Lecture Slides

Chapter 6

Fatigue Failure Resulting

from Variable Loading

© 2015 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or distribution in any manner. This document may not be
copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.

Chapter Outline
 Introduction to Fatigue in Metals

 Loading produces stresses that are variable, repeated, alternating,

or fluctuating
 Maximum stresses well below yield strength
 Failure occurs after many stress cycles
 Failure is by sudden ultimate fracture
 No visible warning in advance of failure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhUclxBUV_E (12 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH9k9fWaFrs (2.27 min – Boeing)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKJtS27DMtY (7.20 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BV9ViUzOHM (5.45 min)

Stages of Fatigue Failure

 Stage I – Initiation of micro-

crack due to cyclic plastic
initiation
deformation
 Stage II – Progresses to
macro-crack that repeatedly
propagation
opens and closes, creating
bands called beach marks
 Stage III – Crack has
propagated far enough that
remaining material is fracture

insufficient to carry the load,

and fails by simple ultimate
failure
From ASM Handbook,
Vol. 12: Fractography, 2nd
printing, 1992, ASM International,

Fig. 6–1 Materials Park, OH

44073-0002, fig 50, p. 120.
Reprinted by permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org.)
Schematics of Fatigue Fracture Surfaces

From ASM Metals

Handbook, Vol. 11: Failure
Analysis and Prevention, 1986,
Fig. 6–2 ASM International, Materials
Park, OH 44073-0002, fig 18,
p. 111. Reprinted by permission
of ASM International®,

Schematics of Fatigue Fracture Surfaces

From ASM Metals

Handbook, Vol. 11: Failure
Fig. 6–2 Analysis and Prevention, 1986,
ASM International, Materials
Park, OH 44073-0002, fig 18,
p. 111. Reprinted by permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org.
 Fatigue Fracture Examples

 AISI 4320 drive

shaft
 B– crack initiation at
stress concentration
in keyway
 C– Final brittle
failure

From ASM Handbook,

Vol. 12: Fractography,
2nd printing, 1992, ASM
International, Materials
Park, OH 44073-0002, fig 51,
Fig. 6–3 p. 120. Reprinted by permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org.

Fatigue Fracture Examples

 Fatigue failure
initiating at
mismatched grease
holes
 Sharp corners (at
arrows) provided
stress concentrations

From ASM Handbook,

Vol. 12: Fractography,
2nd printing, 1992, ASM
International, Materials
Park,

Fig. 6–4 OH 44073-0002, fig 520,

p. 331. Reprinted by
permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org
 Fatigue Fracture Examples

 Fatigue failure of
forged connecting rod
 Crack initiated at flash
line of the forging at the
left edge of picture
 Beach marks show
crack propagation
halfway around the hole
before ultimate fracture
Fig. 6–5 From ASM Handbook,
Vol. 12: Fractography,
2nd printing, 1992, ASM
International, Materials Park,
OH 44073-0002, fig 523,
p. 332. Reprinted by permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org.)

Fatigue Fracture Examples

 Fatigue failure of a
200-mm diameter
piston rod of an alloy
steel steam hammer
 Loaded axially
 Crack initiated at a
forging flake internal to
the part
 Internal crack grew
outward symmetrically
(From ASM Handbook, Vol.
12: Fractography, 2nd
printing, 1992, ASM

Fig. 6–6 International, Materials

Park, OH 44073-0002, fig
570, p. 342. Reprinted
by permission of ASM
International®,
www.asminternational.org.)
 Fatigue Fracture Examples
 Double-flange trailer wheel
From ASM Metals Handbook, Vol.

 Cracks initiated at stamp marks 11: Failure Analysis and Prevention,

1986, ASM International, Materials
Park, OH
44073-0002, fig 51, p. 130.
Reprinted by permission of ASM
International®,
www.asminternational.org.

Fig. 6–7

Fatigue Fracture Examples

 Aluminum allow landing-gear torque-arm assembly redesign to
eliminate fatigue fracture at lubrication hole

Fig. 6–8
From ASM Metals
Handbook, Vol. 11: Failure
Analysis and Prevention,
1986,
ASM International, Materials
Park, OH 44073-0002, fig 23,
p. 114. Reprinted by
permission
of ASM International®,
www.asminternational.org
 Fatigue-Life Methods

 Three major fatigue life models

 Methods predict life in number of cycles to failure, N, for a
specific level of loading
 Stress-life method
◦ Least accurate, particularly for low cycle applications
◦ Most traditional, easiest to implement
 Strain-life method
◦ Detailed analysis of plastic deformation at localized regions
◦ Several idealizations are compounded, leading to uncertainties
in results
 Linear-elastic fracture mechanics method
◦ Assumes crack exists
◦ Predicts crack growth with respect to stress intensity

Stress-Life Method
 Test specimens are subjected to repeated stress while counting cycles to failure
 Most common test machine is R. R. Moore high-speed rotating-beam machine
 Subjects specimen to pure bending with no transverse shear
 As specimen rotates, stress fluctuates between equal magnitudes of tension and
compression, known as completely reversed stress cycling
 Specimen is carefully machined and polished

Fig. 6–9
 S-N Diagram
 Number of cycles to failure at varying stress levels is plotted on log-log scale
 For steels, a knee occurs near 106 cycles
 Strength corresponding to the knee is called endurance limit Se

Fig. 6–10

Video 1
Video 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-6V_JoRX1g (8.22 min)

S-N Diagram for Steel

 Stress levels below Se predict infinite life
 Between 103 and 106 cycles, finite life is predicted
 Below 103 cycles is known as low cycle, and is often considered
quasi-static. Yielding usually occurs before fatigue in this zone.

Fig. 6–10
 S-N Diagram for Nonferrous Metals
 Nonferrous metals often do not have an endurance limit.
 Fatigue strength Sf is reported at a specific number of cycles
 Figure 6–11 shows typical S-N diagram for aluminums

Fig. 6–11

Strain-Life Method

 Method uses detailed analysis of plastic deformation at localized

regions
 Compounding of several idealizations leads to significant
uncertainties in numerical results
 Useful for explaining nature of fatigue
 Strain-Life Method

 Fatigue failure almost

always begins at a local
discontinuity
 When stress at
discontinuity exceeds
elastic limit, plastic
strain occurs
 Cyclic plastic strain can
change elastic limit,
leading to fatigue
 Fig. 6–12 shows true
stress-true strain
hysteresis loops of the
first five stress reversals
Fig. 6–12

Relation of Fatigue Life to Strain

Figure 6–13 plots relationship of fatigue life to true-strain amplitude

 Fatigue ductility coefficient 'F is true strain corresponding to fracture in one reversal
(point A in Fig. 6–12)
 Fatigue strength coefficient 'F is true stress corresponding to fracture in one reversal
(point A in Fig. 6–12)
 Fatigue ductility exponent c is the slope of plastic-strain line, and is the power to which
the life 2N must be raised to be proportional to the true plastic-strain amplitude. Note that
2N stress reversals corresponds to N cycles.
 Fatigue strength exponent b is the slope of the elastic-strain line, and is the power to
which the life 2N must be raised to be proportional to the true-stress amplitude.

Fig. 6–13 Fig. 6–12

 Relation of Fatigue Life to Strain

 Total strain is sum of elastic and plastic strain

 Total strain amplitude is half the total strain range

 The equation of the plastic-strain line in Fig. 6–13

 The equation of the elastic strain line in Fig. 6–13

 Applying Eq. (a), the total-strain amplitude is

Relation of Fatigue Life to Strain

 Known as Manson-Coffin relationship between fatigue life and

total strain
 Some values of coefficients and exponents given in Table A–23
 Equation has limited use for design since values for total strain at
discontinuities are not readily available
 Linear-Elastic Fracture Mechanics Method

◦ Assumes Stage I fatigue (crack initiation) has occurred

◦ Predicts crack growth in Stage II with respect to stress
intensity
◦ Stage III ultimate fracture occurs when the stress intensity
factor KI reaches some critical level KIc

Crack Growth

 Stress intensity factor is given by

 For a stress range , the stress intensity range per cycle is

 Testing specimens at various levels of  provide plots of crack

length vs. stress cycles

Fig. 6–14
 Crack Growth

 Log-log plot of rate

of crack growth,
da/dN, shows all
three stages of
growth
 Stage II data are
linear on log-log
scale
 Similar curves can
be generated by
changing the stress
ratio R = min/ max
Fig. 6–15

Crack Growth

 Crack growth in Region II is approximated by the Paris equation

crack length

number of cycles
material constants

 C and m are empirical material constants. Conservative

representative values are shown in Table 6–1.
 Crack Growth

 Substituting Eq. (6–4) into Eq. (6–5) and integrating,

 ai is the initial crack length

 af is the final crack length corresponding to failure
 Nf is the estimated number of cycles to produce a failure after the
initial crack is formed

Example 6–1

Fig. 6–16
Example 6–1 (continued)

Example 6–1 (continued)

Fig. 5–27
 Example 6–1 (continued)

The Endurance Limit

 The endurance limit for steels has been experimentally found to be

related to the ultimate strength

Fig. 6–17
 The Endurance Limit

 Simplified estimate of endurance limit for steels for the rotating-

beam specimen, S'e

Fig. 6–17

Fatigue Strength
 For design, an approximation of the idealized S-N diagram is desirable.
 To estimate the fatigue strength at 103 cycles, start with Eq. (6–2)

 Define the specimen fatigue strength at a specific number of cycles as

 Combine with Eq. (6–2),

 At 103 cycles,
 f is the fraction of Sut represented by ( S f )103
 Solving for f,

 The SAE approximation for steels with HB ≤ 500 may be used.

 To find b, substitute the endurance strength and corresponding cycles into Eq. (6–9) and
solve for b

 Eqs. (6–11) and (6–12) can be substituted into Eqs. (6–9) and (6–10) to obtain expressions
for S'f and f
 Fatigue Strength Fraction f

 Plot Eq. (6–10) for the fatigue strength fraction f of Sut at 103
cycles
 Use f from plot for S'f = f Sut at 103 cycles on S-N diagram
 Assumes Se = S'e= 0.5Sut at 106 cycles

Fig. 6–18

Equations for S-N Diagram

 Write equation for S-N line

from 103 to 106 cycles
 Two known points
 At N =103 cycles,
Sf = f Sut
 At N =106 cycles,
Sf = Se Fig. 6–10
 Equations for line:
 Equations for S-N Diagram
 If a completely reversed stress rev is given, setting Sf = rev in
Eq. (6–13) and solving for N gives,

 Note that the typical S-N diagram is only applicable for completely reversed
stresses
 For other stress situations, a completely reversed stress with the same life
expectancy must be used on the S-N diagram

Low-cycle Fatigue
 Low-cycle fatigue is defined for fatigue failures in the range
1 ≤ N ≤ 103
 On the idealized S-N diagram on a log-log scale, failure is predicted by a
straight line between two points (103, f Sut) and (1, Sut)

Example 6–2
 NOTES

Endurance Limit Modifying Factors

 Endurance limit S'e is for carefully prepared and tested specimen
 If warranted, Se is obtained from testing of actual parts
 When testing of actual parts is not practical, a set of Marin
factors are used to adjust the endurance limit
 Surface Factor ka
 Stresses tend to be high at the surface
 Surface finish has an impact on initiation of cracks at localized
stress concentrations
 Surface factor is a function of ultimate strength. Higher strengths
are more sensitive to rough surfaces.

Example 6–3
 Size Factor kb
 Larger parts have greater surface area at high stress levels
 Likelihood of crack initiation is higher
 Size factor is obtained from experimental data with wide scatter
 For bending and torsion loads, the trend of the size factor data is
given by

 Applies only for round, rotating diameter

 For axial load, there is no size effect, so kb = 1

Size Factor kb
 For parts that are not round and rotating, an equivalent round
rotating diameter is obtained.
 Equate the volume of material stressed at and above 95% of the
maximum stress to the same volume in the rotating-beam
specimen.
 Lengths cancel, so equate the areas.
 For a rotating round section, the 95% stress area is the area of a
ring,

 Equate 95% stress area for other conditions to Eq. (6–22) and
solve for d as the equivalent round rotating diameter
 Size Factor kb
 For non-rotating round,

 Equating to Eq. (6-22) and solving for equivalent diameter,

 Similarly, for rectangular section h x b, A95 = 0.05 hb. Equating

to Eq. (6–22),

 Other common cross sections are given in Table 6–3

Size Factor kb
Table 6–3

A95 for common

non-rotating
structural shapes
 Example 6–4

Loading Factor kc

 Accounts for changes in endurance limit for different types of fatigue

loading.
 Only to be used for single load types. Use Combination Loading
method (Sec. 6–14) when more than one load type is present.
 Temperature Factor kd

 Endurance limit appears to maintain same relation to ultimate

strength for elevated temperatures as at room temperature
 This relation is summarized in Table 6–4

Temperature Factor kd

 If ultimate strength is known for operating temperature, then just

use that strength. Let kd = 1 and proceed as usual.
 If ultimate strength is known only at room temperature, then use
Table 6–4 to estimate ultimate strength at operating temperature.
With that strength, let kd = 1 and proceed as usual.
 Alternatively, use ultimate strength at room temperature and
apply temperature factor from Table 6–4 to the endurance limit.

 A fourth-order polynomial curve fit of the underlying data of

Table 6–4 can be used in place of the table, if desired.
 Example 6–5

Example 6–5 (continued)

 Reliability Factor ke

 From Fig. 6–17, S'e = 0.5 Sut is typical of the data and represents
50% reliability.
 Reliability factor adjusts to other reliabilities.
 Only adjusts Fig. 6–17 assumption. Does not imply overall
reliability.

Fig. 6–17

Reliability Factor ke

 Simply obtain ke for desired reliability from Table 6–5.

Table 6–5
 Miscellaneous-Effects Factor kf

 Reminder to consider other possible factors.

◦ Residual stresses
◦ Directional characteristics from cold working
◦ Case hardening
◦ Corrosion
◦ Surface conditioning, e.g. electrolytic plating and metal
spraying
◦ Cyclic Frequency
◦ Frettage Corrosion
 Limited data is available.
 May require research or testing.

Stress Concentration and Notch Sensitivity

 For dynamic loading, stress concentration effects must be applied.

 Obtain Kt as usual (e.g. Appendix A–15)
 For fatigue, some materials are not fully sensitive to Kt so a
reduced value can be used.
 Define Kf as the fatigue stress-concentration factor.
 Define q as notch sensitivity, ranging from 0 (not sensitive) to 1
(fully sensitive).

 For q = 0, Kf = 1
 For q = 1, Kf = Kt
 Notch Sensitivity

 Obtain q for bending or axial loading from Fig. 6–20.

 Then get Kf from Eq. (6–32): Kf = 1 + q( Kt – 1)

Fig. 6–20

Notch Sensitivity

 Obtain qs for torsional loading from Fig. 6–21.

 Then get Kfs from Eq. (6–32): Kfs = 1 + qs( Kts – 1)

Fig. 6–21
 Notch Sensitivity

 Alternatively, can use curve fit equations for Figs. 6–20 and 6–21
to get notch sensitivity, or go directly to Kf .

For steels, with Sut in kpsi

Bending or axial:

Torsion:

Notch Sensitivity for Cast Irons

 Cast irons are already full of discontinuities, which are included

in the strengths.
 Additional notches do not add much additional harm.
 Recommended to use q = 0.2 for cast irons.
 Example 6–6

Application of Fatigue Stress Concentration Factor

 Use Kf as a multiplier to increase the nominal stress.

 Some designers (and previous editions of textbook) sometimes
applied 1/ Kf as a Marin factor to reduce Se .
 For infinite life, either method is equivalent, since

nf 
Se

1/ K f  Se
K f 
 For finite life, increasing stress is more conservative. Decreasing
Se applies more to high cycle than low cycle.
Example 6–7

Example 6–8
Example 6–8 (continued)

Example 6–8 (continued)

 Example 6–9

Fig. 6–22

Example 6–9 (continued)

Fig. 6–22
Example 6–9 (continued)

Example 6–9 (continued)

 Example 6–9 (continued)

Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses

 The S-N diagram is applicable for completely reversed stresses

 Other fluctuating stresses exist
 Sinusoidal loading patterns are common, but not necessary
 Fluctuating Stresses

General
Fluctuating

Repeated

Completely
Reversed
Fig. 6–23

Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses

 Fluctuating stresses can often

be characterized simply by
the minimum and maximum
stresses, min and max
 Define m as midrange steady
component of stress
(sometimes called mean
stress) and a as amplitude of
alternating component of
stress
 Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses

 Other useful definitions

include stress ratio

and amplitude ratio

Application of Kf for Fluctuating Stresses

 For fluctuating loads at points with stress concentration, the best

approach is to design to avoid all localized plastic strain.
 In this case, Kf should be applied to both alternating and
midrange stress components.
 When localized strain does occur, some methods (e.g. nominal
mean stress method and residual stress method) recommend only
applying Kf to the alternating stress.
 The Dowling method recommends applying Kf to the alternating
stress and Kfm to the mid-range stress, where Kfm is
 Fatigue Failure for Fluctuating Stresses

 Vary the m and a to learn about the fatigue resistance under

fluctuating loading
 Three common methods of plotting results follow.

Modified Goodman Diagram

 Midrange stress is plotted on

abscissa
 All other components of
stress are plotted on the
ordinate

Fig. 6–24
 Plot of Alternating vs Midrange Stress
 Probably most common and simple to use is the plot of a vs m
 Has gradually usurped the name of Goodman or Modified
Goodman diagram
 Modified Goodman line from Se to Sut is one simple representation
of the limiting boundary for infinite life

Plot of Alternating vs Midrange Stress

 Experimental data on normalized plot of a vs m
 Demonstrates little effect of negative midrange stress

Fig. 6–25
 Equations for Commonly Used Failure Criteria
 Intersecting a constant slope load line with each failure criteria
produces design equations
 n is the design factor or factor of safety for infinite fatigue life

Summarizing Tables for Failure Criteria

 Tables 6–6 to 6–8 summarize the pertinent equations for

Modified Goodman, Gerber, ASME-elliptic, and Langer failure
criteria
 The first row gives fatigue criterion
 The second row gives yield criterion
 The third row gives the intersection of static and fatigue criteria
 The fourth row gives the equation for fatigue factor of safety
 The first column gives the intersecting equations
 The second column gives the coordinates of the intersection
Summarizing Table for Modified Goodman

Summarizing Table for Gerber

Summarizing Table for ASME-Elliptic