60 views

Uploaded by VIFerrata

An introduction to stress and failure theory as it relates to machine design.

- A COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED LIFE OF KNEE IMPLANT APPLYING THE MULTIAXIAL FATIGUE CRITERIA
- Ecoursesonline Iasri Res in Mod Page View Php Id 1329
- Case Hardended Test Results
- 43075_EME 2016 Chapter 2 - 1 Static Loading
- Tutorial Trabajando Con Solidos
- CQUL_2 Design for Strength Due to Static Loading
- BTH-1-2008
- 9783319253053-c2
- materials-09-00419
- alloying and their properties
- Metal Fatigue Spreadsheets
- 6. Simple Stresses and Strains (1)
- Technique for Strengthening of Masonry Wall Panels Using Steel Strips
- 1964 Hoek Fracture of Anistropic Rock
- 1967-Pascoe-LOW CYCLE FATIGUE OF STEELS UNDER BIAXIAL STRAINING.pdf
- ds 4
- Anu
- OBJ Datastream.pdf
- omni-dt
- Acdmaclt 2013 Command Reference Guide

You are on page 1of 108

ENGINEERING DESIGN

WORKING STRESSES AND FAILURE

THEORIES

AGENT OF FAILURE

undertaken task in mechanical design

A common misconception is that the failure of parts is only

due to fracture

There are number of modes of failure based on other failure

mechanisms

We should seek to identify failure-inducing agents and

modes of failure

With a knowledge of these; a definition can be obtained for

failure that is applicable to all possible modes of failure

AGENT OF FAILURE

See

chemical environment, Reactive nuclear

environment, Reactive metallurgical

environment

Level of Application: Low, Medium, or High

Time of Application: Steady, Transient or

Cyclic

Example:

Temperature + High + Steady = Creep

Force and temperature are cause agents

High is the level of application

Transient and steady are time of application

Cause agent

Level of

application

Time of

application

Force

Low

Steady

Medium

Transient

High

Cyclic

Temperature

Reactive chemical

environment

Reactive nuclear

environment

Reactive

metallurgical

environment

MODES OF FAILURE

Types of Failure Modes: Elastic, Plastic,

Fracture, Material change

Duration of Failure: Sudden, Progressive

Location of Failure: Local, Surface and Volume

unable to perform its intended function

ELASTIC

REGION &

HOOKES

LAW

APPLIED

MATERIAL

Beyond yielding, the load needs to

be increased for additional strain or

elongation. This is called strain

hardening and and it is associated

with an increased resistance to slip

deformation at the microscale (for

polycrystalline materials)

AND AFTER FRACTURE

Ductile material will

fracture under:

FATIGUE

CREEP

IMPACT

WORK HARDENING

SEVERE QUENCHING

NECKING

occurs before

facture

BRITTLE MATERIAL

No NECKING

before facture

There is no necking in the fracture

of brittle material.

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF

ENGINEERING MATERIALS

FOR DUCTILE

MATERIALS:

The value of

yielding in shear =

0.5 0.6 of the

value of yielding

in tension

YIELDING

Ultimate strength in compression is higher than for

tension

Fracture occurs with no yielding

COMPRESSION TEST

Ductile Steel

BENDING TEST

Ductile Steel

TORSION TEST

Ductile Steel

BRITTLE MATERIALS

Brittle materials do not yield, they fracture

Strength in compression >> strength in tension

Theory of failures used:

Modified Mohr Theory

Material strength:

Suc = Ultimate (fracture) strength in compression

Strengths are always positive numbers

Principal stresses 1, 2 and 3 can be negative or

positive.

FAILURE THEORIES

When state of stress is uniaxial tension or

compression; limiting stress values from the

tension/compression tests (which are widely

published in material handbooks) can be used

But for complex state of stresses, predicting

failure is not straightforward

Several theories of failures have been put

forward to predict failure for complex engineering

stresses

Unfortunately, no single failure theory can

adequately predict failure in all combination of

engineering stresses

FAILURE THEORIES

Failure theories have been formulated in terms of

three principal normal stresses (S1,S2, S3) at a

point

For any given complex state of stress ,

we can always

find its equivalent principal normal stresses (S1,

S2, S3)

Thus the failure theories in terms of principal

normal stresses can predict the failure due to any

given state of stress

FAILURE THEORIES

STATIC

LOADING FAILURE

Max Normal Stress Theory

Max Shear Stress Theory

Max Strain Energy Theory

Max Distortion Energy Theory

Coulomb-Mohr Theory

Modified Mohr-Coulomb Theory

FATIGUE

SODERBERG Equation

Modified GOODMAN Equation

safe under static conditions.

Horizontal axis is the

maximum principal stress

(1) and the vertical axis is

the minimum principal stress

(2).

For ductile materials, the

yield strength (Sy ) in

tension and in compression

are relatively equal in

magnitude.

For brittle materials the

ultimate compressive

strength (Suc ) is signicantly

greater in magnitude than

the ultimate tensile strength

(Sut ) .

system, labeled I, II, III, and IV as

shown, represent the possible

combinations of the principal stresses

(1, 2) .

As it is usually assumed that the

maximum principal stress (1) is

always greater than or at least equal

to the minimum principal stress (2) ,

quadrant where (1) would be

negative and (2) would be

positive, are not possible.

Primarily, the most common combinations are in the rst (I) quadrant

where (1) and ( 2) are both positive and in the fourth (IV) quadrant

where ( 1) is positive and (2) is negative.

Combinations can occur in the third (III) quadrant where (1) is negative,

however (2) must be equally or more negative.

BRITTLE MATERIALS

THEORY OF FAILURE

THEORY (RANKINES THEORY)

Failure is predicted to

occur in the multi-axial

state of stress when the

maximum principal

normal stress becomes

equal to or exceeds the

maximum normal stress

at the time of failure in

a simple uni-axial stress

test using a specimen of

the same material.

SYP C

S

S1 YP T

N FS

N FS

THESE ARE

FOR DUCTILE

MATERIAL

SYP C

S

S 2 YP T

N FS

N FS

SYP C

S

S 3 YP T

N FS

N FS

U C

N FS

U C

N FS

U C

N FS

S1

S2

S3

U T

N FS

U T

N FS

U T

N FS

THEORY (RANKINES THEORY)

MATERIAL

strain relationship

THEORY (RANKINES THEORY)

MATERIAL

stresses (1) and (2) that are

inside the square is a safe design

and any combination outside the

square is unsafe. Remember, the

strengths (Sut ) and (Suc ) are

positive values.

The mathematical expressions

representing a safe design

according to the maximum-normalstress theory are given,

1 < Sut or 2 > Suc

strain relationship

is given,

1

Sut

2

1

1

or

N FS

Suc N FS

OULOMB-MOHR THEORY S

or

RITTLE MATERIAL

ut

2

Suc

2

Sut

1

Suc

stresses (1) and (2) that

are inside this enclosed area is a

safe design and any combination

outside this area is UNSAFE.

The mathematical expressions

representing a safe design

according to the Coulomb-Mohr

theory are given,

1

Sut

2

Suc

1

1

or 2 1

N FS

Sut Suc N FS

x y

1

a b

MODIFIED MOHR-COULOMB

THEORY BRITTLE MATERIAL

The mathematical expressions

representing a safe design

according to the Modified MohrCoulomb theory are given,

1

Sut

1

Sut Suc

or

2

1 specifies the line in IV quadrant

Suc

connecting the points (0, Suc ) and (Sut , Sut )

Sut 1

1 specifies the line in II quadrant

1

connecting the points ( Suc , 0 ) and ( Sut , Sut )

theory is given,

Sut

1

Sut Suc

2

S

1

or 2 1 ut

Sut Suc

Suc N FS

1

1

Suc N FS

Sut

1

Sut Suc

2

1 specifies the line in IV quadrant

Suc

connecting the points (0, Suc ) and (Sut , Sut )

Sut

or

1

Sut Suc

1

Sut

or

2

Suc

2

Sut

1

1 specifies the line in II quadrant

Suc

connecting the points ( Suc , 0 ) and ( Sut , Sut )

1

Suc

COMPARISON TO EXPERIMENTAL

DATA BRITTLE MATERIAL

the rst (I) and fourth (IV)

quadrants; none in the

second (II) and third (III)

quadrants.

This is not unexpected as

combinations in the second

(II) quadrant are impossible if

the principal stress (1) is

noted as the greater of the

two principal stresses.

Also, combinations in the

third (III) quadrant require

that the principal stress (2)

be at least equally or more

negative than the principal

stress (1) .

MATERIAL

First (I): (1 > 0 and 2 > 0)

most accurate. Coulomb-Mohr theory

does not apply. Modied CoulombMohr theory does not apply.

most accurate. Coulomb-Mohr theory

is okay, but conservative. Modied

Coulomb-Mohr theory does not apply.

Sut >2 > Suc)

most accurate. Coulomb-Mohr theory

is okay, but conservative. Maximumnormal-stress theory does not apply.

DUCTILE MATERIALS

THEORY OF FAILURE

system, labeled I, II, III, and IV as

shown, represent the possible

combinations of the principal stresses

(1, 2) .

As it is usually assumed that the

maximum principal stress (1) is

always greater than or at least equal

to the minimum principal stress (2) ,

combinations in the second (II)

quadrant where (1) would be

negative and (2) would be positive,

are not possible.

Primarily, the most common combinations are in the rst (I) quadrant

where (1) and ( 2) are both positive and in the fourth (IV) quadrant

where ( 1) is positive and (2) is negative.

Combinations can occur in the third (III) quadrant where (1) is negative,

however (2) must be equally or more negative.

Applied

Conservative theory

Failure is predicted to occur in the multiaxial state of stress when the maximum

shearing stress magnitude becomes equal

to or exceeds the maximum shearing

stress magnitude at the time of failure in

a simple uni-axial stress test using a

specimen of the same material.

THEORY DUCTILE MATERIALS

given,

1

Sy

2

1

1

or

N FS

S y N FS

principal stresses (1,

2) that falls inside this

square represents a safe

design, and any

combination that falls

outside the square is

unsafe.

The mathematical

expressions representing

a safe design according

to the maximum-normalstress theory are given

by,

1 < Sy or 2 > Sy

UNI-AXIAL TENSION TEST

x

P

and y 0; xy yx 0

A

At Yield Point:

x S yp

max

max

S yp

2 N fs

S yp

2

THEORY 3D MOHRS CIRCLE

TRIAXIAL

STATE OF

STRESS

S yp

S1 S2

2

2 N fs

S yp

S 2 S3

2

2 N fs

S yp

S1 S3

2

2 N fs

S yp

N fs

S yp

N fs

S yp

N fs

S1 S 2

S 2 S3

S1 S3

S yp

N fs

S yp

N fs

S yp

N fs

THEORY 2D MOHRS CIRCLE

BIAXIAL STATE

OF STRESS

S1 S2

S yp

N fs

DUCTILE MATERIALS

The maximum-shearstress theory, given

mathematically,

1 2

2

Sy

1 2 S y

45, one in the fourth (IV)

quadrant and one only

allowed mathematically in

the second (II) quadrant,

represents this theory

graphically.

The factor-of-safety is given

by,

1 2

Sy

1

Nfs

THEORY BETRAMI THEORY

Failure is predicted to occur in the multiaxial

state of stress when the total strain energy per

unit volume becomes equal or exceeds the total

strain energy per unit volume at the time of

failure in a simple uniaxial stress test using

specimen of the same material

UTOTAL Uuniaxial tensile test at yield ---- Failed

Strain Energy:

Hookes Law:

U1 D

At yield point:

U1 D

2

1 S yp

2 E

1

U1 D x x

2

x

E

1 x2

2 E

x S yp

per a unit volume at

failure

U1 D

2

1 S yp

2 E N fs

STRESS

S3

S11

2

U 2 S 2 2

2

U 3 S3 3

2

U1

U 3-D

1

S11 S2 2 S3 3

2

STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONSHIP:

1

S1 S2 S3 & is Poisson's Ratio

E

1

2 S2 S1 S3

E

1

3 S3 S1 S2

E

S1

S2

U TOTAL

1

S12 S2 2 S32 2 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

2E

THEORY

Failing will not occur if: UTOTAL UUNIAXIAL

2

1

1 S yp

2

2

2

S1 S 2 S3 2 S1S 2 S 2 S3 S1S3

2E

2E N fs

S yp 2

N fs

HYDROSTATIC LOADING

Materials that are hydrostatically loaded will

have the stresses uniform in all directions.

Very large amount of strain energy can be stored

in materials without failure if they are

hydrostatically loaded.

Many experiments have shown that materials

can be hydrostatically stressed to levels well

beyond their ultimate strengths in compression

without failure, as this just reduces the volume of

the specimen without changing its shape.

No distortion in the part there is no shear

stress. There is no distortion and no failure.

Thus, it appears that distortion is the cause in

tensile failure as well.

THEORY OR VON MISES HENCKY

THEORY

TOTAL STRAIN

ENERGY OF

LOADED PART

DUE TO HYDROSTATIC

LOADING CHANGE IN

VOLUME

UT = UV + UD

DUE TO DISTORTION

CHANGE IN SHAPE

S3

S3 SV S3

SV

=

S2

S1

Normal Stresses

+

SV

SV

Hydrostatic Stresses

change in volume

S1 SV S1

S 2 SV S 2

Distortion Stresses

change in shape

DISTORTION OF ENERGY

STRAIN ENERGY DUE TO HYDROSTATIC LOADING - UV:

1

S12 S22 S32 - 2 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

2E

S S S3

Replace S1 , S2 , S3 with S1 S2 S3 Sv 1 2

3

1 - 2

S12 S22 S32 2 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

UV

6E

UT

U D U T UV

1

S12 S22 S32 - 2 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

2E

1 - 2

S12 S22 S32 2 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

6E

1

S12 S22 S32 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

UD

3E

TEST AT YIELD POINT

NORMAL STRESS:

P

S1 x

and S2 S3 0

A

At yield point the stress is Syp and if Nfs Safety Factor,

S1

S yp

N fs

UD

1

S12 S22 S32 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

3E

P

UD for Uniaxial state of stress:

U D -UNIAXIAL

1 2

S1

3E

U D -UNIAXIAL

1 S yp

3E N fs

VON MISES HENCKY THEORY

Failure is predicted to occur in the multiaxial

state of stress when the distortion energy per

unit volume becomes equal or exceeds the

distortion energy per unit volume at the time of

failure in a simple uniaxial stress test using

specimen of the same material

UD-TOTAL UD-uniaxial tensile test at yield ---- Failed

OR VON MISES HENCKY THEORY

FAILURE WILL NOT OCCUR IF UD-TOTAL UD-UNIAXIAL

UD

1

S12 S22 S32 S1 S2 S2 S3 S1S3

3E

U D -UNIAXIAL

1 S yp

3E N fs

1

1 S yp

S12 S22 S32 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3

3E

3E N fs

S

S12 S22 S32 S1S2 S2 S3 S1S3 yp

N

fs

Alternately,

S1 S2

S2 S3 S3 S1

2

2

S1 S2

or

S yp

N

fs

2

2

S yp

S2 S3 S3 S1

N

2

fs

S1 S2

VM

S2 S3 S3 S1

2

2

DUCTILE MATERIALS

For a safe design according

to the distortion-energy

theory,

12 22 1 2 S y2

The above expression in

represents the equation of

an ellipse inclined at 45

as shown in the Figure.

This ellipse passes

through the six corners of

the enclosed shape.

FACTOR OF SAFETY:

12 22 1 2

Sy

1

N fs

COMPARISON TO EXPERIMENTAL

DATA DUCTILE MATERIALS

Note that there is no

experimental data in the

second (II) and third (III)

quadrants. This is not

unexpected as combinations

in the second (II) quadrant are

impossible if the maximum

principal stress (1) is greater

than or at least equal to the

minimum principal stress (2) .

Also, combinations in the third

(III) quadrant require that the

principal stress (2) be at least

equally or more negative than

the principal stress (1) .

MATERIALS

First (I): Distortion-energy

theory is the most

accurate. Maximumnormal-stress theory

is okay, but conservative.

Maximum-shear-stress

theory does not apply.

Fourth (IV): Distortionenergy theory is the most

accurate. Maximumshear-stress theory is

okay, but conservative.

Maximum-normal-stress

theory does not apply.

STRESS CONCENTRATION

Stress concentration is caused by the sudden

changes in geometry.

Sudden change in geometry:

Hole

Shoulder fillet

Groove

Notch

TWO STRESS

CONCENTRATION

FACTORS

K or Kt STRESS

CONCENTRATION

FACTOR for STATIC

LOADING

Kf STRESS

CONCENTRATION

FACTOR for CYCLIC

LOADING

STRESS CONCENTRATION

max max

Max Stress at the section of interest

Kt

max

K ts

o

machine element, not on the material used. However, some materials

are more sensitive to stress concentrations, or notches, so the stressconcentration factors will be modied according to their notch

sensitivity.

K OR KT GEOMETRIC STRESS

CONCENTRATION FACTOR

Stress distribution for semi-infinite plate with a hole. Plate in tension:

max 3 0

Nominal tensile stress:

nom

P

P

A (W D)h

max Kt nom

Kt is geometric stress concentration factor

TENSION

d = D 2r

r is the radius of notch

nom

P P

A dh

max Kt nom

Kt is geometric stress concentration factor

STRESS CONCENTRATION

FILLETS ON SHAFTS

FORCE-FLOW ANALOGY

The force-flow analogy

for contoured parts

Analogy

flow around the

contours is similar to

the flow of

incompressible fluid

inside a step duct.

STRESS CONCENTRAIONS AT A SHARP

CORNER

FOR CYCLIC LOADING - KF

therefore it is necessary to define fatigue

concentration factor Kf:

Kf

Endurance limit of a notched specimen

fillet, an abrupt change in cross section, or any

disruption to the smooth contours of a part) is

usually less predicted. The term notch sensitivity q

has been applied to this behavior.

NOTCH SENSITIVITY Q

Due

to existence of irregularities or

discontinuities (holes, grooves or notches)

in part, high stress will occur in the

immediate vicinity of the discontinuity.

Some materials are not fully sensitive to

the presence of notches, for these a

reduced value of Kt can be used.

max K f o

K f is fatigue stress-concentration factor

NOTCH SENSITIVITY q

Notch

degree to which the theoretical effect of stress

concentration is actually reached.

q

K f 1

0 q 1

K 1

K f 1 q K 1

K or K t is geometric stress concentration factor

safe side.

qshear

K fs 1

Ks 1

CYCLIC LOADING KF AND NOTCH

SENSITIVITY Q

Kf

from Kt because of lessened sensitivity to

notches.

K f 1 q K t 1

If q 0

Kf 1

If q 1

K f Kt

sensitivity is not known, use

a value of 1 to be safe.

sensitivity to notches.

Cast Iron is insensitive to

notches Kf 1

sensitivity to notches

SENSITIVITY q

Materials have different sensitivity to stress concentrations, which

is referred to as the notch sensitivity of material.

varying from 0 to

about 0.2 (very low)

REVERSED BENDING OR REVERSED AXIAL

LOADS

IN REVERSED TORSION

STATIC FAILURE:

They usually developed a very large deflection,

because the stress has exceeded the yield

strength.

Thus static failures give visible warning in

advance

The part is replaced before fracture occurs

FATIGUE FAILURE:

It is sudden and total, and hence dangerous!

Many machine parts are subjected to a loading cycles in which the

stress is not steady but continuously varying. Failures in machine

parts are generally caused by such repeated loadings and at stress

that are considerably below the yield point. This is called fatigue

failure and it resembles the failure of brittle material.

FATIGUE-FAILURE MODELS

FATIGUE REGIMES

part is expected to undergo in its lifetime, we can

classify two regimes:

LCF LOW CYCLE FATIGUE

HCF HIGH CYCLE FATIGUE

STRESS-LIFE APPROACH

The oldest and easiest of the three models to use.

Most often used for High-Cycle Fatigue (HCF) where

part is expected to undergo more than about 103

cycles of stress.

Work best when the load amplitudes are predictable

and consistent over the life of the part.

It is a stress-based model, which determines a fatigue

strength and/or an endurance limit for material so

that the cyclic stresses can be kept below that level

and failure avoided for the required number of cycles

STRESS-LIFE APPROACH

Part is designed based on the materials fatigue

strength or endurance limit and factor of safety.

Assume that stresses and strains everywhere remain

in elastic zone.

No local yielding occurs to initiate a crack.

Least accurate in defining stress/strain states in the

part, especially for LCF finite-life where N is less

than 103 cycles and stress is high enough to cause a

local yielding.

For certain materials, stress-life approach allow the

design of parts for infinite life under cyclic loading.

STRAIN-LIFE APPROACH

Strain-based

accurate picture of crack initiation

stage.

Good for designing part under fatigue

loading and high temperature combined

creep effects can be included.

Most often used for LCF finite-life

problems where the cyclic stresses are

high enough to cause local yielding.

Most complicated of three models to use

and requires a computer solution

LEFM APPROACH

Best model for the crack propagation stage due

to fracture mechanics theory.

Apply to LCF finite-life problem where the cyclic

stresses are known to be high enough to cause

the formation of cracks.

Most useful in predicting the remaining life of

cracked parts in service.

Most often used in conjunction with

nondestructive testing (NDT) in a periodic

service-inspection program, especially in the

aircraft/aerospace industry.

More accurate results when a detectable and

measurable crack already exists.

MACHINE-DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS

STRESS-LIFE

(S-N) approach:

because the required lives are usually in the

HCF range:

Automobile-engine crankshaft the crankshaft and

most other rotating and oscillating components in the

engine will see about 2.5E8 cycles in 100,000 miles

Automated production machinery in industry such as

filling soft-drink cans etc.

MACHINE-DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS

because the required lives are usually in the LCF

range:

land vehicle.

For aircraft/ship -> time-load history can be quite

variable due to storms, gusts/waves, hard

landings/dockings etc.

For land vehicle also time-load history is variable due

to overloads, potholes etc.

The chance of higher-than-design loads causing local

yielding is always present and consequently crack growth

exists.

MACHINE-DESIGN

CONSIDERATIONS

The LEFM or strain-life models (or both) use

simulated and experimental load-time histories for

more accurately predict failure.

Example of the use of -N and LEFM models:

high stresses at high temperatures and go though LCF

thermal cycles at start up and shut down.

DIAGRAM FOR STEEL

The most important thing to observe in an S-N diagram, if the

material being tested is ferrous like steel, is that the straight line at

the lower right of the diagram becomes horizontal somewhere

between (N = 106) cycles and (N = 107) cycles and stays horizontal

thereafter

Bending most common

Torsion next

Axial loading rare.

loading will lose strength with

time and may fail after a certain

number of cycles.

Endurance limit

stress

We assume that stresses below

endurance limit will NOT cause

failure regardless of the number of

repetitions.

Cyclic stress

TWO FATIGUE FAILURE

THEORIES

SOLDERBERG

CRITERION

MODIFIED GOODMAN

CRITERION

maximum value of the completely reversed bending

stress, which a plain specimen can sustain for 10 millions

or more load cycles without failure. It can be assumed that

it will last indefinitely.

THREE ROTATING

MACHINE LOADINGS

FULLY REVERSED

REPEATED

FLUCTUATING

MACHINE LOADING

The stress range S or :

S max min

The alternating component Sr or a:

Sr a

max min

2

Savg m

Stress Ratio:

max

min

max min

2

Amplitude Ratio:

a

m

SOLDERBERG EQUATION

Se

Se

N fs

K f Sr

Savg

S yp

N fs

S yp

Solderberg equation:

S S

S avg S r K f yp yp

Se N fs

where:

S S min

S avg max

2

S Smin

S r max

2

K f 1 q ( K t 1)

S-N DIAGRAM

LCF

HCF

SE

ENDURANCE LIMIT

Unfortunately, for

nonferrous materials

like aluminum there

is no endurance limit,

meaning the test

specimen will

eventually fail at

some number of

cycles, usually near

(N = 108) cycles, no

matter how much the

stress level is

reduced. This is why

critical aluminum

parts, especially

those in aircraft

where the number of

reversed loadings

can become very

high in a short period

of time, must be

inspected regularly

and replaced prior to

reaching an unsafe

number of cycles.

not exhibit an endurance limit. For such materials, the number of cycles

to failure should be reported for the given endurance strength.

GOODMAN THEORY

First equation:

S S

S avg S r K f u u

Se N fs

where:

S S min

S avg max

2

S Smin

S r max

2

K f 1 q ( K t 1)

equation with Su

Second equation:

S avg S r K f

S yp

N fs

Eqns. (11a) and (11b), page 157

FLUCTUATING STRESSES

Gerber parabola is a good fit to experimental data, making it useful for the

analysis of failed part.

criterion when designing parts subjected to mean plus alternating stresses.

The Solderberg line is less often used, as it is overly conservative

LINEAR HYPOTHESE

Equation of straight line in

intercept form:

x y

1

a b

Sm Sa

1

S yt Se

Sm Sa

Sm K f Sa

1

1 or

Sut Se

Sut

Se

N fs

2

Sm Sa

1

Sut Se

LINEAR HYPOTHESE

For Soderberg line:

S

S a Se 1 m

S

yt

S

S a Se 1 m

Sut

S

Sa e

Kf

S m2

S a Se 1 2

Sut

1

Sm

N

S

ut

fs

An infinitely large

number of fully

reversed stress

(40,000 psi) may

take place before

the material

fracture.

finite life.

From N = 1000 cycles to N = 1,000,000 cycles DESIGN FOR FINITE

LIFE

LOG

Scale

LOG

Scale

EQUATION

The equation for a straight line on log-log (logarithmic) paper is,

Parabolic for m = positive

log y m log x log b

or hyperbolic (m =

or

negative) curves when

plotted in rectangular

y bx m

coordinate paper.

BASQUINS EQUATION

S-N curve for avg = 0

is transformed

into straightline in log-log

plot.

BASQUINS EQUATION

Straight line in logarithmic

scale.

The stress value at 103 cycles

(starting cycle for HCF) is 0.9

ult = 0.9 x 90000 psi = 81,000

psi.

log r log A B log N

EQUATION

Eqns. (12) and (13), page 161

Alternating stress r:

r AN B

Number of cycles N:

N r

A

1

B

B

A

3

106 B

DAMAGE

If the machine part is to operate for a finite time

at stress levels exceeding the endurance limit,

then we must examine the cumulative damage.

Miners equation is used for machine part

subjected to various fully reversed stress level.

Failure occurs when:

ENDURANCE

LIMIT

n1 n2 n3

... 1

N1 N2 N3

Stress levels are

higher than

endurance limit

DAMAGE

n1 n2 n3

... 1

N1 N2 N3

Proportionate Damage D:

ni

Ni

Di

D1

D1 D2 D3

n

n1

n

; D2 2 ; D3 3 and so on.

N1

N2

N3

MINERs

EQUATION

n1 n2 n3

... 1

N1 N 2 N 3

N Actual life of the part

n1 1 N ; n2 2 N and so on.

1 N

N1

1

N1

2 N

N2

2

N2

3

N3

3 N

N3

1

1

N

Note that 1 N 2 N 3 N

1 2 3

VARYING, COMPLETELY REVERSED STRESSES

Stresses (including stress concentration factor Kf) at the critical notch of a part

fluctuated randomly as indicated in Figure below. The stresses could be

bending, torsional, or axial or even equivalent bending stresses resulting

from general biaxial loading. The plot shown represents what is believed to be

20 seconds of operation. The material is steel, and the appropriate S-N curve

is given in the Figure shown. This curve is corrected for load, gradient, and

surface. Estimate the fatigue life of the part.

VARYING, COMPLETELY REVERSED STRESSES

Endurance limit = 60,000 psi.

endurance limit of 60 Ksi:

Five at 80 Ksi n1 = 5 cycles

Two at 90 Ksi n2 = 2 cycles

One at 100 Ksi n3 = 1 cycle

VARYING, COMPLETELY REVERSED STRESSES

There are 8 stress cycles above the

endurance limit of 60 Ksi:

Five at 80 Ksi n1 = 5 cycles

Two at 90 Ksi n2 = 2 cycles

One at 100 Ksi n3 = 1 cycle

ni is number of cycles at fully reversed

stress level Si

Each 80-ksi cycle uses one part in 105 of the life N1 = 105 cycles,

Each 90-ksi cycle uses one part in 3.8x104 of the life N2 = 3.8 x 104 cycles,

Each 100-ksi cycle uses one part in 1.6x104 of the life N3 = 1.6 x 104 cycles.

level Si

VARYING, COMPLETELY REVERSED STRESSES

There are 8 stress cycles above the

endurance limit of 60 Ksi:

Five at 80 Ksi n1 = 5 cycles

Two at 90 Ksi n2 = 2 cycles

One at 100 Ksi n3 = 1 cycle

S-N curve shows:

Each 80-ksi cycle uses one part in N1 = 105 of the life,

Each 90-ksi cycle uses one part in N2 = 3.8x104 of the life,

Each 100-ksi cycle uses one part in N3 = 1.6x104 of the life.

Miners rule:

n1 n2 n3

1

N1 N 2 N 3

Failure occurs

5

3

1

0.0001651

5

4

4

10 3.8 10 1.6 10

VARYING, COMPLETELY REVERSED STRESSES

Miners rule:

n1 n2 n3

1

N1 N 2 N 3

5

3

1

0.0001651

5

4

4

10 3.8 10 1.6 10

For the fraction of life consumed to be unity, the 20-second test time must

be multiplied by

1

Fatigue Life

20 121,138.7038 seconds

0.0001651

121,138.7038

Fatigue Life

2018.9784 minutes

60

2018.9784

Fatigue Life

33.6496 hours

60

- A COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED LIFE OF KNEE IMPLANT APPLYING THE MULTIAXIAL FATIGUE CRITERIAUploaded byGlobal Research and Development Services
- Ecoursesonline Iasri Res in Mod Page View Php Id 1329Uploaded byamanpreet
- Case Hardended Test ResultsUploaded byammtst
- 43075_EME 2016 Chapter 2 - 1 Static LoadingUploaded byZahidah Amanina
- Tutorial Trabajando Con SolidosUploaded byAlex Holguino
- CQUL_2 Design for Strength Due to Static LoadingUploaded byPierce Hardin
- BTH-1-2008Uploaded byEnriqueGD
- 9783319253053-c2Uploaded byargentino_ar01
- materials-09-00419Uploaded byAriel Zamora F
- alloying and their propertiesUploaded byWaqar Mansoor
- Metal Fatigue SpreadsheetsUploaded byAlfredo
- 6. Simple Stresses and Strains (1)Uploaded byAnkith Jai Krishna
- Technique for Strengthening of Masonry Wall Panels Using Steel StripsUploaded byMiss Natalie
- 1964 Hoek Fracture of Anistropic RockUploaded byj_brug571
- 1967-Pascoe-LOW CYCLE FATIGUE OF STEELS UNDER BIAXIAL STRAINING.pdfUploaded byEsa M Rod Vig
- ds 4Uploaded byanisha2007
- AnuUploaded byYafi Al Hadi
- OBJ Datastream.pdfUploaded byjohandiamond
- omni-dtUploaded byCHEKOUFI Said
- Acdmaclt 2013 Command Reference GuideUploaded byHemanth Kumar
- Cr 2643604362Uploaded byIJMER
- NahshonHutch2008.pdfUploaded byDeepesh Raj
- A Damage Constitutive Model for Rock Mass With Nonpersistently Closed Joints Under Uniaxial CompressionUploaded byNadim527
- prc 1Uploaded bysaad
- TutorialUploaded byVSColin
- EBM Additive MR 13Uploaded byPierreDolonymous
- Rashid Reinforced Fibrous Concrete Elements Subjected to uniaxial tensile loading..........................pdfUploaded byHasnain Bukhari
- 00963358Uploaded byArun
- k 3 BrochureUploaded byvanillalavender
- Design of Anchor Reinforcement for Seismic Shear Loads-SubmissionUploaded bySarah Perez

- Evaluation of Shear and Diagonal Tension in Plain ConcreteUploaded bystan
- DO-297Uploaded bypjqlln
- A Review on Hybrid Composites: Fabrication, Properties and ApplicationsUploaded byIRJET Journal
- ZigzagUploaded byganeshapec8
- Bridge Seismic DesignUploaded byRuth Vargas Sosa
- BALLOT ITEMS 40 to 49.pdfUploaded byJizelle Jumaquio
- 4 Fatigue Influencing FactorsUploaded bykhanto
- IridiaTr2012-014.pdfUploaded byMukesh Giri
- eli69Uploaded bybobmarley20161934
- Concrete Beton July 07Uploaded bytevrede
- Student Solution Manual for Mathematical Methods for Physics and Engineering Third EditionUploaded byefrghyjgtrfedrfgthy
- Systems-Engineering Management PlanUploaded bylbillings1
- Historical Perspectives on Invention & CreativityUploaded byadhoc3
- G-208 Kontinuirana Ab GredaUploaded bykkklllyyy
- API 6D Valve Inspection TestUploaded bysaffririzal4237
- 2 marksUploaded byKesavan Karthi
- 841017-Mostafa Mansour-Coverletter.docUploaded byMostafa Mohmmed
- Group 4 Smart GridUploaded byLikhitha Yerra
- 44982_01Uploaded byKatai Mwanza
- Fire Alarm Submittal _san Francisco DeptUploaded byvin ss
- Holcim Beton Overview.pptUploaded byAnonymous PFbcBEnX
- Road Various Detail-revUploaded byVinod Vasan
- SERPS Patent!!!!!.pdfUploaded byJake Mitchell
- Hydropower Projiect Instrument InstructionUploaded byJohnnie Isra
- Egt 417 Course Sylabus Fall013Uploaded bynikhilkn
- Ansys 10 bookxUploaded byMurugan Shanmugam
- erin mclean resume 2015Uploaded byapi-276586348
- Mutual Effect Between Lfc and Avr Loops in Power PlantUploaded byAnonymous LSebPS
- Load Testing of Concrete StructuresUploaded byM
- ES-49BranchConnections.pdfUploaded byprabuharan89