Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Crack Initiation
Fatigue always begins at a crack
Crack may start at a microscopic
inclusion (<.010 in.)
Crack may start at a "notch", or
other stress concentration
Crack Propagation
Sharp crack creates a stress
concentration
Each tensile stress cycle causes
the crack to grow
(~10-8 to 10-4 in/cycle)
Fracture
Sudden, catastrophic failure with
no warning.
3
Initiation or onset
microcracks
Development of
micro-cracks in macro-cracks
5
6
7
Fatigue Failure
Thus far we’ve studied STATIC FAILURE of machine elements.
The second major class of component failure is due to DYNAMIC
LOADING
Repeated stresses
Alternating stresses
Fluctuating stresses
8
Methods
and the
and
, ;
9
• Three approaches used in design and analysis
of fatigue
or or
10
1. Stress-Life Method
based on stress levels only
It is the least accurate approach, especially for low-cycle
applications.
Most traditional method:
easiest to implement for a wide range of design
applications
ample supporting data
represents high-cycle applications adequately
11
2. Strain-Life Method
Involves more detailed analysis of the plastic deformation at
localized regions where the stresses and strains are considered
for life estimates.
Good for low-cycle fatigue applications.
Some uncertainties exist in the results.
13
There are essentially two types of fatigue:
1. High Cycle Fatigue (HCF) (Elastic Strain)
Semi-Log Scale
2. Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) (Plastic Strain)
Eventually these
materials will fail due
to repeated loading.
To come up with an
equivalent endurance
limit, designers
typically use the
value of the fatigue
strength Sf at 108
cycles
15
16
Note that non-ferrous materials often exhibit
no endurance limit.
17
18
A quick method of estimating endurance limits is needed:
for preliminary and prototype design
for some failure analysis
Figure Graph of endurance limits versus tensile strengths from actual test
results for a large number of wrought irons and steels. 19
For steels, the relationship between the tensile strength and the
endurance limit is given by
S e 0.3Sut
The endurance limit for various materials are given by 20
Region of low cycle fatigue:
The fatigue strength S f is only slightly smaller than the tensile Sut
strength.
21
, Sut 3.41H B MPa
22
In the region of high cycle fatigue, the equation relating the fatigue
strength S f to the number of cycles to failure N may be given by the
empirical curve fit equation: (only for reversing stress, m = 0)
Low-cycle fatigue is often defined (see Fig. 6-10) as failure that occurs in
a range of cycles.
25
Figure 6-10
26
27
F
log
S e 1 f Sut
b when N e 106 or b log
log 2 N e 3 Se
a
fSut 2
S e 28
S f aN b
1
a b
N S f a completely reversed stress
a
S f ( N ) Sut N log f / 3
29
• Estimate the fatigue strength of
rotating beam specimen made of
AISI 1020 HR steel corresponding to
a life of 12.5 kilocycles of stress
reversal. Also estimate the life of the
specimen corresponding to a stress
amplitude of 252 MPa. The known
properties are Sut = 463 MPa,o=805
MPa, m = 0.22 and f = 0.90
30
F o 8050.90 786.6 MPa
m 0.22
a
fSut
2
0.8954 463
2
829 MPa
S e 231.5
31
S f aN b 82912500
0.08426
374.6 MPa
1 1
a b 252 0.08426
N 1372770 cylces
a 829
• How many cycles before failure at fatigue
strength at 500 MPa?
1 1
Sf b
500 0.08426
N ? ??? cylces
a 829
32
• The rotating-beam specimen used in the laboratory to
determine endurance limits is prepared very carefully
and tested under closely controlled conditions. It is
unrealistic to expect the endurance limit of a
mechanical or structural member to match the values
obtained in the laboratory. Some differences include
composition, basis of failure, variability
method, heat treatment, fretting
corrosion, surface condition, stress concentration
: corrosion, temperature, stress state,
relaxation times
size, shape, life, stress state, stress
concentration, speed, fretting, galling
33
Marin identified factors that quantified the effects of surface condition,
size, loading, temperature, and miscellaneous items.
is therefore written as:
34
Endurance Limit using Marin’s factor
When , estimations
are made by applying Marin factors to the endurance limit. 35
where Sut is the minimum tensile strength and a and b are to be found
in Table 6-2.
36
d / 7.62 0.107
1.24 d 0.107
2.79 d 51 mm
kb
0.157
1.51d 51 d 254 mm
• For , kb = 1
• What happened about the in
is cross
section is used?
Then employs an (de)
Effective dimension for round bar, d e 0.370d
For rectangular section of dimension h × b
de 0.808 h b 37
Use de for round and rectangular cross-sections 38
1 bending
kc 0.85 axial
0.59
torsion
39
k d 0.9877 0.6507(10 3 )Tc 0.3414(10 5 )Tc2 0.5621(10 8 )Tc3 6.246(10 12 )Tc4
where, 37 Tc 540o C
If the
then use
40
41
Table 6-4:Effect of operating temperature on the tensile strength of steel.
If Reliability is not mentioned
Otherwise Use Table 6-5
42
(e.g. rolling, drawing)
43
In Chapter 5, it was pointed out that: The existence of irregularities or
discontinuities, such as , or , in a part increases the
theoretical stresses significantly in the immediate vicinity of discontinuity.
44
In fatigue: Stress concentration should always be taken into account.
45
Some materials are not fully sensitive to notches and a reduced value
of Kt is used and the maximum stress is calculated as follows:
or
46
Notch sensitivity (q) index is defined by
0 q 1
To find q use Fig. 6-20 for steel and Al alloys , for reversed bending or
reversed axial load.
For reversed torsion use Fig. 6-21.
For cast iron use q 0.20 to be conservative.
For q 0 , then K f 1and the material has no sensitivity at notch at
all.
For q 1 , then K f Kt and the material has full notch sensitivity.
47
Figure 6-20: Notch sensitivity curves.
48
A solid round bar, 25 mm in diameter, has a
groove 2.5-mm deep with a 2.5-mm radius
machined into it. The bar is made of AISI 1018
CD steel and is subjected to a purely reversing
torque of 200 N·m. For the S-N curve of this
material, let f = 0.9.
• (a) Estimate the number of cycles to failure.
• (b) If the bar is also placed in an environment
with a temperature of 450◦C, estimate the
number of cycles to failure.
49
For an AISI 1018CD machined steel, the strength are
Sut 440 MPa; S y 370 MPa
440
Sut 3.41H B H B 129
3.41
S su 0.67440 295 MPa
Find: Kfs
r 2.5 D 25
0.125; 1.25; K ts 1.4 [From A13 - 15]
d 20 d 20
50
For Purely reversing Torque of 200 N.m
K ts 16T 1.376 16200
max 175.2 MPa a
d 3
0.023
0.107 0.107
d 20
kb 0.902
7.62 7.62
For Torsional loading : kc 0.59
Endurance limit is not given : k d 1
Re liability Factor assume, ke 1
kf 1 51
The Marine Equation :
Se k a kb kc k d ke k f Se
Se 0.8990.9020.59111220 105.3 MPa
f 0.9
a
fSsu
2
0.9 295
2
669.4
Se 105.3
1 fSsu 1 0.9 295
b log log 0.13388
3 Se 3 105.3
1 1
a b 175.2 b
f a aN b N 22300 Cycles
a 669.4
52
(b) For an operating temperature of 450oC, the
temperature modification factor from Table 6.4 is
kd 0.843
Se 0.8990.9020.590.84311220 88.7 MPa
a
fSsu
2
0.9 295
2
794.7
Se 88.7
1 fSsu 1 0.9 295
b log log 0.15871
3 Se 3 88.7
1 1
a b 175.2 0.15871
f a aN N
b
13700 Cycles
a 794.7 53
• A solid square rod is cantilevered at one end. The rod is
0.8 m long and supports a completely reversing
transverse load at the other end of ±1 kN. The material
is AISI 1045 hot-rolled steel. If the rod must support this
load for 104 cycles with a factor of safety of 1.5, what
dimension should the square cross section have?
Neglect any stress concentrations at the support end
and assume that f = 0.9.
54
For AISI 1045 HR steel, The strength are
Sut 570 MPa; S y 310 MPa
S e 0.5Sut 0.5570 285 MPa
a
fSst
2
0.9 570
2
1715.6
Se 153.4
1 fSst 1 0.9 570
b log log 0.17476
3 Se 3 153.4
S f aN 1715.6 10
b
4 0.17476
343.1 MPa
Sf Sf
6M 343.1
n a 3
a n b 1.5
6800 343.1
3
b 0.0276 m 27.6 mm
b 1.5
57
Now Check Marine Factors are
For non - circular bar, d e 0.808b
0.107 0.107
d 0.808 27.6
kb e 0.891
7.62 7.62
The Marine Equation :
S e k a kb kc k d ke k f S e
S e 0.6060.8911111220 153.9 MPa
a
fSst
2
0.9 570
2
1710
Se 153.9
1 fSst 1 0.9 570
b log
log 0.17429
3 Se 3 153.9
S f aN b 1710 10 4 0.17429
343.4 MPa
58
Sf Sf
6M 343.4
n a 3
a n b 1.5
6800 343.4
3
b 0.0276 m 27.6 mm
b 1.5
Thus, Final dimension of the rod is 28 mm [From A - 15]
59
60
Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses
(R>0 )
Mean (Midrange
Stress)
(R =0)
Stress Amplitude
(Alternating Stress)
Stress Ratio
Stress Amplitude
(R =-1)
Any varying stress with a nonzero mean
is considered a fluctuating stress.
Possible ways of quantifying the problem:
All stresses (both mean and alternating) are multiplied by the fatigue
stress concentration factor Kf , and correction is made for yielding and
resultant residual stresses if the calculated peak stress exceeds the
material yield strength.
Figure 6-26
Master fatigue
diagram for
AISI 4340 steel
with Sut = 158
Sy = 147 kpsi.
The stress
component at A
are
σmin = 20,
σ max = 120,
σ m = 70,
σ o = 50
all in kpsi
Fluctuating Stresses
Mean Stress Effect (R -1)
2. Representing mean
stress effect using
modified
Goodman
Diagram
S is for strength
The early viewpoint expressed on a diagram was that there existed a locus (sa,
sm) diagram was that there existed a locus which divided safe from unsafe
combinations of (sa, sm) .
Ensuing proposals included:
1. The parabola of Gerber (1874),
2. The Goodman (1890) (straight) line,
3. The Soderberg (1930) (straight) line.
As more data were generated it became clear that a fatigue criterion,
rather than being a “fence”, was more like a zone or band wherein the
probability of failure could be estimated. We include the failure criterion
of Goodman because
It is a straight line and the algebra is linear and easy.
It is easily graphed, every time for every problem.
It reveals subtleties of insight into fatigue problems.
Answers can be scaled from the diagrams as a check on the
algebra.
Either the fatigue limit Se or the finite-life strength Sf is plotted on the
a m 1
Sa S m
1 Se Su n
Se Su n = OA/OB
Sa
r
B
Sm
FAILURE CRITERIA (mean stress)
Sa S m a m 1
1
Se S y n
Se S y
n = OC/OB
F
D E
For finite life fatigue B C
strength Sf = a
replaces Se
FAILURE CRITERIA (mean stress)
n = OF/OB
F Factor of Safety
D E 2
B n a n m
1
C
Se Su
For finite life σa replaces Se
FAILURE CRITERIA (mean stress)
2
Sa Sm
2
4- The ASME Elliptic
1
Se S y
Failure Occurs When:
Factor of Safety
2 2
n a n m
1
Se Sy
F
D E
B C
n = OE/OB
FAILURE CRITERIA (mean stress)
1
Se S y
Factor of Safety
2
n a n m
2
1
F
D E
B C Se S y
n = OE/OB
For finite life sa replaces Se
FAILURE CRITERIA
Sa Sm
Failure Occurs When
1
S yt S yt
Factor of Safety
a m 1
S yt S yt n F
D E
B C
n = OD/OB
CH-07 LEC 26 Slide
84
The stresses nσa and nσm can replace Sa and Sm, where n is the design
factor or factor of safety. Then, Eqs. (6-45) to (6-48) become:
We will emphasize the Gerber and ASME-elliptic for fatigue failure
criterion and the Langer for first-cycle yielding. However, conservative
designers often use the modified Goodman criterion. The design
equation for the Langer first -cycle-yielding is
Static
Langer
Criterion
Intersection of
the Static and
Fatigue Criteria
TABLE (7-9)
Langer
Intersection
of Gerber and
Langer
TABLE (7-10)
Langer
Intersection of
ASME Elliptic
and Langer
TABLE (7-11)
• Case 1: m fixed
Sa
n
a
• Case 2: a fixed
Sm
n
m
• Case 3: a / m fixed
Sa Sm
n
a m
1 a m
n Se Sut
Fatigue Strength and Life
A- Completely Reversed Loading (R=-1) Ferrous Metals
min
Stress Ratio R
max
( fSut ) 2
a
Strength Se
1 fSut
b log
3 S e
1
a b
Fatigue life Nf
a
Fatigue Life with Mean Stress Effect
a
S fr
m
From Modified Goodman with Sfr =Se
1
Sut
Fatigue Failure for Brittle Materials
S a 1 Sm Sut
Se 1 Sm Sut
Or a design equation
n a 1 n m Sut
Se 1 n m Sut
For a radial load line of slope r, we substitute Sa/r for Sm and
solve for Sa
r Sut Se 4 r Sut Se
Sa 1 1
r Sut Se
2
2
The fatigue diagram for a brittle material differs markedly
from that of a ductile material
Since the great majority of parts will have surfaces less than
perfect, Gerber, ASME-elliptic, are used
Ssu 0.67Sut
Combining Loading Modes
Multiple stresses on a stress element into a single equivalent von Mises stress.
The same approach will be used here.
1) The first step is to generate two stress elements, one for the alternating
stresses and one for the midrange stresses.
2) Apply the appropriate fatigue stress concentration factors to each of the
stresses; apply K
f bending for the bending stresses, K fs for the
torsion
torsional stresses, and K f axial
for the axial stresses.
3. Next, calculate an equivalent von Mises stress for each of these two stress
elements,
4. Finally, select a fatigue failure criterion (modified Goodman, Gerber, ASME-
elliptic, or Soderberg) to complete the fatigue analysis.
Combining Loading Modes
Combining Loading Modes
Combining Loading Modes
Case of Combined Axial, Bending and Torsion Loading
(kc? Kf?).
Assuming that all stress components are in time phase with each
other.
1. For the strength, use the fully corrected endurance limit for
bending, Se.
2. Apply the appropriate fatigue concentration factors to all stress
components.
3. Multiply any alternating axial stress components by 1/kc,ax
4. Find the principal stresses.
5. Find the von Miss alternating stress, ’a and mean stress ’m.
6. Use any of the theories above to compute the safety factor.
Combining Loading Modes
107
For AISI 1045 HR steel, The strength are
Sut 440 MPa; S y 310 MPa
S e 0.5Sut 0.5440 220 MPa
a 2 m S e
2 2
1S
n f ut 1 1
2 m e
S ut a
S
110
168 370
Se S y
• In the figure shown, shaft A, made ofAISI 1010 hot-rolled steel, is
welded to a fixed support and is subjected to loading by equal and
opposite forces F via shaft B. A theoretical stress concentration Kts
of 1.6 is induced by the 3-mm fillet. The length of shaft A from the
fixed support to the connection at shaft B is 1 m. The load F cycles
from 0.5 to 2 kN.
• (a) For shaft A, find the factor of safety for infinite life using the
modified Goodman fatigue failure criterion.
• (b) Repeat part (a) using the Gerber fatigue failure criterion.
111
For AISI 1010 HR steel, The strength are
Sut 320 MPa; S y 180 MPa
S su 0.67 Sut 0.67320 214.4 MPa
S sy 0.5S y 0.5180 103.9 MPa
S e 0.5Sut 0.5320 160 MPa
1 214.4
2
38.22
2
2 63.68 86.8
nf 1 1
2 63.68 86.8 214.4 38.22
n f 1.70
115