design and calculation of cyclically loaded helical
compression springs
• They are distributed throughout Europe and internationally
and used in particular in SMEs in the spring industry
and by spring users
 For example: Goodman diagram in DIN EN 13906-1
Figure 20 – shot peened compression springs, VD wire
 Fatigue strength can be read off directly:

lower and upper stress for chosen load cycles N
and wire diameter d
𝜏𝑘𝐻,𝐷𝐼𝑁 𝐸𝑁 13906−1 = 𝑓(wire marial, 𝑁, 𝑑, shot peening, 𝜏𝑘𝑈 )

Current level of knowledge
Spring-specific influences on fatigue strength cannot be taken into account!
Priority Influence Effect on permissible stress τkH
1 Residual stresses from production –

especially shot peening ± 200 MPa
(presetting, winding, heat treatment)
2 Static material parameters
± 100 MPa
(tensile strength, ductility…)
3 Surface ± 75 MPa
4 Spring geometry ± 50 MPa
𝜏𝑘𝐻,𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙 = 𝑓(wire marial, 𝑁, 𝑑, shot peening, 𝜏𝑘𝑈 ) and additional

𝑓(𝑤, 𝑛f , 𝑅z , heat treatment, presetting, operating conditions)

Summary
Problem:
Replacement of the fatigue strength diagrams for cold-formed helical compression springs in
DIN EN 13906-1 is absolutely necessary as they are out of date und lots of details are unknown.
Aims:
 Comparatively small experimental scope of fatigue tests
 Methodical, computational approach to synthesize the new diagrams
 Further increase of design quality by development of methods for fatigue strength transfer
YOUR Industrial benefit:

 Competitive advantages through utilization-optimized spring design
 Reduction of time-consuming and cost-intensive tests
 Shortening of development times
 Increase in operational safety and avoidance of damage
 Creation of a uniform and binding interface between manufacturers and users
 Minimizing the product liability problem

Spring
3. Project overview measure-
Surface ment Residual
Schematic workflow
roughness stresses
Project duration:
01.10.2017 – 30.09.2020
Torsion Fatigue
tests tests
>25 supporting companies
in project committee
Analytical
Tensile strength Previous
tests assessment research
for springs
Arithmetically determined fatigue strength lines and guide lines for static load capacity
Validation
Arithmetically generated, Fatigue strength
direct applicable fatigue diagrams! transfer method

Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

τW,s material fatigue limit for completely
reversed shear stress
statistical Kt-Kf ratio; Wöhler exponent kst; spring
Analytical strength assessment for springsgeometry; surface roughness; shot peening Rechnerischer Festigkeitsnachweis für Federn und Federelemente
Der grafische Ablaufplan dient zur Veranschaulichung des Berechnungsablaufs mit Beispielcharakter und erhebt keinen Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit. Es ist stets der Richtlinienentwurf maßgebend.
Rm , =𝑓
• Wärmebehandlung
, 𝑅 , (1.2.1)
Complex, but very

Zugdruckwechselfestigkeit Ölschlussvergüteter Federstahl
20 °C < TW < 450 °C
1,1
Wärmebehandlungsfaktor KT,W
𝑅 , = , 𝑅 (1.2.2) , = (1.2.2a) 1,05
= −3
für Rm,W > 2000 MPa gilt Rm,W = 2000 MPa , , (1.2.2b)
1
• Verformbarkeit Patentiert gezogener Federstahl
accurate and
𝑓 , =𝑓 , (1.2.3) 20 °C < TW < 350 °C 0,95
= , −
, (1.2.2c)
τWK
Drahtsorte ölschlussvergütet patentiert gezogen 1.4310 ,
0,9
spring fatigue limit for = , −

, , (1.2.2d)
fw, 0,47 0,4 0,34
Korrosionsbeständiger Federstahl, 1.4310 0,85
Rm tensile strength
Verformbarkeit gering mittel hoch 20 °C < TW < 450 °C
„automatable“!
Bruchdehnung [%] <3 3-7 >7 = (1.2.2e) 0,8
, ölschlussvergütetes Material
completely reversed shear stress = , −

K* 0,95 1,0 1,05 , , (1.2.2f) 0,75 patentiert gezogenes Material
• Temperatur 1.4310
0,7
Temperatur normal niedrig hoch , Wärmebehandlungsfaktor
0 100 200 300 400 500
Bereich -40°C bis +100°C < -40°C 100°C bis 150°C
Wärmebehandlungstemperatur
Wärmebehandlungstemperatur TW in C
−3
KT,D 1 - ,𝐷 = , ( )
heat treatment; fatigue strength factor for τkm= 0 MPa W,zd

Bei hohen Temperaturen sind anstelle der Werte für W,zd bzw. tW,s die
Werte für W,zd,T bzw. tW,s,T im weiteren Rechengang zu verwenden.
, , = ,𝐷 , (1.2.5)
𝜏 , =𝑓 ,𝜏
fw,t = 0,577 aus Gestaltänderungshypothese

, (1.2.1) Schubwechselfestigkeit
completely reversed normal stress; mean stress Feder

𝜏 , , = ,𝐷 𝜏 , Für korrosionsbeständigen Stahl sind keine Werte bekannt.
Torsionsbeanspruchung (bspw. Schraubendruckfeder DF )
tW,s
Biegebeanspruchung Torsionsbeanspruchung
ductility; working temperature =
1
, ,
1
𝐸
1
(1.4.1) Biegewechselfestigkeit des Bauteils
1
𝜏 =𝜏 ,
1
,𝜏
1
𝜏𝐸
1
(1.4.1) Torsionswechselfestigkeit des Bauteils
1
, = (1.3.1) mit 𝑛 = 𝑛 𝑛 𝑛 (1.3.8) ,𝜏 = (1.3.1) mit 𝑛𝜏 = 𝑛 𝑛 𝑛 (1.3.8)
, , , ,
Statistische Stützzahl nst Verformungsmechanische Stützzahl nvm Bruchmechanische Stützzahl nbm Schätzwert der Kerbwirkungszahl
σW,zd material fatigue limit for

ölschluss- patentiert korrosionsbe-
Biegebeanspruchung (bspw. Schenkelfeder SF, Flachspiralfeder SPF)

Werkstoff
= (
𝑘
) (1.3.2) vergütet gezogen ständig, 1.4310
, ,
spring fatigue limit

𝑛 = (1.3.10)
τAK
, 𝑛 = (1.3.9) 𝑛 = (1.3.9) 𝑘
mit Aref,st = 500 mm² ,𝜏 = ( ) (1.3.2) kst 24 19 14
completely reversed axial stress Querschnitt

Spannungsbeiwert
Biegung
𝑤 ,
Torsion
𝑤 ,
Querschnitt
Wickelverhältnis
𝑅 Rauheit niedrig
kugelgestrahlt
Rauheitsfaktor
hoch
nicht kugelgestrahlt
niedrig hoch
poliert
Randschichtfaktor (nur für Nitrieren)
ohne Randschichtverfestigung KV=1
nicht gekerbte
Bauteile
gekerbte Bauteile
rund = = rund 𝑤= =
𝑤 , 𝑤 , 𝑑 𝑑
, 0,90 0,80 0,85 0,75 1,00
τkm> 0 MPa
vom Anwender 𝑅
rechteckig = , 𝑤 −0, 9
, rechteckig 𝑤= = = , , = , 3,00
zu ermitteln ,𝜏 0,94 0,90 0,92 0,85 1,00
aspired number of cycles; slope exponents Berechnungsmöglichkeiten für die hoch beanspruchte Oberfläche AF,st = A SF , A SPF Berechnungsmöglichkeiten für die hoch beanspruchte Oberfläche AF,st = A DF
fatigue strength factor 1. Oberfläche mit mindestens 90% der Maximalspannung

Schließende Betätigung der Schenkelfeder (s) Öffnende Betätigung der Schenkelfeder (ö)
1. Berechnung der Oberfläche mit mindestens 90% der Maximalspannung
of the Wöhler line =

𝑘 1
𝑛
1
𝑛
𝑘 1
𝑛 1 𝑤 ( 1)
𝐷
mit
=
1 =
𝑛 𝑛
+ − 𝑎 + 𝑎 0,9 𝑘
𝑎
𝑛 1 𝑤 (
=
1)
1
= = =
𝑟 𝑘𝑟 𝑟 𝑟 𝑘𝑟
𝑘 1 1 𝑘 1
Die Gleichungen für 1 und sind dem Richtlinienentwurf zu entnehmen. = = =
𝑟 𝑘𝑟 𝑟 𝑟 𝑘𝑟
Es ist zwischen schließender und öffnender Betätigung zu unterscheiden.
Schließende Betätigung der Spiralfeder (s) Öffnende Betätigung der Spiralfeder (ö) 2. Berechnung der Oberfläche mittels Spannungsintegral
τW,s material fatigue limit for completely τkH spring fatigue limit for aspired 2. Berechnung der Oberfläche mittels Spannungsintegral
= =
−
+𝑎
Schraubendruckfedern
𝐷 = 𝑟 100
180
170
160
A90%
Schenkelfedern 70 mit = 𝑤 150
number of cycles
schließend 𝑁 𝑟 ,𝐷
reversed shear stress mit 𝑁 𝑟 , =

s: = 𝑟 1
𝑤
100
𝑤
+
65
60
55
öffnend
und
= , −0,
140
130
120 kst=14
Anorm in mm²
0,00 𝑘 −0, 6 𝑘 + ,0 110
= 50
N = Ni 100
= , −0,10 100 kst=19
Anorm in mm²
= , , , 45 A90%
90 kst=24
40 80
= , , , kst=30
35 70
( − ) kst=14
ö: = 𝑟 30 60
statistical Kt-Kf ratio; Wöhler exponent kst; spring −0,0 6𝑘 + ,9 𝑘 −

1
,
100
25
kst=19
kst=24 50
stress; safety factors

kst=30 40
= 20
10 000
30
= , , , 15
20
geometry; surface roughness; shot peening = ,

Bei Spiralfedern wird für die Methode
,
Wickelverhältnis w
mit den Spannungsintegralen die Verwendung von FE-Rechnungen angeraten (siehe RL-Entwurf)
, 10
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
10
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Wickelverhältnis w
10 11 12 13 14
Festigkeitszuwachs durch Kugelstrahlen

Die Einteilung niedrig, mittel und hoch ist vom Anwender festzulegen. Festigkeitszuwachs ohne* niedrig mittel hoch
* gilt bei Verwendung des
Der Festigkeitszuwachs wird durch das Kugelstrahlverfahren und die Bauteilgeometrie beeinflusst.
Bei dünnen Drähten d < 2 mm ist aufgrund der geringen Strahlintensität σES [MPa] 0 120 190 260 Prinzips der
Mittelspannungs-
τWK
tES [MPa]
aBK cyclic degree of utilization for the σWK mit geringerem Festigkeitszuwachs zu rechnen, als bei Drähten mit d ≥ mm. 0 80 130 180 tWK
spring fatigue limit for
verschiebung
= , (1.4.3) Amplitude der Bauteil-Dauerfestigkeit 𝜏 = ,𝜏 𝜏 (1.4.3) Amplitude der Bauteil-Dauerfestigkeit

= −3
𝑅 , 𝜏 , Werkstoff ölschlussvergütet patentiert gezogen korrosionsbeständig, 1.4310
completely reversed shear stress assessment of the fatigue strength σAK

Zur Bestimmung von KAK siehe Richtlinienentwurf. aM
bM
0,204
-0,1
0,231
-0,1
0,216
-0,1 tAK
= , 𝑓𝑁 (1.4.17) Amplitude der Bauteil-Betriebsfestigkeit 𝜏 = ,𝜏 𝜏 (1.4.17) Amplitude der Bauteil-Betriebsfestigkeit
σ
, k (lg) , k (lg)
= für <ND (1.4.19) = für <ND (1.4.19)
The
0 MPaanalytical strength assessment, for which parameters were determined
km=
1
k , k ,
1
, ,
= für ND< <ND,II (1.4.20) = für ND< <ND,II (1.4.20)
= , für >ND,II (1.4.21) σ = ,𝜏 für >ND,II (1.4.21) =
mean stress , ,
σ 1
ND,σ ND,II,σ kσ kII,σ fII,σ f σ σ ,
ND, ND,II, k kII, fII, ,
1
ölschlussvergütet 105 109 8 50 0,832 1,047 ölschlussvergütet 106 109 10 25 0,758
based on thousands of fatigue tests, allows the development of meaningful

6 9
patentiert gezogen 105 109 10 50 0,832 1,047 , = , , = 9 patentiert gezogen 106 109 6 25 0,758 = , = , , =
σBK korrosionsbeständig 1.4310 105 109 4 50 0,832 1,047

= 6 N (lg) korrosionsbeständig 1.4310 106 109 6 15 0,631 N (lg) tBK
Nach Bestimmung der Amplitude der Bauteil-Betriebsfestigkeit ist in jedem Fall das in dem Richtlinienentwurf vorgestellte Sicherheitskonzept anzuwenden. Die Autoren erklären hiermit den Ausschluss jeder Haftung für Schäden, die aus der Anwendung dieses Ablaufplans entstehen können. Irrtürmer vorbehalten
fatigue strength lines within a relatively short time!

τAK spring fatigue limit
km>
Slide 14
0 MPa M. Sc. Martin Petrich
aspired number of cycles; slope exponents
of the Wöhler line Precision Engineering
4. Calculation of fatigue strength lines for compression springs Rm tensile strength
Consideration of the test results in the calculations heat treatment; fatigue strength factor for
completely reversed normal stress;
ductility; working temperature
Wöhlerdiagramm DF263 Optimierung τka,Versuch / τka,Rechnung σW,zd material fatigue limit for
700 completely reversed axial stress
800
n1/n2
700 fatigue strength factor
600 600
τW,s material fatigue limit for completely
500 Calculation parameters reversed shear stress
500
τka, Versuch inMPa

FKM_50%
400 MaxLikelihood
statistical Kt-Kf ratio; Wöhler exponent kst; spring
geometry; surface roughness; shot peening
τka in MPa
350 0/8
400
τWK spring fatigue limit for
300 0/8
completely reversed shear stress
0/8
250 8/8 300 τkm= 0 MPa
mean stress
200 8/8
200
τAK spring fatigue limit
Daten nach FKM
150 Daten nO τkm> 0 MPa
100 aspired number of cycles; slope exponents
Kugelgestrahlte nO of the Wöhler line
IGF19693 alle nO
ND NGrenz IGF19693 ks nO
0 τkH spring fatigue limit for aspired
100 number of cycles
1,0E+04 1,0E+05 1,0E+06 1,0E+07 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 N = N
τka, Rechnung in MPa i
stress; safety factors

Schwingspielzahl N 01.11.2020
aBK cyclic degree of utilization for the

assessment of the fatigue strength

Regression of fatigue strength lines Goodman-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern
Werkstoff: VDSiCr | Ölschlussvergütet
1200
 Analytical calculations provide a permissible
amplitude for a chosen mean stress
#1
1000 #2
 Different working points can be calculated (x) #3
#4
 Equations for fatigue lines can be determined #5

800
(𝑓 𝑥 = 𝑚 𝑥 𝑛)
τkO in N/mm²
 Upper boundary is represented by the static load
600 N = 1·10^7
capacity (dashed line, described on next slide)
Pü = 50%
400
 Based on numerous experiments, diagrams can #1 | d = 1 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
be generated synthetically! #2 | d = 2 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa

#3 | d = 3 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
200
#4 | d = 5 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
#5 | d = 7 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
τkU in N/mm² 01.03.2018

Guide lines for static load capacity
DIN EN 13906-1 does not provide any information about the horizontal
lines in the Goodman diagrams, representing a static load capacity. Goodman-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern
Werkstoff: VDSiCr | Ölschlussvergütet
1200
We suggest a new approach to fill the gap, which considers

the yield point and residual stresses from presetting: 1000 #2
#1
#3
𝜏permissible,st tic = 𝜏tF 𝜏residu l stress,presetting #5
#4
𝑥 m 800
𝜏permissible,st tic = , 𝑅m
3
τkO in N/mm²
𝑥
𝜏permissible,st tic = , 𝑅m = 𝑦 𝑅m 600 N = 1·10^7
3
Pü = 50%
400
𝒙
Material 𝒙=𝒙 𝒚= 𝟎, 𝟎𝟔 #1 | d = 1 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
𝟑 #2 | d = 2 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
#3 | d = 3 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
Oil hardened 0,85 0,55 200
#4 | d = 5 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
Patent drawn 0,78 0,51 #5 | d = 7 mm; w = 6; n_f = 4,8; τ_ES = 0 MPa
1.4310 0,60 0,41 0

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
1.4568 0,66 0,44 τkU in N/mm² 01.03.2018

Safety concept
 Previously described calculations have a survival probability of Pü = 50%

 Simplifies the efforts for mathematical analysis as well as the interpretation of test results
 This probability value can not be used practically, since many springs would be overloaded as a consequence
 Data gained via tests have an unavoidable scatter
Because the diagrams in DIN EN 13906-1 do not contain any information on safety, this means a meaningful step forward
in spring design, while also requiring the need for training in the application of the subsequently presented methods.
 safety factor 𝒋𝒈𝒆𝒔 = 𝒋𝑪𝒏 𝒋𝑺
 jCn depends on the trust level of the database C(x) to handle the scatter
 jS enables the survival probability Pü to be increased to a practical value
Example values:
𝑪(𝒙) 𝒋𝐂𝐧 𝑷ü = 𝟗𝟗, 𝟗% 𝒋𝐒 Users can easily take their own
production scatter into account!
90% 1,10 Shot peened Oil hardened Patent drawn 1.4310
95% 1,15 No 1,31 1,37 1,5 Users can consider the statistical
99% 1,23 Yes 1,25 1,25 1,31 demands for a given application!

Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

Torsional stress τ
Chart type standards Stress amplitude τka Stress range τkh
Maximum stress τko
→ L2 / F2
Goodman Haigh
Mean stress τkm
Minimum stress τku

𝜏 a → L1 / F1
Time t
4. area of elastic-plastic 5.
critical
area
material behavior 𝜏 a
(overstress)
1. working area
𝑅=
of the spring
3.
< area not relevant,
due to
6. critical area
3. (overstress)
1. 4.
area not relevant,
due to 𝜏 ≥ 𝜏 working area
equivalent
2. of the spring 6. area of elastic-
meaning + easy plastic material
conversion behavior
𝜏 ,
2. 𝜏 m
5.

Determination of standard parameters for the new fatigue diagrams
 Characteristic lines for cold-formed, pre set, cylindrical compression spring at N = 106 and 107 load cycles
 Tensile strength 𝑅m , basically included in every calculation, is specifically determined as mean value of the tensile strength
in DIN EN 10270
 Spring geometry contains 𝑤 = and 𝑛 = , (𝑛f = , )
 Wire diameters according to DIN EN 13906-1 from 𝑑 = – mm
 Surface roughness assumed as mean value of high and low roughness
 A high increase in fatigue strength is assumed for shot peened springs (𝛥𝜏𝐸 = )
 Safety concept: Trust level of database set to = % and survival probability set to ü = , %
 Level of the static load capacity is illustrated as a dashed line for orientation purposes
 6 Materials * not shot peened/shot peened * N = 106 / 107 = 24 new fatigue diagrams for standard applications!

Goodman diagram for compression springs Parameters of the characteristic lines
Structure Wire and shot peening DH | patent drawn wire | shot peened
information d w n R m,W K R,τ ∆τ ES
of the new 1.200 #1 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
diagrams Goodman diagram
1
#2
#1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.344 0,92 180
1.000 2 #3
#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,92 180
3
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.935 0,92 180
New fatigue strength #4
5
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.746 0,92 180
τkO in N/mm²
800 #5
lines 8 #6
10 #5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.571 0,92 180
600 #6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.486 0,92 180
Guide lines for static
load capacity 400 Safety concept Static load guidelines
Confidence level τ permissible,static =
Fatigue strength lines 200 C = 95% 0,51 R m
from DIN EN 13906-1 Partial safety factor [MPa]
N = 10^6
0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.196
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
Parameters for the new τkU in N/mm² Diagram 8 Failure probability P A #2 1.063
fatigue strength lines Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 987
DH | patent drawn wire | shot peened
500 Safety factor #4 890
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^6
j S = 1,25 #5 801
Load cycles N
Overall safety factor #6 758
400
j ges = 1,43
Information on safety
#1
#2
#3
1 Equations for characteristic lines
aspects #4 2
straight line equation f(x) = m x + n
τkA in N/mm²
300 #5 3
#6
5
8
Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram
Values of the static load 10
m n m n
capacity 200
- [MPa] - [MPa]
#1 0,645 758,1 -0,216 460,8
Haigh diagram 100
#2 0,686 739,7 -0,186 438,8
#3 0,710 712,8 -0,17 416,8
Slide 22 Equations
M. Sc. Martin Petrich / parameters #4 0,742 653,9 -0,148 375,4
27.04.2021 Machine Elements Group / Research Group Wire and
0 Springs Institute#5 0,772 and
603,0 -0,128 340,2
for calculating values 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
Precision
for Design
Engineering
τkm in N/mm² Diagram 8 #6 0,788 579,5 -0,119 324,2
Oil hardened material
Goodman diagram for compression springs Parameters of the characteristic lines Goodman diagram for compression springs Parameters of the characteristic lines
FDSiCr | oil hardened wire | not shot peened VDSiCr | oil hardened wire | shot peened
d w n R m,W K R,τ ∆τ ES d w n R m,W K R,τ ∆τ ES
1.200 #1 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa] 1.200 #1
[mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
#2 #2
#3 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.200 0,89 0 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.155 0,92 180
#3
#4
1.000 #5
#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.090 0,89 0 1.000
#4 #2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,92 180
#6 #5
#6
1
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 2.015 0,89 0 #3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.960 0,92 180
1
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.905 0,89 0 #4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.860 0,92 180
τkO in N/mm²
τkO in N/mm²
800 2 800
3 2
5 #5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.785 0,89 0 3 #5 7,0 6,0 6,5 1.760 0,92 180
5
8
10 7
600 #6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.735 0,89 0 600 #6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.720 0,92 180
400 Safety concept Static load guidelines 400 Safety concept Static load guidelines
Confidence level τ permissible,static = Confidence level τ permissible,static =
200 C = 95% 0,55 R m 200 C = 95% 0,55 R m
Partial safety factor [MPa] Partial safety factor [MPa]
N = 10^7 N = 10^7
0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.210 0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.185
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
τkU in N/mm² Diagram 13 Failure probability P A #2 1.150 τkU in N/mm² Diagram 16 Failure probability P A #2 1.147
Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 1.108 Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 1.078
FDSiCr | oil hardened wire | not shot peened VDSiCr | oil hardened wire | shot peened
500 Safety factor #4 1.048 500 Safety factor #4 1.023
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^7 R = -1 R=0 N = 10^7
j S = 1,31 #5 982 j S = 1,25 #5 968
Overall safety factor #6 954 Overall safety factor #6 946
400 400 #1
j ges = 1,51 #2
#3 j ges = 1,43
#4
Equations for characteristic lines #5 Equations for characteristic lines
#6
straight line equation f(x) = m x + n straight line equation f(x) = m x + n
τkA in N/mm²
τkA in N/mm²
1
300 300 2
3
#1 Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram 5
7 Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram
#2
#3
#4 m n m n m n m n
#5
200 #6 200
1
- [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa]
2
3
5 #1 0,906 537,6 -0,049 282,0 #1 0,737 812,2 -0,151 467,5
10
8
#2 0,912 515,9 -0,046 269,9 #2 0,747 784,4 -0,145 449,1
100 100
#3 0,916 504,2 -0,044 263,2 #3 0,764 762,5 -0,134 432,2
#4 0,922 467,2 -0,041 243,2 #4 0,779 718,9 -0,124 404,2
0 #5 0,928 427,7 -0,037 221,8 0 #5 0,793 684,1 -0,115 381,5
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
τkm in N/mm² Diagram 13 #6 0,931 410,9 -0,036 212,8 τkm in N/mm² Diagram 16 #6 0,799 662,5 -0,112 368,3

Patent drawn material
DH | patent drawn wire | not shot peened DH | patent drawn wire | shot peened
1.200 #1 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa] 1.200 #1 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
1 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.344 0,89 0 1 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.344 0,92 180
#2 #2
1.000 2 #3
#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,89 0 1.000 2 #3
#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,92 180
3
#4
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.935 0,89 0 3
#4
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.935 0,92 180
5
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.746 0,89 0 5
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.746 0,92 180
τkO in N/mm²
τkO in N/mm²
800 #5 800 #5
8 #6 8 #6
10 #5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.571 0,89 0 10 #5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.571 0,92 180
600 #6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.486 0,89 0 600 #6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.486 0,92 180
200 C = 95% 0,51 R m 200 C = 95% 0,51 R m
N = 10^7 N = 10^6
0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.196 0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.196
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
τkU in N/mm² Diagram 19 Failure probability P A #2 1.063 τkU in N/mm² Diagram 8 Failure probability P A #2 1.063
Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 987 Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 987
DH | patent drawn wire | not shot peened DH | patent drawn wire | shot peened
500 Safety factor #4 890 500 Safety factor #4 890
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^7 R = -1 R=0 N = 10^6
j S = 1,37 #5 801 j S = 1,25 #5 801
400 400
j ges = 1,58 #1
j ges = 1,43
#2
#3
Equations for characteristic lines 1 Equations for characteristic lines
#4 2
τkA in N/mm²
τkA in N/mm²
300 300 #5 3
#6
5
Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram 8
Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram
1 10
2 m n m n m n m n
#1 3
200 #2 200
#3 5
- [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa]
#4 8
10
#5 #1 0,888 426,0 -0,06 225,7 #1 0,645 758,1 -0,216 460,8
#6
#2 0,902 410,1 -0,051 215,6 #2 0,686 739,7 -0,186 438,8

100 100
#3 0,911 388,1 -0,047 203,1 #3 0,710 712,8 -0,17 416,8
#4 0,921 340,5 -0,041 177,2 #4 0,742 653,9 -0,148 375,4
0 #5 0,932 298,9 -0,035 154,7 0 #5 0,772 603,0 -0,128 340,2
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200

1.4310 | 1.4568
1.4310 | stainless steel wire | not shot peened 1.4568 | stainless steel wire | not shot peened
1.200 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa] 1.200 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
#1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.195 0,89 0 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.285 0,89 0
1
1.000 1 #2 2,0 6,0 6,5 1.980 0,89 0 1.000 #1 #2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.070 0,89 0
2
2 #1 #3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.870 0,89 0 #2 #3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.965 0,89 0
3 #3
#4 4,0 6,0 6,5 1.765 0,89 0 #4 4,0 6,0 6,5 1.855 0,89 0
τkO in N/mm²
τkO in N/mm²
#2 #4
800 3 800
#3 #5
4 4
#6
6
#5
#4
#5 6,0 6,0 6,5 1.655 0,89 0 6 #5 6,0 6,0 6,5 1.750 0,89 0
600
#6
#6 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.525 0,89 0 600 #6 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.670 0,89 0
200 C = 95% 0,41 R m 200 C = 95% 0,44 R m
N = 10^7 N = 10^7
0 j C = 1,15 #1 900 0 j C = 1,15 #1 1.005
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
τkU in N/mm² Diagram 21 Failure probability P A #2 812 τkU in N/mm² Diagram 23 Failure probability P A #2 911
Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 767 Haigh diagram for compression springs P A = 0,10% #3 865
1.4310 | stainless steel wire | not shot peened 1.4568 | stainless steel wire | not shot peened
500 Safety factor #4 724 500 Safety factor #4 816
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^7 R = -1 R=0 N = 10^7
j S = 1,50 #5 679 j S = 1,50 #5 770
400 400
j ges = 1,73 j ges = 1,73
Equations for characteristic lines Equations for characteristic lines
τkA in N/mm²
τkA in N/mm²
300 300
Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram Goodman-diagram Haigh-diagram
1
1
2
m n m n 2 m n m n
200 200 3
3 - [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa] - [MPa]
6
4
#1 6
4 #1
#2 #1 0,917 332,0 -0,043 173,2 #2
#3
#1 0,913 329,1 -0,046 172,0
#3 #4
#4
#5 #2 0,927 307,2 -0,038 159,4 #5
#6 #2 0,923 307,5 -0,04 159,9
100 #6 100
#3 0,932 278,4 -0,035 144,1 #3 0,927 289,7 -0,038 150,3
#4 0,937 255,9 -0,033 132,1 #4 0,933 266,5 -0,035 137,9
0 #5 0,942 230,2 -0,03 118,5 0 #5 0,938 241,0 -0,032 124,4
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200

Goodman-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern Kennlinienparameter
Validation 1.4310 | Korrosionsbeständig | kugelgestrahlt
d w n R m,W K R,τ ∆τ ES
1.200 0,85|448
[mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
0,85|448
0,85|448
0,85|448
0,85|448
0,6|10 #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.195 0,92 180
Wöhlerdiagramm PA_DS1
0,85|6 0,85|6
0,85|348
1.000 0,85|448 0,85|448
#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 1.980 0,92 180
600 Schraubendruckfedern PA_DS1 0,9|448
0,85|100
0,75|10
0,75|10 0,55|10 #3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.870 0,92 180

FKM_Safe
Enden angelegt und geschliffen 1,7|12
1,7|12
1,7|24
3,2|12
#1
1,8|12
500 #4 4,0 6,0 6,5 1.765 0,92 180
τkO in N/mm²
Draht : 1.4310 800 0,9|10
0,95|12 0,55|12
#2
0,9|10
2,6|12 #3
450 Federherstellung 0,7|48 0,9|10

#5 6,0 6,0 6,5 1.655 0,92 180
0/22 0,85|10 2|12
#4
#5
Wärmebeh. 1 : 400°C | 30min
400 6/22 600
0,75|10 #6
#6 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.525 0,92 180
Kugelstrahlen : Ja 1,05|12
11/22
0,75|10
0,9|10 0,75|8
350 17/22
Wärmebeh. 2 : 240°C | 30min 0,9|10
Setzen : v o rg e s e t z t 400 Hinweislinien für statische Auslastung

300 21/22
τka in MPa
Federdaten
τ zul,statisch
22/22 d [mm] = 0,60
0,85|10
250 L 0 [mm] = 17,80 200 [MPa]

22/22
n = 11,30 #1 900
22/22 w = 7,40 N = 10^6
200 R [N/mm]= 1,40
0
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
#2 812
Schwingversuch τkU in N/mm² Schaubild 10 #3 767
τ km [MPa]= 465 Haigh-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern #4 724
150 f [Hz]= -
500
1.4310 | Korrosionsbeständig | kugelgestrahlt
#5 679
Legende R = -1 R=0 N = 10^6
n 1 Anzahl Durchläufer #6 625
n1/n2 n 2 Anzahl geprüfter Federn
ND NGrenz Bruch 400
Gleichungen für Dauerfestigkeitskennlinien
100 Kein Bruch
1,0E+04 1,0E+05 1,0E+06 1,0E+07 Endwindungsbruch #1
0,7|48
Geradengleichung f(x) = m x + n
#2
Doppelbruch
τkA in N/mm²
Goodman-Diagramm Haigh-Diagramm
Schwingspielzahl N 16.12.2020
300 #3
#4
0,85|448
#5
0,75|10
m n m n
Dokumentation der Auswertung #6
0,95|12
0,85|6
0,85|448
0,85|12
0,85|6
0,85|448
0,85|100 0,85|4480,85|448 - [MPa] - [MPa]
FKM Zugfestigkeit R m,W [MPa] = 2.209 n f = 9,30 Rauheitsfaktor KR,τ = 0,94 200
0,9|10 0,85|348 0,85|448
0,9|448
0,9|10
0,9|10 0,55|10
#1 0,704 678,4 -0,174 398,2
C = 95,0% PA = 0,100% Kugelstrahl-Offset Δτ ES [MPa] = 180
0,9|10
0,9|10
0,85|10
1,7|12 #2 0,736 644,3 -0,152 371,2
jCn = 1,15 jS = 1,31 Gesamtsicherheit jges = 1,51 0,85|10
1,7|24
1,7|12
0,75|10
0,75|8 0,75|10 3,2|12 #3 0,752 604,1 -0,141 344,7

Kennlinien τD ND k 1τ k 2τ τ N=10^6 τ N=10^7 TS 100 0,75|10
2|12
0,55|12
1,8|12 #4 0,769 573,2 -0,131 324,1

1 FKM_Safe 321,2 1.000.000 6,0 15,0 321,2 263,1 - 2,6|12
1,05|12 0,6|10 #5 0,786 537,9 -0,12 301,2

0 #6 0,807 507,0 -0,107 280,5
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
Slide 26 M. Sc. Martin Petrich τkm in N/mm² Schaubild 10
Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

Method overview
The new fatigue diagrams are valid for specific standard springs, as shown before.
Furthermore, there is a need in fatigue assessment to consider different geometries, production influences and operating
conditions to increase the accuracy in spring design.
The developed method contains 3 essential steps:

6
1. Determine the fatigue value from diagram at 𝑁 = for the next possible spring
2. Determine the transfer factors and thus calculate the new permissible stress at N = 106
3. Calculate the stress / load cycles for required load cycles Ni / stress τi based on the ascertained fatigue value
𝜏kH
𝜏 H = GF F ZF 𝑗ges S MS (using Goodman diagrams)
𝜏 = GF F ZF 𝜏 1 𝑗ges S MS (using Haigh diagrams)

Transfer equations and transfer factors
𝜏kH
𝜏 H = GF F ZF 𝑗ges S MS (using Goodman diagrams)
𝜏 = GF F ZF 𝜏 1 𝑗ges S MS (using Haigh diagrams)

jges safety factor
Geometry factor GF =
n statistical Kt - Kf ratio
Rτ,
Surface factor F = KR surface roughness factor
Rτ,
m,
Tensile strength factor ZF = Tensile strength (for 𝑅m
m, Rm
a set 𝑅m = a)
Shot peening factor S = ES, , ES,1 ,1
τ, τ,
ES Existing residual stress
MS =𝜏 m,1 𝜏 m, (not shot peened)
3 3
Mean stress factor tkm Existing mean stress
MS =𝜏 m,1 ,1 𝜏 m, , (shot peened)
Mt Mean stress sensitivity
1
𝑘
KR Small (Rz < 6µm) High (Rz > 6µm) 𝑟𝑒
𝑛= 𝑤 ℎ 𝑟𝑒 = 𝑚𝑚
𝑝𝑟𝑖 𝑔
Not shot peened 0,92 0,85
−3
𝑅m,W
Shot peened 0,94 0,90 𝜏 = , = , M M
a

Application example 1 DH | Patentiert gezogen | nicht kugelgestrahlt
1.200 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
6 #1
1. Determine the fatigue value from diagram at 𝑁 = for #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.344 0,89 0
#2
the next possible spring 1.000 #3

#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,89 0
#4
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.935 0,89 0
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.746 0,89 0
τkO in N/mm²
800 FederNeu #5
Wire material DH Diameter d 6 mm #6
#5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.571 0,89 0
#6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.486 0,89 0
Rm 1750 MPa Spring index w 12 600
Heat treatment 230°C Number of coils nges 9,5 400 Sicherheitskonzept Statische Auslastung
Vertrauensniveau τ zul,statisch =
Ductility medium Roughness Rz small 200 C = 95% 0,51 R m
Teilsicherheit [MPa]
Shot peening no Load cycles Ni searched 0
N = 10^6
j C = 1,15 #1 1.196
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
Working point 1 tkU 250 MPa Working point 2tkO 810 MPa τkU in N/mm² Schaubild 7 Ausfallwahrsch. #2 1.063
Haigh-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern P A = 0,10% #3 987
DH | Patentiert gezogen | nicht kugelgestrahlt
Safety C = 95%, PA = 1% 500 Teilsicherheit #4 890
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^6
j S = 1,37 #5 801
Gesamtsicherheitsfaktor #6 758
400
Select diagram for non-shot peened springs made of DH j ges = 1,58
for N = 106 and draw in the operating points.
τkA in N/mm²
300 Geradengleichung f(x) = m x + n
FederNeu
#1
#2 m n m n
#3
200
#4 - [MPa] - [MPa]
#5
#6 #1 0,877 464,6 -0,065 247,5
#2 0,893 447,6 -0,056 236,4
100
#3 0,902 423,7 -0,051 222,7
#4 0,914 372,0 -0,045 194,3

0 #5 0,925 326,6 -0,039 169,7
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
27.04.2021 Machine Elements Group / Research Group Wire and Springs τkm and
Institute for Design in N/mm² Schaubild 7 #6 0,931 305,5 -0,036 158,2
Application example 1 DH | Patentiert gezogen | nicht kugelgestrahlt
1.200 [mm] - - [MPa] - [MPa]
6 #1
1. Determine the fatigue value from diagram at 𝑁 = for #1 1,0 6,0 6,5 2.344 0,89 0
#2
the next possible spring 1.000 #3

#2 2,0 6,0 6,5 2.085 0,89 0
#4
#3 3,0 6,0 6,5 1.935 0,89 0
#4 5,0 6,0 6,5 1.746 0,89 0
τkO in N/mm²
800 FederNeu #5
Wire material DH Diameter d 6 mm #6
Referenzfeder #5 8,0 6,0 6,5 1.571 0,89 0
#6 10,0 6,0 6,5 1.486 0,89 0
Rm 1750 MPa Spring index w 12 600
Heat treatment 230°C Number of coils nges 9,5 400 Sicherheitskonzept Statische Auslastung
Vertrauensniveau τ zul,statisch =
Ductility medium Roughness Rz small 200 C = 95% 0,51 R m
Teilsicherheit [MPa]
Shot peening no Load cycles Ni searched 0
N = 10^6
j C = 1,15 #1 1.196
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
Working point 1 tkU 250 MPa Working point 2tkO 810 MPa τkU in N/mm² Schaubild 7 Ausfallwahrsch. #2 1.063
Haigh-Diagramm Schraubendruckfedern P A = 0,10% #3 987
DH | Patentiert gezogen | nicht kugelgestrahlt
Safety C = 95%, PA = 1% 500 Teilsicherheit #4 890
R = -1 R=0 N = 10^6
j S = 1,37 #5 801
Gesamtsicherheitsfaktor #6 758
400
Select diagram for non-shot peened springs made of DH j ges = 1,58
for N = 106 and draw in the operating points.
τkA in N/mm²
300 Geradengleichung f(x) = m x + n
FederNeu
#1
#2 m n m n
#3
Read fatigue strength using the characteristic 200
#4
Referenzfeder
- [MPa] - [MPa]
#5
#1 0,877 464,6 -0,065 247,5
curve of nearby wire diameter with same #6
#2 0,893 447,6 -0,056 236,4

mean stress in Haigh diagram 100
#3 0,902 423,7 -0,051 222,7
#4 0,914 372,0 -0,045 194,3

0 #5 0,925 326,6 -0,039 169,7
0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200
27.04.2021 Machine Elements Group / Research Group Wire and Springs τkm and
Institute for Design in N/mm² Schaubild 7 #6 0,931 305,5 -0,036 158,2
Application example 1
6
Reference spring (diagram 7) FederNeu (New spring)

value calculated value calculated
Tensile strength Rm 1750 MPa Rm,1= 1746 MPa 1750 MPa Rm,2= 1778 MPa
Heat treatment temperature 250°C 230°C
Wire diameter d 5 mm n1 = 0,948 6 mm n2 = 0,855
Spring index w 6 12
Number of coils nges 6,5 9,5
Surface roughness Rz medium KRτ,1= 0,885 small (<6µm) KRτ,2= 0,92
Load cycles Ni 106 searched
Working point 1 t kU 359 MPa τkH1 = 342 MPa 250 MPa τkH2,vorh = 560 MPa
(range permitted) (range required)
Working point 2 t kO 701 MPa 810 MPa

6
𝑛 , =𝜏 𝜏
𝐺 = = = , MS m,1 ,1 m, ,
𝑛1 , = a , a ,
𝜏, ,
𝑂 = = = , = , a , a= , a
𝜏,1 ,
𝑅 ,
𝑍 = = = ,
𝑅 ,1
𝜏kH
𝜏 H , =106 = GF F ZF 𝟏, 𝟓𝟖 MS
3 MP
= , , , 𝟏, 𝟓𝟖 , a = , a

6
3. Calculate the stress / load cycles for required load cycles Ni / stress τi based on the ascertained fatigue value
𝑗ges,erf = 𝑗 n 𝑥 = % 𝑗S ü = % = , , = , SA
𝜏 H , =106 , a kI
𝜏 ,zul = = = , a SBK
𝑗ges,erf ,
SBK/jD kII
𝑘 τ 6 6
𝑁 𝜏i Sa
= =
𝑁i 𝜏 ,zul 𝑁i ,
𝜏i = 𝜏 H ,vorh = a N ND=106 N
6
C(x) C(x)jCn jCn Pü Pü jS
𝑁i = 6 =
, 90% 90%
1,10 1,10 90 % 90 %1,12 1
, 95% 95%
1,15 1,15 99 % 99 %1,23 1
Strength verification is valid up to 72.845 load cycles for given working points 99% 99%
1,23 1,23 99,9 % 99,9 1,31
% 1

Aim: Higher safety factors for Reference spring from fatigue diagram
SA
Existing safety:
𝑪(𝒙) 𝒋𝐂𝐧 𝑷ü = 𝟗𝟗, 𝟗% 𝒋𝐒 kI
SBK
90% 1,10 Shot peened Oil hardened Patent drawn 1.4310 SBK/jD kII
95% 1,15 No 1,31 1,37 1,5
Sa
99% 1,23 Yes 1,25 1,25 1,31
𝑗ges,ex = 𝑗 n 𝑥 = % 𝑗S ü = , % = , , = ,
N ND=106 N
Required safety:
𝑪(𝒙) 𝒋𝐂𝐧 𝑷ü = 𝟗𝟗, 𝟗𝟗𝟗𝟗% 𝒋𝐒
90% 1,10 Shot peened Oil hardened Patent drawn 1.4310
95% 1,15 No 1,51 1,63 1,87 𝜏 H , =106
𝜏 ,zul = 𝑗𝑔𝑒 ,𝑒𝑥
99% 1,23 Yes 1,40 1,40 1,51 𝑗ges,𝑟𝑒𝑞
a
𝑗ges,req = 𝑗 n 𝑥 = % 𝑗S ü = , % = , , = , = , = a
,

Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

7. Conclusion
Advantages and usage
 Bundled knowledge of analytical strength assessment for springs with consideration of all important spring-specific influences
 24 new fatigue strength diagrams for standard springs were developed - same usage as conventional Goodman diagrams!
 Included: safety concept and method for transferring strength to springs with differing properties
What are the next steps?
 VDFI guide line
 Feedback / usage experiences
 Validation process
 Replacement of the diagrams

in DIN EN 13906-1 (standard update)
 EU wide support is required!

Structure
3. Project overview
7. Conclusion

The IGF Project (IGF 19693 BR) of the FSV is supported via AiF within the
programme for promoting the Industrial Collective Research (IGF) of the German
Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi), based on a resolution of the
German Parliament.
The research was thankfully supported by the Forschungsgesellschaft
Stahlverformung e.V. (FSV) and Verband der Deutschen Federnindustrie e.V. (VDFI)
as well as the numerous members of the project committee.
What’s next?
 Promotion and validation of the new fatigue diagrams
 Research project dealing with fatigue assessment of tension springs
 Ilmenauer Federntag (Ilmenau Spring Conference) on 07.10.2021
https://wwwalt.tu-ilmenau.de/stz-federntechnik/ilmenauer-federntag-2021/
 Workshop Cold-formed Springs expected in Sept. 2022 (TU Ilmenau)

Thank you for your kind attention!
Speaker: M. Sc. Martin Petrich Martin.Petrich@tu-ilmenau.de
Phone: (+49) 3677 / 69 - 1865
Head of Research Center: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ulf Kletzin Ulf.Kletzin@tu-ilmenau.de
Phone: (+49) 3677 / 69 - 2471
Machine Elements Group @ TU Ilmenau www.tu-ilmenau.de/maschinenelemente
Copyright: TU Ilmenau


Fatigue Strength Diagrams EU Presentation

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Fatigue Strength Diagrams EU Presentation

Originaltitel:

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Presentation of Research Project

Replacement approach of the fatigue strength diagrams for cold-formed helical

Slide 1 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

2. Research motivation und aims

4. Calculation of fatigue strength lines for compression springs

5. Development and validation of the new fatigue strength diagrams

6. Method of transferring fatigue strength for different compression springs

8. Acknowledgements and Outlook

Slide 2 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

Slide 3 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

 Decades of research on wire and

spring technology ND NGrenz

 Head of Research Center since 2007:

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ulf Kletzin

associations like VDFI, ESV, FKM, FSV, … Mittelspannungsfaktor

 Additional university-related service Gesamtsicherheitsfaktor j ges

company „STZ Federntechnik“

Slide 4 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

video is not included in the PDF Slides

Slide 5 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

2. Research motivation und aims

4. Calculation of fatigue strength lines for compression springs

5. Development and validation of the new fatigue strength diagrams

6. Method of transferring fatigue strength for different compression springs

8. Acknowledgements and Outlook

Slide 6 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

Slide 7 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

 Existing stress  Permissible stress ?

Mean stress τkm

Minimum stress τku

Slide 8 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

• Equations and fatigue strength diagrams in

 Fatigue strength can be read off directly:

𝜏𝑘𝐻,𝐷𝐼𝑁 𝐸𝑁 13906−1 = 𝑓(wire marial, 𝑁, 𝑑, shot peening, 𝜏𝑘𝑈 )

Slide 9 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

Spring-specific influences on fatigue strength cannot be taken into account!

Priority Influence Effect on permissible stress τkH

1 Residual stresses from production –

𝜏𝑘𝐻,𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙 = 𝑓(wire marial, 𝑁, 𝑑, shot peening, 𝜏𝑘𝑈 ) and additional

Slide 10 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

YOUR Industrial benefit:

Slide 11 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

Slide 12 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

2. Research motivation und aims

4. Calculation of fatigue strength lines for compression springs

5. Development and validation of the new fatigue strength diagrams

6. Method of transferring fatigue strength for different compression springs

8. Acknowledgements and Outlook

Slide 13 M. Sc. Martin Petrich

Complex, but very

spring fatigue limit for = , −

completely reversed shear stress = , −

heat treatment; fatigue strength factor for τkm= 0 MPa W,zd

fw,t = 0,577 aus Gestaltänderungshypothese

completely reversed normal stress; mean stress Feder

σW,zd material fatigue limit for

Biegebeanspruchung (bspw. Schenkelfeder SF, Flachspiralfeder SPF)

spring fatigue limit

completely reversed axial stress Querschnitt

fatigue strength factor 1. Oberfläche mit mindestens 90% der Maximalspannung

of the Wöhler line =

Schenkelfedern 70 mit = 𝑤 150