ME2200

Fatigue Failure of Ratna Kumar Annabattula

Office: MDS-208

Materials email: ratna@iitm.ac.in

 Contents
❖ Fatigue failure theories ❖ Endurance limit, Fatigue strength

❖ Low cycle and high cycle ❖ Effect of mean stress on fatigue

life
fatigue
❖ Gerber parabola
❖ Stages of fatigue crack
propagation ❖ Gough ellipse

❖ Stress-life approach and

❖ Soderberg line
LEFM approach ❖ Yield line

❖ Types of fatigue loading ❖ Modified Goodman diagram

❖ Rotating beam test and

❖ Paris Law
Marin factors ❖ Multiaxial Fatigue
 Learning Objectives
1. Draw the schematic S-N curves for ferrous and nonferrous materials
2. Determine the life of a given member from SN curve
3. Draw the schematics for fully reversed, repeated and fluctuating loads and
label the stress range, alternating stress and mean stress on the schematic.

4. Describe rotating beam bending test

5. Draw the failure locus of different fatigue failure theories with the effect of
mean stress

6. Discuss Paris law and underlying assumptions

7. Apply stress-life and LEFM approaches to design simple machine member
under uniaxial fatigue loading

8. Calculate the factor of safety using Goodman diagram

 Fatigue Failure
❖ Most of the failures in machine components are due to
time varying loads rather than static loads
❖ Such failures happen at much lower stress than yield
stress
❖ Static failure theories alone leads to unsafe design
❖ Failure of rail coach axels in 1800’s lead to the
development of failure theories under dynamic loads
❖ First scientific investigation of fatigue failure was done
by August Wohler (it took 12 years of careful study!)
 Fatigue Failure

❖ 80-90% of all failures are due to Fatigue

❖ Annual cost of fatigue of materials to the US economy
in 1982 was $100 billion
❖ That’s about 3% of their GNP then
❖ Two fatal crashes of the first commercial passenger jet
aircraft Comet in 1954 due to fatigue failure of fuselage
Fatigue Failures in History
❖ Collapse due to
rise of
temperature from
-17C to 5C in two
days
❖ Fatigue crack near
a man hole
❖ 25 ft high wave
with 56 kmph
❖ Killed 21 people
and injured 150

Boston Molasses tank explosion

Fatigue Failures in History
• G-ALYV after leaving Calcutta
– May 1953. Violent storms
were thought to be involved
and some wreckage was
recovered. No firm conclusions
drawn as to cause.
• G - A LY P o v e r E l b a – 1 0
January 1954 after 1 286
cabin pressurisation cycles.
Little wreckage was recovered
and no major problems found
in fleet inspection. Fire was
assumed the most likely cause
and modifications made to
improve fire prevention and
control. Aircraft returned to
service.
• G-ALYY flying as SA 201 after
leaving Rome – April 1954.
Comet flight disaster
 Comet Crash

❖ BOAC flight 781 from Rome Ciampino to London Heathrow

❖ First flight, January 10, 1954: G-ALYP, Fuselage break up in mid-air
within 20 minutes after take off
❖ March 23, 1954: Comet flights resumed after some design changes
❖ April 8, 1954: G-ALYY from Rome Ciampino to Cairo crashed into
Mediterranean within 30 minutes after take off
❖ Entire Comet 1 fleet was grounded
Comet Fatigue Cracks
 Comet Fatigue Cracks

Lessons Learnt:
• Viewing windows are no longer square; they are made circular to reduce stress
concentration
• Crack-stoppers are placed between frame cut-outs to prevent crack propagation from one
window to other
• SAFE-LIFE design methodology to FAIL-SAFE methodology
Enschede derailment in Germany

Ingo Wagner/AFP/Getty Images

 Enschede derailment in Germany
❖ 3rd June 1998 in Enschede, Germany at 200 km/h
❖ Worst high-speed train accident in the world and in the history of Germany
❖ 101 people died, 88 injured, passengers: 287
❖ A single fatigue crack in the wheel
❖ A mono block wheel has been replaced with a dual block wheel
❖ a layer of rubber followed by a metal layer in contact with rail
❖ A dual block wheel has not been tested on a high speed train
❖ They simply didn’t have facilities to test fatigue failure at such high
speeds
❖ Effect of dynamic loading not taken into account during design
 Fatigue Failure
❖ WÖhler found that the number of cycles of time-varying
stress as the culprit (after 20 years of research! in 1867)
❖ Existence of endurance limit for steels, i.e., a stress level
that would be tolerable for a million of fully reversed cycles.
S-N Curve or WÖhler Diagram

August WÖhler
(1819 - 1914)
Types of Time Varying Stresses
 Fatigue Failure
❖ Huge costs are involved with fatigue failure and/or with
attempts to avoid it
❖ Fatigue failure always starts at a crack
❖ Comet airplane failure started at cracks smaller than 0.07’’ long
near the windows which were almost square in shape
❖ Dynamically loaded parts should be designed to minimise
stress concentrations
❖ After Comet failure, UK lost its airplane market completely to
Boeing in USA
 Three Stages of Fatigue Failure
❖ Crack initiation
❖ First stage involves a very short duration
❖ Cracks initiate due to stress raisers such as notches
❖ Important for ductile materials due to local yielding
❖ Crack propagation
❖ Second stage involves the most of the life of the part
❖ Tensile stress open the crack and compressive
stresses close the crack
❖ Crack propagation growth rates are small, i.e. 10-8 Schematic of Fatigue Failure in a Steel Shaft
to 10-4 in per cycle
❖ Sudden fracture due to unstable crack growth
❖ This stage is instantaneous
 Fatigue Failure Examples

200 mm diameter piston rod of

Forged connecting rod of AISI 8640 steel
an alloy steel steam hammer used for forging
 Fatigue Failure Regimes

❖ Low-Cycle Fatigue (LCF)

❖ High-Cycle Fatigue (HCF)
❖ N = 103 cycles is the dividing line between LCF and
HCF in this class
 Fatigue Failure Models
❖ Stress-Life (S-N) Approach
❖ Oldest way
❖ Often used for HCF where component is expected to last for more than 103 cycles
❖ Suitable when stress and strain are mostly elastic (hence not suitable for LCF where stress levels are
high leading to possible local yielding)
❖ Seeks to find fatigue strength and/or an endurance limit
❖ Can’t distinguish between initiation and propagation phases
❖ Strain-Life (ε-N) Approach
❖ Suitable for LCF
❖ Gives good picture of crack initiation
❖ Suitable when there is significant plastic strain
❖ Most complicated to implement of all the three models
❖ Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics Approach (LEFM)
❖ Suitable for remaining life prediction
❖ Best model for crack propagation stage
❖ Cyclic stress-intensity factor as the crack driver
 Examples
❖ Automobile crank shaft is usually required to last for
several thousand kilometres
❖ Number of fatigue cycles are around 2.0E8 which is
clearly a HCF regime
❖ Air craft bodies, ship hulls although have many cycles of
known stress, they some times are subjected to storms
which might exceed design loads leading to local yielding
❖ They use strain-life approach together with LEFM
 Fatigue Loading Parameters
❖ Cyclic Stress Range
❖ ∆σ = σmax - σmin
❖ Stress Amplitude
❖ σa = (σmax - σmin)/2
❖ Mean Stress
❖ σm = (σmax + σmin)/2
❖ Stress Ratio
❖ R = σmin/σmax
❖ Amplitude Ratio
❖ A = σa/σm
 Fatigue Loading Parameters
❖ Cyclic Stress Range
❖ ∆σ = σmax - σmin
❖ Stress Amplitude
❖ σa = (σmax - σmin)/2
❖ Mean Stress
❖ σm = (σmax + σmin)/2
❖ Fully reversed loading
❖ R=-1, A=∞
❖ Stress Ratio
❖ Repeated loading
❖ R = σmin/σmax
❖ R=0, A=1
❖ Amplitude Ratio
❖ A = σa/σm
 Fatigue Failure Measurement
❖ Wöhler: Rotating cantilever beam with bending
❖ R. R. Moore: Rotating simply supported beam with fully
reversed pure bending
❖ More data is available for rotating beam in fully
reversed bending; less data for axial loading; much less
data for torsion
❖ Some times, no fatigue strength information is available;
we need to estimate!
 Rotating-Beam Test

❖ The test is set-up so that the

beam experiences pure
bending
❖ No axial stresses are
developed due to vertical
load
❖ Read the details from
Norton’s text book
R. R. Moore rotating beam fatigue testing machine
http://www.umflint.edu/sites/default/files/groups/Research_and_Sponsored_Programs/MOM/d.hendrickson.pdf
Rotating Beam Test
Rotating Beam Test
Experimental data on Wrought Steel

For Wrought Steel, Sut = 1400 MPa

For Steels, S’e = 0.5 Sut for Sut <= 1400 MPa
S’e = 700 MPa for Sut > 1400 MPa
Experimental data on Wrought Steel

❖ The data is for wrought steel with Sut = 200 ksi

❖ The test is run at a particular stress level until the given specimen fails.
❖ The test is repeated at another stress level using different specimen of same material.
❖ Samples run at higher stress levels fail after fewer cycles.
❖ At lower stress levels, some do not fail at all (see not broken data) until the test is stopped.
❖ The scatter in the data is probably due to unknown defects of different sizes in different samples.
S-N diagram for different materials

Ferrous Metals

Non-Ferrous Metals
 S-N Curve for Aluminum Alloys
❖ S-N curves for aluminum alloys
❖ No distinct knee showing no
endurance limit; so we talk about
fatigue strength (Sf’) instead of Se’
❖ Slope starts to decrease around 107
cycles
❖ Fatigue strength Sf ’of Aluminium
is taken at 5E8 cycles
❖ Sf’ (at 5E8 cycles)= 0.4Sut for Sut <
48 ksi
❖ Sf’ (at 5E8 cycles)= 19 ksi for Sut >=
48 ksi
Axial Fatigue Test
 Axial Fatigue Test
❖ Stress across the cross
section is same
❖ High probability for
micro-cracks to be found
in high stress region as
the entire cross section is
equally loaded unlike
rotating beam test ❖ Other Fatigue Test Methods
❖ Lower fatigue strength ❖ Cantilever
than rotating bending
test ❖ Torsional
Schematic of S-N diagram in LCF+HCF regime
1
Sm/Sut
S/Sut

S’e/Sut

LCF Regime HCF Regime

0.1
1E+00 1E+03 1E+06

Number of Cycles (N)

 Exercise

❖ Create an estimated S-N diagram for a steel bar and

define its equations. How many cycles of life can be
expected if the alternating stress is 100 MPa and 400
MPa.
❖ Sut = 600 MPa
❖ Estimated strength at 103 cycles = 0.9 Sut
Answer (No Correction Factors)
Sut Sm
Failure point

Safe

Sm = 0.9Sut for bending

Sm = 0.75Sut for axial loading
Corrections to Fatigue Strength/Endurance Limit

❖ Fatigue strength or Endurance limit for materials is obtained by standard

tests
❖ There will be physical differences between the test specimen and the actual
machine part
❖ Sf ’ or Se’ obtained from experiments should be corrected for following
factors
❖ Loading Factors (Cload)

❖ Environmental Factors such as Temperature (Ctemp)

❖ Reliability Factors (Creliab)

❖ Size Effects (Csize)

❖ Surface Effects (Csurf)

❖ Se = Cload Csurf Csize Ctemp Creliab Se’

 Strength Reduction Factors

❖ Loading Factor (Cload)

❖ Bending: 1.0
❖ Axial Load: 0.7
❖ In the case of pure torsion, we calculate effective
stress (von-Mises) and that will be used as bending
stress with Cload = 1
 Strength Reduction Factors
❖ Size Factor (Csize)
❖ The specimen size in Rotating Beam test is about 8 mm diameter
❖ If the part size is larger than this, a strength reduction factor should be used
❖ Large parts fail at lower stress due to high probability of flaw being present in larger stress region

❖ For axial loading case Csize = 1 as the failure in axial loading is independent of
cross sectional area
❖ for d <= 8 mm, Csize = 1
❖ for 8 mm < d <= 250 mm, Csize = 1.189d-0.097
❖ for d > 250 mm, Csize = 0.6
❖ The above equations are valid for steels. For non-ferrous metals, the equations are
not precise
❖ For non circular cross section Ref. Norton’s Machine Design text book
 Strength Reduction Factors
max
❖ Size Factor (Csize) for non circular cross 95%

sections and non-rotating round bars

❖ Obtain an equivalent diameter by
equating the volume of the material
stressed above 95% of its maximum 
d2 (0.95d)2
stress (Kugel, ASTM Proceedings, 61, 732-748, A95 = ⇡ = 0.0766 d2
4
1961)with the similarly stressed

volume of a rotating beam specimen r

A95
dequiv =
0.0766
❖ Since, lengths are the same, we can
consider areas in place of volume
❖ Stress varies linearly across the
diameter of a rotating beam specimen
Strength Reduction Factors
max
95%


d2 (0.95d)2
A95 = ⇡ = 0.0766 d2
4

r
A95
dequiv =
0.0766

For non-rotating hollow/solid bar

0.0766d2eq = 0.010462d2
deq = 0.370d

Refer: Shigley and Mitchell’s text book on Mechanical Design

 Strength Reduction Factors
❖ Surface Factor (Csurf)
❖ Rough surface reduces fatigue
strength
❖ For cast iron Csurf =1 as their
internal discontinuities
dominate the surface finish
effects
❖ Electroplating the surface with
metals drastically reduces the
fatigue strength
 Strength Reduction Factors
❖ Surface Factor (Csurf) = A(Sut)b if Csurf > 1.0, set Csurf = 1.0
 Strength Reduction Factors

❖ Temperature Factor (Ctemp)

❖ Fatigue tests are done at room temperature
❖ Correction should be made for the service conditions
❖ For T <= 4500 C, Ctemp = 1
❖ 4500C < T < 5500C, Ctemp = 1-0.0058(T-450)
❖ The above criteria is based on steels and hence not valid
for other metals
 Strength Reduction Factors

❖ Reliability Factor (Creliab)

❖ Reported strength data are mean
values
❖ Scatter of the data should be
taken care
❖ Endurance strength of steels
have a standard deviation of 8%
of their mean values
 Estimated S-N diagram
❖ The band width of interest for HCF regime is 103 cycles to 106 cycles and beyond
❖ Sm - Material strength at 103 cycles
❖ Bending: Sm = 0.9 Sut
❖ Axial load: Sm = 0.75 Sut
❖ Correction factors are not applied to Sm
❖ If the material exhibits a knee (or endurance limit), then corrected Se is plotted at
106 cycles
❖ If no knee, corrected Sf is plotted at 5e8 cycles
❖ The equation of line from Sm to Se is S(N) = aNb
❖ logS = log(a)+blog(N)
❖ a and b are obtained by boundary conditions
 Estimated S-N diagram
❖ Boundary Conditions:
❖ S(N) = Sm at N = N1 = 103
❖ For Endurance limit case: S(N) = Se
at N = N2 = 106
❖ With no endurance limit: S(N) = Sf
at N = N2 = 5e8
❖ b = (1/z) log(Sm/Se); z = log(N1)-log(N2)
❖ log(a) = log(Sm)-b log(N1)
= log(Sm) - 3b
 Exercise
❖ Create an estimated S-N diagram for a steel bar and define its equations. How
many cycles of life can be expected if the alternating stress is 100 MPa and 400
MPa.
❖ σut = 600 MPa
❖ Estimated strength at 103 cycles = 0.9 σut
❖ The bar is 150 mm square and has hot-rolled finish.
❖ The operating temperature is 5000C
❖ Loading is fully reversed bending
❖ Infinite life is required
❖ A reliability factor of 99.9% is to be used
 Solution

❖ Cload = 1.0
❖ Csize = 0.747 (A95 = 0.05bh = 1125 sq.mm), dequiv = 121.2 mm
❖ Csurf = ASutb = 0.584
❖ Ctemp = 0.71
❖ Creliab = 0.753
❖ Se = Cload Csize Csurf Ctemp Creliab Se’ = 70 MPa
 Solution
❖ S(N) = aNb = 4165.707 N-0.295765 MPa for 103 <= N <=106
❖ S(N) = Se = 70 MPa for N > 106
 Fatigue Failure
❖ Crack initiation happens due to shear
stress leading to slip bands
❖ Crack growth is due to tensile stresses
❖ Occasional large amplitude stress-cycles
shows up as large striations
❖ Cracks also propagate through corrosion
under static stress Fatigue striations on the Crack
surface of an Aluminum alloy.
❖ Combination of stress and corrosion has a Spacing of striations corresponds
synergistic effect to the cyclic loading pattern. These
striations are seen at 12000X
❖ Material corrodes more rapidly if stressed magnification. They are not beach
called “Stress Corrosion Cracking” marks!
 Fatigue Failure
❖ Crack grows much faster if fatigue and corrosion co-exist;
it is called “Corrosion Fatigue”
❖ In the corrosive environment, frequency of stress cycling
influences the crack growth rate
❖ If the crack grows sufficiently larger such that the stress
intensity factor equals the fracture toughness, failure
happens in the next tensile cycle
❖ The above condition can be met either by increasing the
crack size or by increasing the nominal stress sufficiently
 Features of Fatigue Failure
Failure surface of a keyed shaft

❖ The features are visible to

naked eye
❖ Beach lines near the origin
(where crack initiates)
❖ Surface away from origin
looks like a smooth Failure
surface of a
polished surface similar to a crank shaft
of a diesel
brittle fracture surface engine
Features of Fatigue Failure Surfaces

See Norton’s Machine Design text book for more information

Features of Fatigue Failure Surfaces

See Norton’s Machine Design text book for more information

 Stress-Life (S-N) Approach
❖ Oldest of all the three approaches
❖ Mostly used for HCF applications, i.e. N > 103 cycles
❖ Stress-based model
❖ Stress amplitude is known and is almost consistent for the entire range
of operation
❖ Determines fatigue strength and/or endurance limit of the material
❖ Cyclic stress is kept below the endurance limit to avoid failure
❖ Attempts to keep low local stresses in notches so that crack initiation
doesn't start
❖ Assumption: Stresses and Strains are elastic every where and no yielding
 Fatigue Regimes
❖ Based on the number of stress or strain cycles that a part is
expected to be subjected to, it is classified as
❖ low-cycle fatigue (LCF) regime
❖ high-cycle fatigue (HCF) regime
❖ No sharp boundary between LCF and HCF
❖ One suggestion is that HCF starts from 102 to 104 cycles of
stress
❖ But the above number changes from material to material
 Problem
❖ Some values of stress amplitude and corresponding cycles to failure
are given in the table below. The tests were done on un-notched,
axially loaded specimens under zero mean stress.
❖ If this trend seems to represent a straight line on log-log plot,
obtain the values of a and b in the stress-life equation.
 Answer
❖ Let the first and last point represent the straight line
approximately, represented by (S1,N1) and (S2,N2),
respectively. S1=948 MPa, N1=222; S2=524, N2=132150
❖ S1=aN1b; S2=aN2b
❖ S1/S2 = (N1/N2)b —> log(S1/S2)=b log(N1/N2)
❖ Solving for b leads to b = -0.0928
❖ Thus, a = S1/N1b = 948/222-0.0928 = 1565 MPa
❖ Right approach: to fit a linear least square-fit for the data
and then proceed to solve for a and b
 Safety factors for S-N curves
Nf 2
Safety factor in life : XN =
N̂
a1
Safety factor in stress : XS =
ˆa

• Safety factors in stress for fatigue should be

similar in magnitude to other stress-based
safety factors. (e.g., XS: 1.5 to 3.0)

• Safety factors in life should be relatively

large as the fatigue life is very sensitive to
the value of stress. (XN is in the range of 5
to 20)
 Problem
❖ For the fatigue stress-life data shown in the table, a stress
amplitude of σa = 500 MPa will be applied in a service for
Ñ = 2000 cycles. What are the safety factors in stress and
life?
For the data shown in previous problem, a = 1565MPa, b = 0.0928.
 Solution
⇣ ⌘1/b ✓ ◆ 1/0.0928
b a 500 5
a = aNf 2 , Nf 2 = = = 2.187 ⇥ 10 cycles
a 1565
2.187 ⇥ 105
Nf 2
safety factor in life:XN = = = 109.4
N̂ 2000
0.0928
a1 = aNFb = 1565 (2000) = 773 MPa
a1 773
Safety factor in stress:XS = = = 1.546
a 500

A modest safety factor of 1.546 in stress results in quite a large safety

factor in life of 109.4
 Effect of mean stress

❖ Fatigue life decreases with increase

in mean stress (σm) for a given stress
amplitude (σa)
Schematic of effect of
mean stress on fatigue life
❖ Let σf be the maximum allowable
true stress
❖ σa+σm <= σf
Effect of Mean Stress
Constant Life Diagram
 Effect of Mean Stress
Constant Life Diagram Normalised Amplitude-Mean Diagram

σfB= Corrected true fracture strength

 Effect of Mean Stress
❖ When the mean stress is not zero
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values
❖ Several failure theories
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
❖ Modified Goodman diagram
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
❖ When the mean stress is not zero
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values
❖ Several failure theories
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
❖ Modified Goodman diagram
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values
❖ Several failure theories
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values
❖ Several failure theories Se
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values σy
❖ Several failure theories Se
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values σy
❖ Several failure theories Se
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S-
N curves for different σm values σy
❖ Several failure theories Se
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy σut
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S- Modified Goodman line

N curves for different σm values σy

❖ Several failure theories Se
❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy σut
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S- Modified Goodman line

N curves for different σm values σy Gerber Parabola

❖ Several failure theories Se

❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy σut
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S- Modified Goodman line

N curves for different σm values σy Gerber Parabola

❖ Several failure theories Se

❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy σut σfb
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
 Effect of Mean Stress
σa
❖ When the mean stress is not zero Soderberg line
one needs to develop different S- Modified Goodman line

N curves for different σm values σy Gerber Parabola

❖ Several failure theories Se

❖ Goodman diagram is the most
used
σm
❖ Modified Goodman diagram σy σut σfb
takes into consideration of
experimental data at low stress
amplitudes
Fatigue Failure Theories

a m
Soderberg’s Equation: + =1
Se y
a m
Goodman’s Equation: + =1
Se ut
✓ ◆2
a m
Gerber’s Equation: + =1
Se ut
 Effect of Mean Stress

For steels at 107 to 108 cycles For Aluminum alloys at 5x108 cycles
 Effect of Mean Stress

❖ Compressive mean stress is

beneficial
❖ Generally residual
compressive mean stresses
are induced in the high
alternating tensile stress
regions to improve fatigue life
 Effect of mean stress on life
❖ The steel specimen mentioned in the below tabulated
data is subjected to cyclic loading with a tensile mean
stress of 200 MPa. UTS of steel is 1172 MPa.
❖ What is the life expected if the stress amplitude is 450
MPa?
 Solution
❖ The values of a and b for the
data are:
❖ a=1565 MPa, b = -0.0928.
σa
Se3
Se2

N2 N3
Se1

N1

Sut σm
 Solution

a m
+ =1
Se0 Sut
0 a 450
Se = = 200 = 542 MPa
1 Sut 1 m
1172
✓ 0 ◆1/b ✓ ◆ 1/0.0928
Se 542
Life:N = = = 91, 716 cycles
a 1565
 Multi-Axial Fatigue

❖ Combined bending and torsion of shafts

❖ Biaxial stress due to cyclic pressure in tubes and pipes
❖ Bending of plates about more than one axis
❖ Steady applied loads added to above cyclic loads
 Multi-Axial Fatigue

Combined cyclic pressure and a steady Combined cyclic pressure and a steady
bending of a thin walled tube torsion with closed ends of a thin walled
tube
The second case is more complicated where the principal directions also oscillate with
each cycle.
 Multi-Axial Fatigue
❖ For ductile metals
❖ assume that the fatigue life is controlled by cyclic amplitude
of octahedral shear stress (von-Mises)
❖ Equivalent stress amplitude
1 p 2+( 2+( 2
˜a = p ( a1 a2 ) a2 a3 ) a3 a1 )
2
❖ Amplitudes in phase are positive and 1800 out-of-phase are
negative
❖ Life may now be estimated using equivalent stress amplitude in
S-N diagram
 Multi-Axial Fatigue
❖ Effective mean stress is proportional to hydrostatic stress

❖ the sum of mean stresses in three principal directions

˜m = m1 + m2 + m3
˜m = xm + ym + zm
1 q 2 2 2 2 2 + ⌧2 )
˜a = p ( xa ya ) +( ya za ) +( za xa ) + 6(⌧xya + ⌧yza zxa
2
For uni-axial case 1a and 1m are the only non-zero components and hence
equivalent quantities and uni-axial quantities are one and the same.
For pure shear (torsion) case only the amplitude (⌧xya ) and mean (⌧xym ) shear
stresspare non-zero.
˜a = 3⌧xya ; ˜m = 1m + 2m = ⌧xy ⌧xy = 0.
 Problem

❖ An un-notched solid circular shaft of diameter 50 mm is

made of steel of the previous problem. A zero-to-
maximum (R=0) cyclic torque T = 10 kN-m is applied,
together with a zero-to-maximum bending moment of
M = 7.5 kN-m, with the two cyclic loads being applied
in phase at the same frequency. How many load cycles
can be applied before fatigue failure is expected?
 Solution
⌧xy,max = T r/J = 407.4 MPa
xx,max = M r/I = 611.2 MPa
All the other stress components are zero. Since both the stresses are applied atR = 0,
⌧xy,a = 407.4/2 = 203.7, x,a = 611.2/2 = 305.6 MPa.
The e↵ective stress amplitude and mean stress are:
1 p
¯a = p (305.6 0)2 + 0 + (0 305.6)2 + 6(203.72 + 0 + 0) = 466.8 MPa
2
¯m =
= 305.6
466.8 + 0 + 0 = 305.6 MPa
MPa
<latexit sha1_base64="pqCyTvbLTlEnq9+nZ7Dc1Tot+VU=">AAACC3icbVA9SwNBEN2LXzF+nVraLAmC1XEnEtMIQRsbIYL5gCQce5tNsmT37tidE8OR3sa/YmOhiK1/wM5/4ya5QhMfDDzem2FmXhALrsF1v63cyura+kZ+s7C1vbO7Z+8fNHSUKMrqNBKRagVEM8FDVgcOgrVixYgMBGsGo6up37xnSvMovINxzLqSDELe55SAkXy72NF8IAn2cYolnuALfFYuO5UOsAdI8U2N4Ilvl1zHnQEvEy8jJZSh5ttfnV5EE8lCoIJo3fbcGLopUcCpYJNCJ9EsJnREBqxtaEgk09109ssEHxulh/uRMhUCnqm/J1IitR7LwHRKAkO96E3F/7x2Av1KN+VhnAAL6XxRPxEYIjwNBve4YhTE2BBCFTe3YjokilAw8RVMCN7iy8ukcep4ruPdnpWql1kceXSEiugEeegcVdE1qqE6ougRPaNX9GY9WS/Wu/Uxb81Z2cwh+gPr8wcaupiK</latexit>
m

a 466.8
Se0 = = 466.8 = 775.79 MPa
<latexit sha1_base64="EBEM2AqJdn3tofLb1j6jMd4Ec+Y=">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</latexit>
1 Snt
m
1 117.2

✓ ◆1/b ✓ ◆ 1/0.0928
Se0 631.45
Nf = = = 1923 cycles
<latexit sha1_base64="rzYi2l/bDomW/dtd5NkJP24xcP0=">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</latexit>
a 1565
 Solution
⌧⌧xy,max = T r/J = 407.4 MPa
xy,max = T r/J = 407.4 MPa
= M r/I = 611.2 MPa
xx,max = M r/I = 611.2 MPa
xx,max
All
All the
the other
other stress
stress components
components are
are zero.
zero. Since
Since both
both the
the stresses
stresses are
are applied
applied atR
atR =
= 0,
0,
⌧⌧xy,a = 407.4/2 = 203.7, x,a =
xy,a = 407.4/2 = 203.7, x,a = 611.2/2
611.2/2 =
= 305.6
305.6 MPa.
MPa.
The
The e↵ective
e↵ective stress
stress amplitude
amplitude and
and mean
mean stress
stress are:
are:
11 pp 2 2 2
¯¯aa = p
= p2 (305.6 0) + 0 + (0 305.6) + 6(203.72 +
(305.6 0) 2 + 0 + (0 305.6) 2 + 6(203.7 + 00 +
+ 0)
0) =
= 466.8
466.8 MPa
MPa
2
¯¯m
m
=
=
= 305.6
305.6
466.8 +
+ 0
0
MPa +
+ 0
0 =
= 305.6
305.6 MPa
MPa
m
<latexit sha1_base64="pqCyTvbLTlEnq9+nZ7Dc1Tot+VU=">AAACC3icbVA9SwNBEN2LXzF+nVraLAmC1XEnEtMIQRsbIYL5gCQce5tNsmT37tidE8OR3sa/YmOhiK1/wM5/4ya5QhMfDDzem2FmXhALrsF1v63cyura+kZ+s7C1vbO7Z+8fNHSUKMrqNBKRagVEM8FDVgcOgrVixYgMBGsGo6up37xnSvMovINxzLqSDELe55SAkXy72NF8IAn2cYolnuALfFYuO5UOsAdI8U2N4Ilvl1zHnQEvEy8jJZSh5ttfnV5EE8lCoIJo3fbcGLopUcCpYJNCJ9EsJnREBqxtaEgk09109ssEHxulh/uRMhUCnqm/J1IitR7LwHRKAkO96E3F/7x2Av1KN+VhnAAL6XxRPxEYIjwNBve4YhTE2BBCFTe3YjokilAw8RVMCN7iy8ukcep4ruPdnpWql1kceXSEiugEeegcVdE1qqE6ougRPaNX9GY9WS/Wu/Uxb81Z2cwh+gPr8wcaupiK</latexit>

a 466.8
Se0 = = 466.8 = 775.79 MPa
<latexit sha1_base64="EBEM2AqJdn3tofLb1j6jMd4Ec+Y=">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</latexit>
1 Snt
m
1 117.2

✓ ◆1/b ✓ ◆ 1/0.0928
Se0 631.45
Nf = = = 1923 cycles
<latexit sha1_base64="rzYi2l/bDomW/dtd5NkJP24xcP0=">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</latexit>
a 1565
 Variable Amplitude Loading

Stress amplitude a1 is applied for N1 cycles while the Nf 1 is the number of

cycles to failure at a1 .
N1
The fraction of the life used is Nf 1
The Palmgren-Miner Rule: P Nj
N1 N2 N3
Nf 1 + Nf 2 + Nf 3 + . . . = Nf j = 1
 Variable Amplitude Loading
❖ A particular sequence of loading may be repeatedly applied
❖ Sum cycle ratios over one repetition of a given load and
then multiply with number of repetitions

❖ Bf is the number
of repetitions to
failure
Variable Amplitude Loading

Units: MPa(ksi)
Notches and Stress Concentrations
❖ Geometric contour that disrupts the force flow
❖ What is a notch?
❖ a hole
❖ a groove
❖ a fillet
❖ an abrupt change in cross section
❖ any disruption to the smooth contours of a
part
❖ Notches of concern in machine components
❖ fastener holes, key holes on shafts, O-ring
grooves etc.,
 Failures at Notches

Steam turbine rotor with blades Crack at the base of the fir tree
attached with a fir tree type connection type LP turbine blade
 Stress Concentration Factor (kt)
Actual Stress
Stress Concentration Factor (kt ) := Nominal Stress

❖ Actual Stress = Value of maximum localised stress

❖ Nominal Stress = Value of undisturbed, free flowing stress
Notches and Stress Concentrations

❖ Geometric Stress concentration:

Raise of stress at a local location
due to change of geometry
❖ σmax = Kt σnom

a
Kt = 1 + 2
c
Notches and Stress Concentrations

Stress concentration factor for notched bar under axial loading [1]
Notches and Stress Concentrations

Stress concentration factor for notched bar under bending [1]

Effect of notch on fatigue strength

Effect of notch on the rotating bending S-N behaviour of an aluminium alloy, and
comparison with strength reductions using kt and kf
Fatigue Stress Concentration Factor
❖ For dynamic loading the theoretical stress concentration
factor (Kt) should be modified based on the notch
sensitivity of the material to obtain fatigue stress
concentration factor (Kf)
❖ Notch sensitivity:
❖ Ductile materials are less notch sensitive; brittle
material are more notch sensitive
❖ Reduction of notch radius decreases notch sensitivity
 Notch Sensitivity (q)
Kf 1
q= =) Kf = 1 + q(Kt 1)
Kt 1

❖ First determine the theoretical stress concentration

factor Kt
❖ Establish appropriate notch sensitivity for the material
and then find dynamic stress concentration factor
= Kf nom

❖ Notch sensitivity q is also defined as

1
q= pa
1+ r
 Notch Sensitivity (q)

❖ √𝑎 is Neuber’s constant and r is the notch radius

Neuber’s constant and Notch sensitivity factor [1]

❖ For torsional loading, use a curve for Sut that is 20 kpsi

higher than the selected material
 Neuber’s Constant

Neuber’s Constants for various materials [1]

kf and kt as a function of notch radius
 Why kf is smaller than kt?
❖ Stress in notched member decreases away
from notch. This rate of decrease
increases with decrease in notch radius.
❖ Material is not sensitive to peak stress,
but rather to the average stress acting
over a small finite region.
❖ finite volume of material should be
involved in damage progress.
❖ The size of the active region is
characterized by process zone size
shown in the figure.
❖ Reversed yielding?
average y |x=0! e
kf = =
❖ Plastic strain at notch cause stress to Sa Sa
be lower than ktSa
 Exercise

❖ A rectangular, stepped bar shown in figure is to be loaded

in bending. Determine the fatigue stress concentration
factor for the given dimensions
❖ D = 2, d = 1.8 and r = 0.25, Sut = 100 kpsi
 Exercise

❖ A rectangular, stepped bar shown in figure is to be loaded

in bending. Determine the fatigue stress concentration
factor for the given dimensions
❖ D = 2, d = 1.8 and r = 0.25, Sut = 100 kpsi
⇣ r ⌘b
Kt = A
d
1
q= pa
1+ r
Kf = 1 + q(Kt 1)
 Fracture Mechanics
❖ Theoretical Cohesive Strength 2⇡x
= max sin
𝜎max is the theoretical cohesive strength
𝑥 = 𝑎-𝑎0 is the displacement in atomic
spacing in a lattice with wavelength 𝜆.
For small displacements, sin 𝑥= 𝑥
2⇡x
= max
For a brittle elastic solid
Ex E
= E✏ =
a0 ) max =
2⇡ a0
If we assume, 𝑎0=𝜆/2, then
E
max =
⇡
 Fracture Mechanics
❖ For brittle solids, all the work in fracture is spent in creating two
new surfaces
❖ Assume each surface has a surface energy of 𝛾s J/m-2
❖ Work done per unit area of fracture surface creation
Z /2
2⇡x max
U0 = max sin dx =
0 ⇡ r
max 2⇡ s E s
=2 s or = =) max =
⇡ max a0
Fracture Mechanics
 Fracture Mechanics

❖ Determine the cohesive strength of a silica fibre if E = 95

GPa, 𝛾s=1 J/m2 and a0 = 0.16 nm.
 Fracture Mechanics

❖ Determine the cohesive strength of a silica fibre if E = 95

GPa, 𝛾s=1 J/m2 and a0 = 0.16 nm.
 Fracture Mechanics

❖ Determine the cohesive strength of a silica fibre if E = 95

GPa, 𝛾s=1 J/m2 and a0 = 0.16 nm.

❖ 𝜎max = 24.4 GPa (Very large number! not observed in

experiments!)
 Fracture Mechanics
❖ The maximum stress at the tip of
the crack is given by
 r r
c c
max = 1+2 ⇡2
⇢ ⇢

r r
c E
2 =
⇢ a0 Elliptic crack model
r
E ⇢
f =
4ca0 r
E
❖ Sharpest possible crack means ⇢ = a0 =) f =
4c
Exercise
 Exercise
❖ Determine the theoretical cohesive strength and fracture
strength for a brittle material with the following properties:
 Exercise
❖ Determine the theoretical cohesive strength and fracture
strength for a brittle material with the following properties:
E = 100 GPa, γ = 1 J/m2, a0 = 0.25 nm,
 Exercise
❖ Determine the theoretical cohesive strength and fracture
strength for a brittle material with the following properties:
E = 100 GPa, γ = 1 J/m2, a0 = 0.25 nm,
length of crack c = 104a0
 Exercise
❖ Determine the theoretical cohesive strength and fracture
strength for a brittle material with the following properties:
E = 100 GPa, γ = 1 J/m2, a0 = 0.25 nm,
length of crack c = 104a0
❖ 𝜎f = 100 MPa, i.e. E/1000 while theoretical cohesive
strength is E/5!
 Exercise
❖ Determine the theoretical cohesive strength and fracture
strength for a brittle material with the following properties:
E = 100 GPa, γ = 1 J/m2, a0 = 0.25 nm,
length of crack c = 104a0
❖ 𝜎f = 100 MPa, i.e. E/1000 while theoretical cohesive
strength is E/5!
❖ Defects are the key for lower cohesive strengths than
theoretical predictions!
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM)

❖ Fracture mechanics presumes presence of a crack

❖ LEFM is applicable
❖ if the zone of yielding around the crack is small
compared to the dimensions of the part
❖ if the bulk of the material behaves according to
Hooke’s law
 Modes of Fracture

❖ Mode-I: Crack opens in tension

❖ Mode-II: In-plane shear
❖ Mode-III: Out-of-plane shear (tear)
❖ In this class, let’s focus only on Mode-I
Stress intensity factor
❖ Plate of width 2b with a crack of length 2a in the
centre
❖ Assume that the crack is sharp at its ends and b
>> a
❖ From theory of linear elasticity for b>>a, the stress
around the crack tip is written as

K ✓ ✓ 3✓
xx =p cos 1 sin sin + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2

K ✓ ✓ 3✓
yy =p cos 1 + sin sin + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2
K ✓ ✓ 3✓
⌧xy =p sin cos cos + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2
 Stress Intensity Factor

K ✓ ✓ 3✓
xx =p cos 1 sin sin + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2

K ✓ ✓ 3✓
yy =p cos 1 + sin sin + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2
K ✓ ✓ 3✓
⌧xy = p sin cos cos + ...
2⇡r 2 2 2
❖ For r=0, the stresses are infinite
❖ K is called the stress intensity factor
p
K = nom ⇡a for a ⌧ b
❖ If the a << b and the geometry of the specimen is
p
different, then K = nom ⇡a
❖ β is the geometry parameter
Example

Courtesy: Dr. Narasimhan Swaminathan

Example

Courtesy: Dr. Narasimhan Swaminathan

Solution
 Griffith Theory of Brittle Fracture

❖ First explanation of discrepancy between theoretical

cohesive strength and fracture strength
❖ Applicable only to brittle materials like glass
❖ A brittle material contains large number of fine cracks to
produce a stress concentration of sufficient magnitude
❖ A crack will propagate when the decrease in elastic strain
energy is at least equal to the energy required to create the
new crack surface
 Griffith Theory of Brittle Fracture
❖ The thickness of the plate is small
and hence plane stress state
❖ The cracks are assumed to be
elliptic
❖ Decrease in strain energy results
from the formation of crack
❖ Elastic strain energy per unit of
plate thickness is
⇡c2 2
UE = Griffith crack model
E
 Griffith Theory of Brittle Fracture
❖ The surface energy per unit plate thickness due to
presence of crack Us = 4c

❖ The total change in potential energy

⇡c2 2
U = UE + Us = 4c
E
❖ Griffith says , “ The crack will propagate under a constant
stress if an incremental increase in crack length produces
no change in the total energy of the system”.
r
d U 2E
= 0 =) =
dc ⇡c
 Griffith Theory of Brittle Fracture
❖ For a plane strain case
s
d U 2E
= 0 =) =
dc (1 ⌫ 2 )⇡c

❖ The above equations mean that for a given material σ√c is

a constant.
❖ Griffith has proved that this is indeed true.
r
2E
❖ Griffith also showed that the constant is equal to
⇡
 Griffith Theory of Brittle Fracture

r
2E
❖ For many materials σ√c is much larger than
⇡
❖ Irwin and Orawan explained that through fracture energy = surface
energy + plastic work
❖ Plastic work is much larger than surface energy and hence the
griffith theory can’t be used for metals (ductile materials)
❖ Griffith theory can be used if surface energy also includes plastic
work term.
 Fatigue Crack Growth
❖ Rate of crack growth as a function of
number of cycles da/dN (log scale) plotted
against the stress intensity factor range ΔK
(log scale)
❖ The plot shows a sigmoidal behaviour
divided into three regions
❖ Region I: Crack initiation stage
❖ Region II: Crack growth (propagation)
stage
❖ Region III: Unstable fracture
❖ Region II is of interest in predicting fatigue
life
Prof. Paul C. Paris
 Fatigue Crack Growth
❖ Initial steep region at
low △K values

❖ no crack growth
❖ linear regime
❖ stable crack growth
❖ final steep region
❖ unstable crack growth
 Fatigue Crack Growth
❖ Initial steep region at
low △K values

❖ no crack growth
❖ linear regime

No crack
❖ stable crack growth
❖ final steep region
❖ unstable crack growth
 Fatigue Crack Growth
❖ Initial steep region at
low △K values

Stable fatigue crack growth

❖ no crack growth
❖ linear regime

No crack
❖ stable crack growth
❖ final steep region
❖ unstable crack growth
 Fatigue Crack Growth

Unstable fatigue crack growth

❖ Initial steep region at
low △K values

Stable fatigue crack growth

❖ no crack growth
❖ linear regime

No crack
❖ stable crack growth
❖ final steep region
❖ unstable crack growth
 Fatigue Crack Growth
❖ The part of the curve in Region II is a straight line on log
coordinates
❖ P. C. Paris defined the relationship in region II as
❖ da/dN = C(ΔK)m
❖ Fatigue crack growth life is predicted by integrating the
above equation
❖ C and m are constants obtained through experiments
❖ Usually m = 3 for steels and ranges from 3 to 4 for
aluminium alloys
 Fatigue Crack Growth

❖ Region I is also interesting as it shows a threshold limit

ΔKth below which there is no crack propagation
❖ ΔKth occurs at crack propagation rates of the order 0.25
nm/cycle or less
❖ Region III is of accelerated crack growth in which Kmax
approaches Kc, the fracture toughness of the material
Fatigue Crack growth: Effect of increasing mean stress

❖ Increasing the stress ratio (R = σmin/σmax =Kmin/Kmax) has

a tendency to increase the crack growth rate in all
regions
❖ The effect of increasing R is less in Region II than
Regions I and III
❖ Influence of R on Paris law

da C( K)P
=
dN (1 R)Kc K
Obtaining crack-growth behaviour and using for engineering
application
 Example
❖ A mild steel plate is subjected to constant amplitude
uniaxial fatigue load to produce stresses varying from
σmax = 180 MPa to σmin = -40 MPa. The static properties
of the steel are σ0 = 500 MPa, Su = 600 MPa, E = 207 GPa
and Kc = 100 MPa m1/2. If the plate contains an initial
through thickness edge crack of 0.5 mm, how many
fatigue cycles will be required to break the plate?
Assume an infinite width plate, for which β = 1.12 and
C = 6.9X10-12
 Solution
da m 12 3
= C( K) = 6.9 ⇥ 10 ( K) (m = 3 for steels)
dN
✓ ◆2 ✓ ◆2
1 Kc 1 100
ai = 0.0005 m, and af = = = 0.078 m
⇡ max ⇡ 180 ⇥ 1.12
Neglecting e↵ect of small mean stress
K = Kmax Kmin , Kmin = 0 for compressive stress
da p m
= C( max ⇡a)
dN
Z Nf Z af
da
Nf = dN = p
C m m (⇡a) m
0 ai max Nf = 261,000 cycles
Z af
1 da
= m m (
p p
C max ⇡)m ai am
 References
1. Robert L. Norton, Machine Design: An integrated approach,
3rd edition, Prentice Hall, (2006)
2. George E. Dieter, Mechanical Metallurgy, Mc GrawHill (1988)
3. M. A. Meyers and K. K. Chawla, Mechanical Behavior of
Materials, Cambridge University Press (2008).

4. Norman E. Dowling, Mechanical Behaviour of Materials,

Pearson (2013)
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cauchy_stress_tensor