You are on page 1of 130

FATIGUE STUDIES AND

CUMULATIVE DAMAGE ANALYSIS


OF THE SURGICAL ALLOY
VITALLIUM

by

Kieran J. Claffey

9529349

A report submitted in partial fulfillment of the


requirements for the undergraduate degree of
Mechanical Engineering
University of Limerick, Ireland.
1997

Approved by Dr. Tim Mcgloughlin Project Supervisor

I
Abstract

This study is based on the fatigue failure of the trade-marked, cobalt-chrome, surgical alloy,
Vitalliumtm which is used in the manufacture of prosthetic hip implants. Different aspects of
fatigue failure are explored within a completely reversed bending, fatigue test programme.
The effect of mean stress on alternating stress is considered in the form of a fatigue strength
diagram. An exploratory S-N curve is determined for cast vitalliumtm. A notch sensitivity
analysis is conducted for two different notch types. A cumulative damage analysis is also
conducted to determine the most suitable life prediction theory for vitalliumtm. The effects of
machining and hot isostatic pressing on fatigue resistance are examined. The nature of the
fatigued microstructure and macrostructure is inspected. It was found that Ben-Amoz’s
theory and the Unified theory were the best cumulative damage life prediction theories for
application to vitalliumtm.

II
Dedication

To my parents for being ever supportive and making all this possible.

III
Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Chapter Description Page

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1
2 Objectives .......................................................................................................................4
3 Literature Review .........................................................................................................5
3.1.1 Introduction to Fatigue Behaviour .................................................................................5
3.1.2 The Three Stages of Fatigue...........................................................................................5

3.1.3 Fatigued Surface Characteristics ....................................................................................6

3.1.4 The S-N Curve ...............................................................................................................6

3.1.5 Determination of S-Log N Curve ...................................................................................7

3.2.1 Fatigue Tests ..................................................................................................................8

3.2.2 R.R. Moore Fatigue Test ................................................................................................9

3.2.3 Strain Controlled Tests ...................................................................................................9

3.3.1 Mathematical Relationship between Strength and Number of Cycles.........................10

3.3.2 The Basquin Relation ...................................................................................................10

3.4.1 Combined Alternating and Mean Stress ......................................................................11

3.4.2 Constant Life Diagram .................................................................................................11

3.5.1 Notch Effects ................................................................................................................12

3.5.2 Notch Sensitivity, Stress Concentrations and Fatigue Notch Factors ..........................13

IV
Table of Contents

3.5.3 Tensile Notch Sensitivity .............................................................................................16

3.5.4 Multiple Notches in a Plate ..........................................................................................16

3.6.1 Cumulative Damage Analysis ......................................................................................17

3.6.2 Cumulative Damage Theories ......................................................................................17

3.6.3 Two Level Step Tests ...................................................................................................17

3.7.1 Damage Tolerant Design ..............................................................................................18

3.7.2 Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) ................................................................18

3.7.3 Thickness Considerations for LEFM ...........................................................................19

3.7.4 Determination of Fracture Toughness ..........................................................................21

3.7.5 Life Prediction using LEFM ........................................................................................23

3.7.6 Randomly Distributed Small Crack Data Method of Fatigue Evaluation ...................24

3.8.1 The Finite Element Method..........................................................................................24

3.9.1 Information Required for Damage Assessment ...........................................................26

3.9.2 Damage Assessment .....................................................................................................26

3.10.1 Ductile Materials ..........................................................................................................30

3.10.2 Brittle Materials............................................................................................................30

3.11.1 Investment Casting of Hip Implants and Fatigue Test Specimens ..............................31

3.11.2 Hot Isostatic Pressing ...................................................................................................32

V
Table of Contents

3.11.3 HIPing Investment Castings .........................................................................................34

3.11.4 HIPing – The End Result .............................................................................................35

3.11.5 Fatigue Resistance due to HIP .....................................................................................36

3.12.1 Specimen Design ..........................................................................................................38

3.12.2 Specimen Preparation ...................................................................................................38

3.12.3 Machining.....................................................................................................................39

4 Life Prediction Theory ...............................................................................................40

4.1 Miner’s Cumulative Damage Theory ...........................................................................40


4.2 Subramanyan’s Cumulative Damage Theory .............................................................42
4.3 Ben-Amoz’s Cumulative Damage Theory ..................................................................44
4.4 Corten-Dolan’s Cumulative Damage Theory .............................................................47
4.5 Marin’s Cumulative Damage Theory ..........................................................................48
4.6 Manson’s Double Linear Cumulative Rule .................................................................50
4.7 Henry’s Cumulative Damage Theory .........................................................................50
4.8 Henry’s Modified Cumulative Damage Theory .........................................................51
4.9 Gatt’s Cumulative Damage Theory .............................................................................52
4.10 Unified Theory of Cumulative Damage ......................................................................53
4.11 Marco-Starkey’s Cumulative Damage Theory ...........................................................55

5 Experimentation .........................................................................................................57

5.1 Experimental Programme .............................................................................................57


5.2 Specimen Preparation ...................................................................................................57
5.3 Preparation of Notched Specimens ..............................................................................58
5.4 Apparatus .....................................................................................................................59
5.5 Standard Fatigue Test Precautions ...............................................................................61

VI
Table of Contents

5.6 Experimental Procedure ..............................................................................................61


5.7 Test Problems and Solutions ........................................................................................63

6 Experimental Results .................................................................................................65

7 Analysis of Data ..........................................................................................................73

7.1 Determination of S-N Curve ........................................................................................73


7.2 Mean Stress Effects on Machined Vitalliumtm .............................................................75
7.3 Constant Life Diagram for Machined Vitalliumtm .......................................................76
7.4 Constant Life Diagram with Mean Stress Correction for Machined Vitalliumtm ........77
7.5 Fatigue Strength Diagram for Cast Vitalliumtm ...........................................................78
7.6 Cumulative Damage .....................................................................................................81
7.7 Notched Vitalliumtm .....................................................................................................83
7.8 HIPed Vitalliumtm.........................................................................................................85

8 Inspection ....................................................................................................................87

8.1 Microscopic Examination ............................................................................................87


8.2 Procedure for Microstructure Analysis ........................................................................87
8.3 Results of Micro-Structural Inspection ........................................................................88
8.4 Macroscopic Inspection................................................................................................90

9 Discussion ....................................................................................................................92

9.1 Machining Effects on Fatigue Resistance ....................................................................92


9.2 Notch Analysis .............................................................................................................92
9.3 Damage Assessment .....................................................................................................93
9.4 Cumulative Damage Theories ......................................................................................94
9.4.1 Marco-Starkey’s Theory ..............................................................................................94
9.4.2 Miner’s, Subramanyan’s and Ben-Amoz’s Theories ...................................................95

VII
Table of Contents

9.4.3 Corten-Dolan’s and Marin’s Theories..........................................................................96


9.4.4 Manson’s Theory..........................................................................................................96
9.4.5 Henry’s, Henry’s Modified and Gatt’s Theories..........................................................97
9.4.6 Unified Theory .............................................................................................................98
9.5 HIPed Specimens .........................................................................................................99
9.6 Mean Stress Effects ....................................................................................................100
9.7 Inspection ...................................................................................................................100
9.8 The Fatigue Testing Machine .....................................................................................101

10 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................102

11 Recommendations ....................................................................................................103

References .................................................................................................................104

Appendix .........................................................................................................................

Derivation of Equation 5.1 ........................................................................................ A.1


Specimen Specifications ........................................................................................... A.2
Machined Vitalliumtm S-N Curve.............................................................................. A.3
S-N Curve for Cast Vitalliumtm ................................................................................. A.4
Constant Life Diagram for Machined Vitalliumtm .................................................... A.5
Sample Life Prediction Calculations based upon Cumulative Damage Theories..... A.6

VIII
Nomenclature

Nomenclature

Symbol Description Units

B Specimen width mm

C Material constant for LEFM -

C Material constant used in Gatt’s cumulative damage theory -

CR Strength reduction factor for reliability -

D Damage fraction -

D Specimen thickness mm

D1 Damage fraction after first stress level application -

De Equivalent damage fraction -

E0 Original endurance limit MPa

E1 Endurance limit after first stress application MPa

Kf Fatigue notch factor -

Kt Stress concentration factor -

Ktf Estimated fatigue notch factor for design purposes -

K1C Fracture toughness (1st mode) -

M Bending moment Nm

N Number of cycles to failure -

N1,2 Number of cycles to failure at first or second applied stress levels -

Nd Number of delay cycles -

NI Number of cycles required to initiate a crack to the propagation stage

NK Number of cycles to knee-point of S-N curve (Subramanyan’s theory) -

R Stress ratio -

S Alternating stress amplitude MPa

Se Current value of endurance limit MPa

Seo Original value of endurance limit MPa

IX
Nomenclature

SN Stress amplitude for a safe life of N cycles MPa

SU Ultimate tensile strength MPa

a Material constant for notch sensitivity -

a Crack length used in LEFM mm

d Material constant used in Corten-Dolan’s theory -

m Material constant used in the Unified theory -

mi Exponent used in Marco-Starkey’s cumulative damage theory -

n Number of applied cycles -

n Material constant for LEFM -

n1 Number of cycles applied at S1

nf Number of remaining cycles to failure -

n Factor of safety -

nf Number of remaining cycles to failure -

n12 Equivalent no. of cycles for 2nd stress level after application 1st stress level (Subramanyan). -

ni2 Number of cycles which cause crack initiation at stress level 2

np2 Number of cycles which cause crack propagation at stress level 2 -

q Notch sensitivity -

q Material constant used in Marin’s cumulative damage theory -

r Notch radius mm

w1 Work done at n1 cycles KJ

 Constant used in Subramanyan’s and Corten-Dolan’s cumulative damage theory -

ek Equivalent cycle ratio after k levels of stress -

ε Strain -

 Stress MPa

a Alternating stress MPa

f Stress for static failure/fracture MPa

m Mean stress MPa

N Nominal stress MPa

TS Ultimate tensile strength MPa

X
Nomenclature

Y Yield strength MPa

α Reliable stress for a design life of N cycles

µ Weighting coefficient used in the Unified theory -

 Non-dimensional maximum cyclic stress -

e Instantaneous non-dimensional endurance limit -

u Non-dimensional original ultimate tensile strength

da/dN Rate of crack growth (Paris’s Law) -

dD/dn Rate of damage growth -

de/dn Rate of reduction in the non-dimensional endurance limit (Unified theory) -

K Change in stress intensity factor -

XI
Introduction Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 1

Introduction
The study of fatigue failure began more than a century ago. The English engineer, Sir
William Fairbairn, carried out the first recorded fatigue tests with wrought iron girders. He
discovered that a girder which could withstand a static load of twelve tons for an indefinite
period would fail if a load of three tons was applied cyclically about three million times. His
explanation was that the metal had become tired. Thus was born the concept of metal
fatigue.

Fatigue accounts for approximately eighty per cent of all metal failures. Therefore, the more
information that can be obtained on the subject, the better it is for society. The general
public first became aware of fatigue failure because of the comet airline disasters in the
1960’s and from the fatigue of fuselage and propellers in ageing civilian and military aircraft.

Fatigue affects us in ways other than aeroplane disasters. An example is of fatigue failure of
the pinion teeth in a rack and pinion automotive steering system. If this were to suddenly fail
when coming down a winding mountain road, the consequences would be obvious. Another
practical example is the small pin which connects the gear shift of a car to the transmission.
This pin is subjected to high stresses every time a gear is changed and cannot fail in a fatigue
event.
Introduction Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

It is obvious that these are extreme situations. Fatigue can cause a lot of trouble in industry.
For example a crack may occur in a notched key way on a motor shaft and as a result, fail
due to fatigue. The damage would necessitate repair and the motor may need to be replaced.
Either of which is expensive. Any part of a machine that vibrates around a point of stress
concentration is liable to be subjected to fatigue and possible failure. It is therefore,
important to design machines to operate at speeds which avoid resonant frequencies, thus
eliminating strong vibrations and unnecessary fatigue failures.

A large area which warrants fatigue information is that of the prosthetic bone industry.
Cobalt chrome alloys have been used as a bone prosthesis material for decades. Vitalliumtm
is one such alloy used by Howmedica to manufacture knee implants and fasteners for
insertion into the human body. Some of the early prosthesis in the 1960’s and ‘70’s failed
during service, due to fatigue. The Charnley-Muller type femoral component in hip
prosthesis was one of these. Today, implants do not fail. This can be accredited to the
design engineers who relentlessly made improvements to get to this stage.

However, the failure of a metal component in a person cannot be over emphasised because of
the excruciating pain involved. It is dangerous to become complacent especially with the
design of new implant products. Surgeons are still reluctant to do hip replacement operations
on people who are under sixty years of age. The implant cannot be one hundred percent
guaranteed against failure under very active conditions. This is a materials problem that
needs to be addressed. This report concentrates on the selection of the best cumulative
damage theory to apply to vitalliumtm , in order to predict when failure is likely to occur
when the material is in a pre-stressed condition.

2
Introduction Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The study examines certain areas of the fatigue failure of heat treated cast vitalliumtm, heat
treated machined-cast vitalliumtm and hot isostatically pressed (HIPed) heat treated cast
vitalliumtm.

These areas include


1. Determination of S-N curves.
2. Notch sensitivity analysis.
3. Cumulative damage analysis.
4. Effects of mean stress (Fatigue Strength Diagram).
5. Microscopic and macroscopic examination.

The literature review explains each aspect of fatigue, which was considered relevant to
vitalliumtm. The theory section breaks down each cumulative damage theory that was used
and shows how to apply the theory for life prediction purposes. The chapter entitled
‘Analysis of Data’ is basically a summary of how the results were analysed to produce
design charts and design data for vitalliumtm.

The investment casting, hot isostatic pressing and X-raying was conducted by Howmedica
Limerick (Pfizer Corp.). The machining, microscopic analysis and fatigue testing were
conducted by the author in the University of Limerick materials laboratory.

3
Objectives Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 2

2.1 Objectives

The main objective of this report is to develop an extensive understanding and empirical
knowledge about the fatigue behaviour of the surgical alloy, Vitalliumtm. In particular, to
determine a suitable cumulative damage theory for application to this material. The previous
researcher [29] provided a basis for the study by producing an S-N curve and cumulative
damage results for machined Vitalliumtm.

The primary objectives are shown below.

1. To plot a reliable S-N curve for cast vitalliumtm by conducting experimental fatigue tests.
2. To conduct a cumulative damage analysis so as to determine the best life prediction
theory for vitalliumtm.
3. To conduct a notch sensitivity analysis.
4. To produce an S-N diagram for notched cast vitalliumtm and to evaluate the affects of
geometric discontinuities on fatigue behaviour.
5. To produce a fatigue strength diagram for cast vitalliumtm.
6. To determine and quantify whether hot isostatic pressing (HIP) treatment affects the
fatigue resistance of cast vitalliumtm.
7. To evaluate the affect of machining on the fatigue behaviour of cast vitalliumtm.
8. To conduct a microscopic and macroscopic examination of the fatigued surface.

4
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 3
3.1.1 Introduction to Fatigue Behaviour

Fatigue results from repeated plastic deformation on a microscopic level. Without


this repeated plastic yielding, fatigue failure could not occur [1]. This is illustrated
below in figure 3.1. The area around the notch tip behaves in a plastic manner while
the rest of the material behaves elastically. It is better for the engineer to design a
component, which is subjected to cyclic stresses, with fatigue data, as opposed to
tensile data because failure may occur well below the yield strength of the material.

Figure 3.1 Illustration of the plastic behavior at a fatigued area.

Local plastic yielding may strain harden a material and prevent the growth of a crack.
If yielding is any more than this it causes a loss of local ductility. The resulting cyclic
strain causes failure.

3.1.2 The Three Stages of Fatigue


Fatigue is widely believed to occur in three separate stages. The first stage is known
as crack initiation or crack nucleation. Crack initiation is caused by a phenomenon
known as dislocation. A dislocation is a fault where half-planes of atoms are missing
within a crystal [2]. These dislocations travel along crystallographic planes until they
reach the surface where they form a minute step. This microscopic step acts as a stress
raiser and a crack initiates. The second stage is known as crack propagation. This
basically is the development of a crack across a surface caused by repeated loading.

5
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A loss of ductility is associated with this stage. The third stage is a catastrophic
failure. This occurs when the decreasing cross-sectional area, can no longer support
the applied load.

3.1.3 Fatigued Surface Characteristics


A failed surface can be examined, to determine whether it failed due to fatigue or not.
There are three distinct areas to look out for. The first is a small smooth area where
the crack begins to initiate, the second is characterised by fibrous beach marks caused
during crack propagation, as shown below, and the third is a crystalline (bumpy) area
where final fast failure occurs.

Figure 3.2 Beach marking transitions to a suddenly failed crystalline section.

3.1.4 The S-N Curve


This is a graphical relationship between strength and number of cycles to failure. It
can be a logarithmic or semi-logarithmic plot. The semi-log plot is more often used
because it is much easier to read stresses on the ordinate compared to a logarithmic
plot.
The fatigue limit is the threshold stress at which failure will no longer occur no matter
how many bending cycles are applied. It is also commonly known as the endurance
limit.
The fatigue test is a simple tensile test in which a load, less than the ultimate, is
applied and released cyclically. A large magnitude of specimens are subjected to this
test with a different load for each case. The data from these tests are used to provide

6
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

data points on the S-N plot. The curve of best fit is drawn, which gives 50%
reliability.

Figure 3.3 Experimental S-N plots, illustrating different levels of reliability.

The scatter is due to the statistical nature of fatigue, and remains despite taking care to
make all specimens identical. At 106 cycles the statistical spread can be taken as
Gaussian with a standard deviation of 8%. If the design stress is reduced by 8%, the
probability for survival for 106 cycles is 0.841. However, if the design stress is
reduced by three standard deviations (24%), a theoretical reliability of 99.9% can be
achieved.

This means the strength reduction factor for reliability ‘CR’ has a value of 0.76.
Therefore, the reliable stress for a design that is to have a safe life of N cycles is
σα = CR SN Equation 3.1

3.1.5 Determination of S-log N Curve


It is desirable to apply forces in the initial tests which result in a final life (fatigue
cracked specimen). These forces are selected on the basis of past experience of the
ratio between fatigue strength and tensile strength of the material. For wrought
aluminum, copper and nickel alloys, the ratio of the fatigue strength at 107 cycles to

7
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

the ultimate tensile strength is typically 0.35 to 0.5 in a completely reversed bending
test with stress ratio R = -1.

Figure 3.4 Typical S-Log N curve (Wohler curve).

Refer to figure 3.4. The scatter in fatigue strength corresponding to a given life, is
small. The scatter in fatigue life corresponding to a given stress level, is large. It is
therefore important to pick the correct stress level for each test. Frequency has a
negligible effect on the fatigue life of most metallic materials, except at frequencies
greater than 1000 Hz or at temperatures where significant creep occurs during each
cycle. This is useful since accelerated testing can be used to explore failure
conditions [3].

3.2.1 Fatigue Tests


There are four different types of fatigue tests which may be carried out on a material.
1. Rotating bending (R.R Moore test).
2. Reversed bending.
3. Reversed axial loading (push-pull).
4. Reversed torsional loading.

8
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A completely reversed bending test is carried out in this analysis.

3.2.2 R.R Moore Fatigue Test


This is a strict standardised fatigue test which is used to determine the S-N curve
(Wohler curve) for a material under rotating bending conditions. In rotating bending,
the maximum stress acts all around the circumference. Fatigue failure will occur at
the weakest point of the circumference. In reversed bending the maximum stress acts
at the top and the bottom of the test specimen. There is a statistical probability that
cracks will not initiate at the place of least cross-sectional area. This means that the
fatigue strength in reversed bending is slightly greater than in rotating bending.
Reversed axial loading subjects the entire cross-sectional area to the maximum stress,
therefore giving approximately 10% lower fatigue strengths than the R.R Moore test.
These tests can serve as a strong basis for the fatigue knowledge of a material.

3.2.3 Strain Controlled Tests


Some structures such as aeroplane cabins and pressure vessels are subjected to
infrequent large strains which may exceed the elastic limit. The materials S-N curve
is often invalid for this type of loading because the large strains are not taken into
consideration. Specialised hydraulic fatigue testing machines are used to conduct
strain controlled tests to produce a relationship between strain and the number of
cycles to failure. There are changes to the hysteresis loop in the stress-strain plot
under cyclic loading. For example, an annealed metal will increase in stress and
undergo cyclic softening, whereas a hardened cold worked metal will decrease in
stress and undergo cyclic hardening [4].

9
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

3.3.1 Mathematical Relationship between Strength and Number of


Cycles
To save testing time, a mathematical relationship between stress and cycles to failure
can be used instead of the S - N curve. When the number of cycles is greater than 106
the endurance limit is significant. Between 103 and 106 cycles the straight line
formula can be used to find the endurance stress for a given life.
S103  6 LogN 
S N  S106  S106
 
 3


Equation 3.2

Or if the safe number of cycles for a given stress is required the formula transposes to
  SN 
  log S 6 
 6 3 10 
  S 3
10 
  log  

N  10  
S 6
10
Equation 3.3

These formulae can only be used when the endurance stresses are known at 103 and
106 cycles and only apply to materials which show an asymptotic relationship on a
S –log N curve at 106 cycles.

It is common practice to use static design data between 1 and 10 cycles because the
strength reduction is considerably small when compared to cycles above 103 cycles.
A safety factor is introduced to compensate for the cyclic nature of the load.

3.3.2 The Basquin Relation


This is a method of determining the life of a material when subjected to a high stress
in low cycle fatigue. That is, from 102 to 105 cycles. The Basquin relation is
expressed as follows.

10
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

S (2 N f ) c   F Equation 3.4

Where σF = The true stress for fracture in tension

c = exponent lying in the range 0.05 to 0.12.

Once the exponent ‘c’ is known the number of cycles to failure ‘Nf’ can be
determined.

3.4.1 Combined Alternating and Mean Stress


The majority of strength problems involve a combination of steady and alternating
stresses. This means that components are subjected to fluctuating stresses as
illustrated below.

Figure 3.5 Illustration of how stress alternates with time for zero mean stress and mean stress conditions.

3.4.2 Constant Life Diagram

A constant life diagram allows one to determine the new safe value for the cyclic
component of alternating stress when a mean stress is applied. The application of a
mean stress, results in a lesser allowable alternating stress. This stress needs to be
known. The constant life diagram is then superimposed on another plot, on which
maximum stress is the ordinate and the minimum stress is the abscissa to produce

11
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

what is known as a fatigue strength diagram. An example of one such diagram is


shown below [5]. The chart can be used if the application of a mean stress is
unavoidable or if it is the desired effect.

Figure 3.6 Fatigue strength diagram for 7075-t6 aluminum alloy, Su = 82 Ksi, Sy = 75 Ksi [5]

If a known mean stress is applied, and if the maximum stress and the required life
cycle of a component are also known, then the maximum allowable alternating stress
can be determined using the fatigue strength diagram. Having mean stress correction
has the effect of increasing the materials chances of yielding before actual failure. It
reduces the possibility of catastrophic failure due to mean stress.

3.5.1 Notch Effects

Most components contain necessary discontinuities in their structure such as holes


and edges. Collectively, these are known as notches and reduce the fatigue resistance
of components. It is necessary, therefore to account for this effect. The study of this
is called a notch analysis. A sharp notch is considered to have a radius smaller than
0.25 mm whilst a blunt notch has a radius of approximately 2 mm. Sharp notches can

12
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

initiate cracks at low energy whereas blunt notches need more energy to initiate
cracks.

Two types of test exist


 To assess notch sensitivity as a material property.
 To generate information for design purposes.

3.5.2 Notch Sensitivity, Stress Concentration and Fatigue Notch


Factors

The introduction of a notch causes a stress concentration in one local area. The stress
at the notch is higher than the nominal stress throughout the component. For
example, consider the S-N curve below.

Figure 3.7 S-N curve illustrating how the introduction of a notch can affect the fatigue life.

The fatigue life of the plain material with no notch is given by ‘N1’. The material
would not last as long as long as N1 if a notch were to be introduced. Therefore, the
life of the notched material is given by ‘N2’ at the new higher local stress. In reality,
this is not the new fatigue life. The introduction of the new local higher stress does
not reduce the fatigue limit as much as it was thought it would. This is where the
fatigue notch factor and notch sensitivity come into play. The notch, in actual fact
has an equivalent stress level at ‘N3’.

13
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The notch sensitivity is defined as

q = Kf - 1 Equation 3.5

Kt - 1

Kf = Fatigue notch factor

Kt = Stress concentration factor

Note: When q = 0, implies no notch effect.


q = 1, implies full theoretical notch effect.

f
Kf  Equation 3.6
 nf
 f = Fatigue limit of unnotched material
 nf = Fatigue limit of notched material

Note: It is desirable that notch effects do not adversely change the fatigue properties.
Therefore, one wants to keep the fatigue notch factor ‘Kf’ as close to unity as
possible. The fatigue notch factor is always lower than the stress concentration factor.
The estimated fatigue notch factor ‘Ktf’is used for design purposes, only when the true
notch factor is unknown. It represents a calculated estimate of the actual fatigue
notch factor ‘Kf’.
Ktf = q(Kt - 1) + 1 Equation 3.7
Note: In high strength steels the effect of small holes or scratches is more
pronounced than in steels of lesser strength. Vitalliumtm is a high strength material
which is susceptible to notch effects of small holes. This is the reason why such
small notch radii were chosen for the notch analysis. It can be seen from the graph q
vs. r, (figure 3.8) that materials (especially brittle materials) are more notch sensitive
at small radii.

14
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.8 Notch sensitivity curves for steels of different hardness and an aluminum alloy [1].

It is difficult to find ‘q’ because the notch sensitivity factor ‘Kf’ must be known first.
However the approximate nature of ‘q’ as shown in the above graph, can be found
using the following formula.
1
q Equation 3.8
a
1
r
Where a = material constant

r = notch radius
Note: The softer the material is; the higher the value of ‘a’.
a = 0.02 for aluminium alloy.
The notch sensitivity ‘q’ and the material constant ‘a’ are unknown for vitalliumtm.
One of the main purposes of doing a notch sensitivity analysis is to determine the
proper ‘Kf’ fatigue notch factor for vitalliumtm as opposed to using stress

15
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

concentration factors. This allows us to accurately quantify the effects of notches on


material properties.

3.5.3 Tensile Notch Sensitivity

There exists another definition of notch sensitivity which is obtained from material
tensile data. It is defined by the reduction in ductility of an area that has a tri-axial
stress field [6].

-
Notch strength ratio (NSR) = Equation 3.9

Where SULT-n = ultimate tensile strength in notched specimen.

SULT = ultimate tensile strength in plain material (unnotched).

If NSR < 1 => notch sensitive material

> 1 => notch insensitive material

3.5.4 Multiple Notches in a Plate


It is known that a single notch represents a higher degree of stress concentration than
a series of closely spaced notches of the same kind.

Single notch Multiple notches


Figure 3.9 Stress contours associated with multiple notches.

Sometimes it is preferable to introduce multiple notches into the design of a


component so as to avoid having high stress concentrations with single notches.
When doing a notch sensitivity analysis single notches are preferred because they
produce higher localised stress concentrations.

16
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

3.6.1 Cumulative Damage Analysis


Cumulative damage is the damage that accumulates in a material after it has been
subjected to various stresses, for an arbitrary number of cycles. It involves the
prediction of the actual damage that has occurred, in parts stressed above the
endurance limit at different stress levels and the remaining life of the material at a
particular stress level. It is, at best, a rough procedure due to the large scatter band of
failed specimens. Several cumulative damage theories have been developed, most of
these in the 1950’s and 60’s. There is no absolute correct theory. It is up to the
engineer or scientist to determine whether any theory may apply and to determine the
most suitable theory for a particular material.

3.6.2 Cumulative Damage Theories


There are several damage theories available, some of which are more suitable to
particular materials than others. Miner’s rule is the most simple cumulative damage
theory. It suggests that when the sum of the cycle ratios equals unity, complete
damage, which is failure, will occur.

n/N = 100% Damage ≈ 1 Equation 3.10

3.6.3 Two Level Step Tests


This is a test method used to model the action of a material which is subjected to
varying loads above the fatigue limit. The specimen can be stressed high, then
stressed low until failure occurs (high-low test) or it can be stressed low, then stressed
high until failure (low-high test). The cumulative damage theories are then used to
predict the number of cycles to failure at the second stress level. The Avery-Denison
fatigue testing machine in UL does not have the facility to apply fluctuating loads that
can be repeated for sustained periods. This method of testing acts only as a model to
the real situation.

17
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

3.7.1 Damage Tolerant Design


Damage tolerant fatigue design ensures that cracks will not propagate to failure either
within the design life or between inspection periods. It was introduced for the design
of military aircraft where it was impractical to adopt the fail-safe procedures used for
commercial aircraft. The concept was that an assumed pre-existing defect would not
propagate to failure between two inspections [7], and it depends on the application of
fracture mechanics.

Fatigue strength calculation is based on the determination of the fatigue or threshold


stress which corresponds to a particular life (S-N curve) whereas linear elastic
fracture mechanics (LEFM) is based on the determination of fracture stress which
corresponds to a particular crack length. LEFM has an advantage over fatigue
strength calculation which is that it is more useful to a maintenance engineer. A crack
may develop, due to unusual loading circumstances, which could possibly fail at a
fracture stress below the fatigue threshold stress. Fatigue strength calculation will not
take this into account but fracture mechanics will.

3.7.2 Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM)


The durability of a component is governed by the rate of degradation of the load
bearing capacity as a result of sub-critical crack growth. The sub-critical crack is
defined as a crack that is smaller than the critical crack length for a particular stress.

LEFM describes the useful life of a component as a function of the materials


subcritical crack growth resistance [8]. This mathematical relationship is known as
Paris's Law.
da
 C K 
n
Equation 3.11
dN

K is the change in the stress intensity factor and can be measured experimentally.

18
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

It can be expressed in terms of geometry, stress and crack size as

K  Y f a Equation 3.12

Where Y is a function of the geometry of the instantaneous crack size ‘a’ and the
specimen thickness ‘B’, [Y= f (a/B)].
For a given crack size, a specific critical failure stress is defined by its fracture
toughness ‘Kc’or failure locus (figure 3.10 below). Conversely, for a given stress, a
critical crack size exists.

Figure 3.10 Schematic representation of failure locus.

3.7.3 Thickness Considerations for LEFM


The failure locus is different for different materials of varying thicknesses. For
example, Harrison [9] applied an LEFM analysis to the fatigue behaviour of
transverse non-load carrying fillet welds and discovered that the fatigue strength tends
to decrease with increasing thickness (B). Refer to figure 3.11

19
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1.8
1.6

Relative Fatigue Strength


1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
Square butt w elds
0.2
0 Fillet w elds
1 10 100
Thickness, m m

Figure 3.11 Influence of plate thickness on fatigue strength of weldments [9].

The reason the thickness effects the failure locus is because ‘Y’ is a function of (a/B).
Thus, the high stress region extends further for a thick plate than for a thin one.
Therefore, for two weld joints with the same initial crack size, but with different plate
thicknesses, the ‘Y’ factor and hence the stress intensity factor (K) will be greater for
the thicker plate, causing the crack to propagate faster in the thicker plate. The same
situation exists for pressure vessels in that fatigue strength will decrease with
increasing thickness. However, in bridge girders, (I - beams, T - beams, J - beams),
the fatigue strength will increase with flange thickness.
LEFM thickness predictions have been investigated experimentally and have
correlated reasonably with conventional fatigue test data.

The mode one stress intensity factor ‘K1’ varies with thickness ‘B’ but the critical
stress intensity factor ‘K1c’ is a material property that has a critical value according to
equation 3.13. Refer to figure 3.13 below.

2
K 
B  2.5 1c  Equation 3.13
 Y 

20
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.12 Illustration of how material thickness affects the stress intensity factor.

The critical stress intensity factor ‘K1c’ is more commonly known as the fracture
toughness parameter. To perform a valid test to find K1c the thickness B must be in
agreement with equation 3.13 above.

3.7.4 Determination of Fracture Toughness (K1C)


The use of alloys with high fracture toughness can act as a safeguard against
catastrophic failure towards the end of the design life of a component. The
determination of the fracture toughness provides an insight into the materials ability
to resist failure after crack nucleation and propagation. The figure below shows an
example of typical test procedure (Figure 3.13). A specimen is cyclically excited
with constant amplitude load. Two such loads () yield two different fatigue crack
growth curves for a titanium alloy.

21
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.13 Constant load amplitude fatigue crack growth curves for a mill annealed Ti-6A1-4V alloy tested in
vacuum at room temperature.

Paris's Law relates the slope (da/dN) of figure 3.13 to the stress intensity range (K).
K can be found from the equation
K1    . a Equation 3.14

and da/dN can be obtained from figure 3.13. A plot with da/dN as ordinate and K1
as abscissa (figure 3.14) yields the fracture toughness value, K1C.

Figure 3.14 Relationship between the rate of crack growth and fracture toughness.

22
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The value of the fracture toughness on the K1 (fracture toughness) axis occurs when
the slope of figure 3.14 goes to infinity.
3.7.5 Life Prediction using LEFM
Paris's Law, [da / dN = C (K )n] can be solved to yield a life prediction, once the
initial crack length ai and the final crack length af are known. Through integration by
separation of variables equation 3.11 becomes

1
 dN  
Nf af
da
C K 
n
N0 ai Equation 3.15

But if equation 3.14 is substituted into equation 3.15, the equation then becomes

1 n
 
Nf af
dN  a 2
da Equation 3.16
C   n
N0 n ai
2

The constants C and n can be found in the following manner

Take the logarithm of Paris's equation to yield a linear equation

log (da/dN) = log C + n log K Equation 3.17

The values of C and n can be obtained from the plot of log (da/dN) vs. log K. as
shown in figure 3.15.

Figure 3.15 Demonstration of method used to determine the constants ‘C’ and ‘n’.

The equation which allows the calculation of the number of cycles to failure is
simplified to give this final equation.
af
1  a 1 n 2 
Nf    Equation 3.18
C    1  n 
n n
2
 2 ai

23
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

It should be noted that LEFM can only be utilised in materials which exhibit a
relatively linear elastic relationship according to Hooke's Law ( Elastic-plastic
fracture mechanics [EPFM] has been developed to deal with materials that act in a
plastic nature around the crack zone. EPFM is the preferred fracture mechanics
method when dealing with materials that tend to work-harden during cyclic loading.

3.7.6 Randomly distributed small crack data method of fatigue


evaluation
Conventional fatigue testing using S-N curves and fracture mechanics are the better
known methods of fatigue damage measurement. Another method, developed by
Kitagawa et als, utilises small crack data, which are randomly distributed throughout
test specimens [10]. Their method incorporates the probabilistic laws that cracks
follow and a quantitative method for the fatigue damage evaluation and fatigue life
prediction of materials. It is based on the growth rate of distributed small cracks and
on the crack length distribution function. This function is dependent on geometry,
initial crack size and the type of loading involved.
The first step is the preparation of test specimens having small cracks randomly
distributed, in a deliberate manner, over their surfaces. The second step is the
sampling of statistical data on the cracks from these specimens and from real
structures. Finally, the third step is fatigue damage evaluation and life prediction
based on various statistical treatments of the obtained data. This method of fatigue
damage evaluation has yielded good results for some steels. It is not used very much
in practice because of the lack of experimental data available.

3.8.1 The Finite Element Method (FEM)


Fatigue testing can be quite long and expensive. Any method capable of predicting
the outcome of these tests in the early stage of the design process would be useful.
Viceconti et als created three different finite element computer models, of increasing
complexity, to predict the stress field in a prosthetic hip implant.

24
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The first model was a linear model with all the material assumed to have an elastic
behaviour. In the second model the non-linear behaviour of the stem interface was
taken into account by incorporating simple gap elements. In the third model the
bonding cement was modelled as an elastic-perfectly plastic material. Their study
highlighted the important point that FEM cannot be blindly used to predict failure
because the first two FE models failed completely to predict the actual stress field
with only the most complex model achieving an acceptable degree of accuracy.

Figure 3.16 Finite element model of a hip prosthesis [11].

McNamara et als investigated the load transfer (stress shielding) of press fitting and
full bonding of hip prosthesis by comparing a finite element model with an
experimental model [11]. They discovered that press-fitting a stem does not provide
the same stress shielding effect as obtained by gluing. The FE method predicted
strains which correlated well with the experimental strains. In this case the FE
method was accurate.
The problem associated with FE is not the actual computer package but the wisdom of
the engineer who makes the simplifying assumptions. Often it is impossible to be
able to preconceive actual material behaviour. It is always recommended to conduct
experiments and not to rely on FEM alone.

25
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

3.9.1 Information Required for Damage Assessment


Before the fatigue life of an actual component can be obtained, the working stress and
the cycles of operation must be known. This may often be difficult as it involves
precise instrumentation and experimental work, regarding the operation. S-N curves
are required for the particular part in question. An example of which occurs when
conducting a cumulative damage analysis of a hip prostheses. This involves
producing an S-N curve for the actual component type and applying the damage
theories. It is necessary to take component geometry into consideration in this
instance because there is a critical stress concentration approximately 5 mm below the
level of fixing cement in the human femur. However, if the critical region has a
negligible stress concentration, S-N Curves of the basic material can be used.

3.9.2 Damage Assessment


Cumulative damage theories are at best a rough approximation of the damage that
actually accumulates during the working life of a component, because the nature of
fatigue, in itself, is random but more importantly the definitions and evaluation
methods for damage are a much debated question [12]. Cumulative damage theories
provide a means for life prediction based upon accumulated damage over time.

The damage methods may be divided into two categories:

1) Damage is considered as the presence of defects.


2) Damage is considered as the alteration of a property.

The first method presents difficulties in that several kinds of defects exist at the same
time ( geometry, size, and inclusion defects for example ) The problem of adding the
effects of different kinds of defects to obtain ‘total damage’ has not yet been solved
[12] although LEFM methods have produced some promising results for variable
loading conditions.

26
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Attempts have been made to predict fatigue life under variable - amplitude loading
using LEFM methods. For randomised load spectra, LEFM models are reasonably
successful in predicting trends in the rate of fatigue crack growth and fatigue life.
The rate of crack growth may be characterised reasonably well by using the root-
mean-square value of the stress intensity range (Krms) [9]. Life prediction for
random load spectra may then be possible by replacing K by Krms in equations 3.11
and 3.16.

Failure conditions must be checked along the way by comparing the crack size ‘a’
against the critical crack size ‘af’ for the current maximum load.

For ordered loading spectra, such as in two level step tests, an iterative procedure
developed by Wei and Shih [8] appears to work. The general form of Paris's law is
preserved, but is modified by adding numbers of cycles of delay ‘ND’, where no crack
growth takes place. These delay cycles are illustrated in figure 3.17 below and they
are determined by experimentation.

Figure 3.17 Schematic illustration of delay in fatigue crack growth (definition of delay cycles, N d).

Their results [8] suggest the assumption, that damage is directly related to defects, is
correct. This method is long winded however as the number of delay cycles must be
found experimentally for the magnitude of each loading level, whether it is high- low
stressing, or low-high stressing. The second method damage being considered is the
alteration of a material property. Some properties which have been correlated with

27
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

damage evolution include resistivity, ductility, fatigue limit, Young's modulus,


mechanical energy dissipation and plastic strain.
When the second method is used, the damage correlated with various properties
shows a non-linear characteristic with respect to cycle life ‘β’, (Figure 3.18 below).

Figure 3.18a. Figure 3.18b.

Figure 3.18 Damage accumulation curves for two level tests. (a) Without interaction

(b) With interaction

The forms of the curves are dependent on the loading level; the higher levels
correspond to a higher damage level.
Consider a two level step test. Proposed test models may be divided into two cases:
[12]
1.) There is no interaction of the first level upon the second level. (Figure 3.18a).
2.) There is interaction of the first level upon the rate of damage accumulation of
second level. (Figure. 3.18b).
For the first case, at S1, damage accumulates along path OAC until point A is reached,
where the stress level is changed to S2. The damage then begins to accumulate along
path OBC, which is the path along which damage would have accumulated if the
stress had been equal to S2 all along. However, for the second case (Fig. 3.18b);
damage accumulates along path BD after the stress change. This case is what actually
happens in reality, especially when the first stress is greater than the second stress
(high-low) in a two level step test.

28
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Pluvinage and Raguet [12] investigated the affects of eight different damage
properties for low cycle fatigue. They defined damage as
X0  Xn
D Equation 3.19
X0  X R

Where X0 is the value of the considered property for the virgin material, and XR is the
value of the considered property after N cycles of strain.
Their results suggested that the measurement of fatigue damage depends on the
properties that are used as damage indicators (Figure 3.19 below). Clearly the
damage indicator affects the cycle ratio ‘β’ and the overall life prediction.

Figure 3.19 Damage evolution curves measured by 8 different methods.

From figure 3.19 it can be seen that the eight properties can be put into three
categories.

29
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1) Those which are sensitive to the formation of macrocracks ( Elasticity modulus


and electrical resistivity )
2) Those which are sensitive to the migration of dislocations ( density and
Brinell hardness ).
3) Those which are sensitive to both of the above (Ductility, Limit of
Reversibility, load drop during strain controlled tests).

Pluvinage et al [12] suggested that the examination of the evolution of a property


seems to be easier than the defect method for a quantitative measurement of fatigue
damage.

3.10.1 Ductile Materials


Ductile materials can be deformed considerably by tension before fracture will occur.
As a general rule, ductile materials do not suffer loss of strength due to steady
increasing uniaxial load. In completely reversed bending fatigue tests they tend to
form pockets or indentations at the surface. Ductile materials are more fatigue
resistant by nature than brittle materials [2]. Cast vitalliumtm has a 15% elongation
before ultimate failure and is considered to be a ductile material.

3.10.2 Brittle Materials


Brittle materials are materials that are typically hard but not tough. Experience has
shown that it is wise to apply the full stress concentration factor ‘Kt’in the design of
brittle material components, despite the fact that experiments show that the full effect
is not usually obtained. The full ‘Kt’factor is used to compensate for poor shock
resistance and tends to give conservative estimates for failure criteria. Conservative
estimates are quite satisfactory when dealing with notches in brittle materials due to
their inherent ability to fail in a catastrophic manner.

30
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The Mohr theory is suggested for design purposes for brittle materials subjected to
alternating stress [13]. The factor of safety for bending loading (normal stress) is
given as,
n =  f / Kt  a Equation 3.20

3.11.1 Investment Casting of Hip Implants and Fatigue Test Specimens


Vitalliumtm is an expensive material which warrants ‘casting to size’ to eliminate
machining waste. When large quantities of cast products, under 2 kg in weight, are
required, investment casting is ideal. The fatigue test specimens were cast and then
machined and ground to size.

A master mould, in two separate halves, is produced to manufacture the wax patterns.
This metal mould can be machined or cast using a low melting point alloy around a
pattern. A typical example of a wax mould making process can be broken into five
steps below.

1. Molten wax is injected into the clamped master mould at a pressure of about
3.5 MPa.
2. When the wax has solidified it is removed from the metal mould and its gate is
trimmed.
3. The wax pattern is attached to a central wax runner. This is repeated until the
required number of castings is reached and produces a ‘wax tree’ which is then
attached to a bottom plate.
4. An open metal flask is placed over the assembly and a liquid investment
material is poured into the flask. The bottom plate vibrates to bring entrapped
air bubbles to the surface during investment solidification. A typical
investment material is a mixture of fine ‘sillimanite’ sand and ethyl silicate.
5. It takes about eight hours for the investment to dry. The bottom plate is
removed, the flask is inverted and is passed through an oven at approximately
150°C. The wax melts and leaves a cavity which is then used as the mould for
the original required parts.

31
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.20 The investment mould making process [2].

3.11.2 Hot Isostatic Pressing


Hot isostatic pressing is a process of bonding materials at high temperatures with high
pressures acting on all surfaces simultaneously and equally. It is used to heal internal
casting defects and to reduce scrappage. The work piece is placed in a furnace which
is contained within a pressure vessel as shown below [14].

32
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.21 HIP vessel with work piece [14].

The work piece is then pressurised with an inert gas and heated to a softened state.
The gas pressure exerts a large force equally distributed over the part to attain
absolute density. When healing defects in castings, temperatures generally range from
500°C to 1300 °C and pressures from vacuum to 200 MPa.
Companies, such as Howmedica, who conduct high integrity casting, can accrue the
following advantages utilising HIP.
1. Repair of subsurface defects.
2. Improved mechanical properties which reduce rejection rates and inspection
frequencies.
3. Elimination of unwanted porosity to significantly reduce premature failure.

Repair of used turbine blades, such as the one in figure 3.22, by HIP has been
successful on both stationary and aircraft turbine engines. The cost to HIP is much
less than the cost to manufacture new turbine blades.

33
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.22 Turbine blade repaired by HIP [14].

3.11.3 HIPing Investment Castings


Precision casting of cobalt- base superalloys to near net shape is well established as a
means of producing fasteners for insertion into the human body. The mechanical
properties and microstructures are expected to be those of the perfect as-cast material.
The fabrication of investment castings is such that they are prone to developing
residual casting defects which effect mechanical properties [14]. An example is that
of microporosity which is readily formed from shrinkage, during cooling, in castings.
The application of HIP has changed the integrity of investment castings which can
now actively compete in net shape technology of high performance forged parts. It is
used extensively for full densification of investment castings.
For the production of prosthetic bone implants and fasteners, it is absolutely critical
that material with casting defects does not pass through the system and break in the
patient’s body. Casting defects are inevitable. This entails a large amount of
scrappage which is rather costly. HIPing is expensive, yet it offsets scrappage and re-
manufacturing costs in most cases.

34
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

In HIP cycles for castings, restrictions on the temperature range are influenced by the
strength of the material (minimum temperature) and the occurrence of melting
(maximum temperature). The range may be as little as 30 °C. Temperature control is
more critical than pressure or dwell time control. Frequent sampling of gas purity is
necessary during a typical cycle to prevent gas inclusions.

A typical HIPing process is as follows.


1. Castings are loaded into a container which is then transferred into a pressure
vessel, surrounded by insulation.
2. The cold system is closed, evacuated, flushed with argon and re-evacuated.
3. The vessel is then pressurised and the furnace is started. The operating
conditions in terms of temperature and pressure are controlled until they reach
the desired values simultaneously.
4. The dwell time at peak pressure and temperature typically varies between two
to four hours. The power is shut off and the system is allowed to cool by itself
[14].

3.11.4 HIPing - The End Result


The application of HIP to castings has the effect of healing the microstructure. This
has a knock on effect of improving the mechanical properties of castings.

35
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.23 Illustration of the microshrinkage that can appear in titanium castings which can be closed
by HIP [14].

HIP has been proven to increase the stress rupture life under creep tests, the fatigue
life under fatigue tests and tensile strength for most alloys. Also, mechanical
properties are improved in castings that have no detectable defects.

3.11.5 Fatigue Resistance due to HIP


Fatigue data under high cycle (30 Hz) and low cycle fatigue (0.17 Hz) is illustrated
below for a titanium alloy.

Figure 3.24 High cycle fatigue properties of titanium alloy before and after HIP [14]

36
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 3.25 Low cycle fatigue properties of titanium alloy before and after HIP [14].

It can be seen that the HIPed specimens give fatigue lives to the right and above the
mean S-N curve.

A typical set of fatigue test results is shown in table 3.1 for the alloy RENE 120. In
this case HIPing improves the fatigue resistance.

As-cast HIP 4h @ 103 MPa

1177 0C 1204 0C

2487 8,543 24,919

Cycles to failure 2300 10,933 13,052

773 13,685 5,723

1853 11,053 12,077

Table 3.1 Effect of HIP on RENE 120 Fatigue Properties [14].

37
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

3.12.1 Specimen Design


Bending specimens may be round or flat and maybe tested under plane bending or
rotating bending conditions. Plane bending specimens are usually flat and may be
tested as beams or cantilevers. Examples of flat test specimens [15], according to BS.
3518, are shown in figure 3.26 below. The test specimen may be subjected to a
uniform or varying moment.

Figure 3.26 Typical bending test pieces of rectangular cross-section, outlined by BS. 3518 [15].

It is desirable to keep the continuous radii ,‘r’, as large as practicable in order to


minimise stress concentration effects. The continuous radii are necessary in order to
ensure fatigue cracking close to the centre of the specimen. The design of the
gripping portions is dictated by the clamping arrangement of the particular machine.

3.12.2 Specimen Preparation


It is essential that uniform specimen preparation procedures are practiced. The
procedures should be carefully specified for the various stages of rough machining,
finish machining and polishing [16]. Machining should be longitudinal on flat
specimens. To obtain the required thickness of cast specimens it is necessary to
perform gradual grinding operations. Sharp edges can be removed by breaking them
by hand to an approximate radius of 0.125mm, then using a fine emery paper (no.
500), moving in the longitudinal direction in order to leave no harmful scratches.

Notched specimens can be prepared by rough machining or grinding of notches,


depending upon the strength of the material and cutting tools available. It should be
noted that notched specimens are designed so that failure will occur at the notched

38
Literature Review Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

cross-section. The surface preparation of the remainder of the test section is therefore
not as important as in the case of unnotched specimens [16].

Polishing is a cutting process used to remove scratches. It is not a smearing operation


which merely smudges scratches into themselves. If a polishing process smears
scratches, then they still exist. So even, if there is a perfect mirror finish it is not
guaranteed to be scratch free. For most non-ferrous specimens a machined surface is
often more desirable than a polished surface because it is easily produced and it
represents a practical condition. Experience has shown that complicated polishing
procedures are no more effective in obtaining fatigue values, than in a uniform
standard finish. However, it is sometimes necessary to polish specimens, so that the
surface finish is similar to that of the desired finished product. Polishing methods in
use have roughness limits as low as 0.05µm and as high as 0.8µm. Notched
specimens may be polished by means of a rotating member immersed in an abrasive.
Two successively finer grades of abrasive slurry are used, for example, 280 grit in
SAE 30 oil and then 3F grit in SAE 30 oil.

3.12.3 Machining
The tolerance on the thickness of the test piece is X + 0.5mm. Test pieces should be
ground to size in the following manner.

0.025mm depth of cut to 0.1mm oversize.


0.005mm depth of cut to 0.03mm oversize.
0.0025mm depth of cut to size.

The sequence of polishing is arranged so that the last paper used is 600 grade
waterproof silicon carbide paper.

39
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 4
4.1 Miner's Cumulative Damage Theory
This theory adopts two major assumptions [17]:
1.) The loading cycle is sinusoidal, (figure 4.1).
2.) The total amount of work that can be absorbed produces failure (i.e. no work
hardening occurs).

Figure 4.1 Assumed sinusoidal loading cycle.

W = work absorbed at failure.


W1 = work done at n1cycles.
N1 = number of cycles to failure at stress S1.
n1 = number of cycles applied at S1.

Figure 4.2 Typical S-N curve illustrating the effects of cumulative damage for two
different levels of stress [17].

40
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

If W represents the net work absorbed at failure, then


w1 n1 w2 n2
 ;  ………….etc. Equation 4.1
W N W N

and w1+ w2+w3+…..wn=W (at failure)

w1 w2 w3 w
Hence   ...... n  1 Equation 4.2
W W W W

Substituting values of equation 4.1 into equation 4.2.

n1 n2 n3 nn
  ...... 1 Equation 4.3
N1 N 2 N 3 Nn

Or n/N = 1 Equation 4.4

Miner experimented with 245 - T Alcad aluminium at two or more stress levels, with
constant stress ratio, and found that the average test value for n/N was 0.98.
He discovered that all loading cycles were significant in the eventual failure of
materials. To prove this he based experiments on the assumption that only the final
stress cycling caused failure. The average value of n/N was 0.37 in this
circumstance, which indicated that the damage from the other loading cycles cannot
be ignored.

Miner also experimented with aluminium specimens, at different stress levels, and
also with variance in the stress ratio R (Smin/Smax). He did this to determine the effect,
the ratio had in particular cyclic loading patterns. He discovered that the average
value of n/N was 1.05 for these experiments. Fatigue data by Johnson and Oberg
[18] when readjusted gave an average value of n/N equal to 1.05. Miner published
his paper on cumulative damage in 1945. He did not know whether his rule would

41
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

apply to materials other than 24 S-T Alcad aluminium. Subsequent fatigue testing of
various materials has proven him correct. More complicated cumulative damage
theories have been developed since but none is more widely used than Miners' theory
because of its sheer simplicity. His rule has been developed by other authors to
increase its accuracy. It has been discovered [19] that for a two level stress test, in
which one stress is applied for a number of cycles and then run to failure at a second
stress, that if S1 < S2, then n/N > 1
and for S1 > S2, then n/N < 1
In addition, the variation from unity is greater for larger differences between S1 and S2
stress levels.

4.2 Subramanyan’s Cumulative Damage Theory


Subramanyan's theory states that lines of constant damage (isodamage lines) exist
between applied stress levels and that all these lines converge to a kneepoint [20],
(Figure 4). This differs to Miner's rule which assumes the constant damage line
between stress levels lie parallel to the S-N curve.

Figure 4.3 Comparison of Subramanyan’s constant damage line approach to Miner’s


approach for remaining life prediction theory [20].

42
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The isodamage line is drawn from the point (S1, n1) to the point ( Se, Ne ) which is
known as the knee point. The equivalent damage D at ( S2, n12 ), caused by stress 1 at
n1 is found from

log N k  log N 1 log N k  log N 2


D  Equation 4.5
log N k  log n1 log N k  log n12

This equation is transposed to give

log n12  log N 2


 Equation 4.6
log n1  log N 1

From figure 4.3, n2 = N2 - n12. Cycle ratio may be defined as C = n/N then equation
2 may be written as follows.

 log C1  log1  C2  Equation 4.7

But
log n12 <=> - Se
log n1 <=> - Se
log N2 <=> - S2
log N1 <=> - S1

From equation 4.6 this implies that


S2  Se log N k  log N 2
  Equation 4.8
S1  S e LogN k  log N 1

When the number of remaining cycles to failure in a two level step test is required,
equation 4.7 transposes to the following form.
  n  
n2  N 2 1   1   Equation 4.9
  N1  

43
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

4.3 Ben-Amoz’s Cumulative Damage Theory


Ben-Amoz’s theory is a development of both Miner’s and Subramanyan’s theories.
He proposed the idea of introducing upper and lower bounds on remaining fatigue life
in two-stage cycling [21]. Subramanyan assumed that all damage curves converge to
a knee-point. Ben-Amoz considered this to be too restrictive and so relaxed the idea
to produce a lower bound on damage S-N curves. Refer to figure 4.4 below. Miner’s
rule states that damage curves run parallel to the original S-N curve. According to
Ben-Amoz this provides an upper bound on remaining life. The principle of this
theory is to use both Subramanyan’s and Miner’s rules to give two values which
inbound the true value of remaining life.

Figure 4.4 Upper and lower bounding damage curves used in Ben-Amoz’s cumulative damage theory
[21].

To prove his theory he made two assumptions.


1. Damage curves constitute a family of curves of which the base S-N curve is a
member.
2. Damage curves form a non-intersecting family of curves.

44
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The damage curves A’ and B’ in figure 4.4 above violate the second assumption and
so are considered to be invalid.
n2 n
Miner’s theory states that  1 1
N2 N1


n2 n 
Subramanyan’s theory states that  1  1 
N2  N1 

For a two-level, high-low stress test, Ben-Amoz suggests that


n n n 
1 1  2  1  1  Equation 4.10
N1 N 2  N1 

And for a low-high test, that

1

n n n 
1 2  1  1  2  Equation 4.11
N 2 N1  N2 

Ben-Amoz proved that the bounds apply equally aswell to linear as well as non-linear
S-N curves. The bounds can become narrower if crack initiation information is
available. The fatigue process is broken into two phases, crack initiation and crack
propagation. The remaining life is considered to be of the form
n2 = ni2 + np2 Equation 4.12

where ni2 = number of cycles which cause crack initiation at stress level 2.
np2 = number of cycles which cause crack propagation at stress level 2.
Two cases arise.

Case 1 For n1  Ni1, the bounds are considered to be



 n1 
N i 2  n1  n2  N1 
1    1  N i2   Equation 4.13
N i1  N 1  N 2  N i1 
 

45
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

where Ni1 = number of cycles to initiate crack at stress 1.


N i 2 = Ni/N = crack initiation life fraction at Stress 2.
n1 = number of cycles applied at stress 1.
N1 = number of cycles to failure at stress 1.

Case 2 For n1 > Ni1, the bounds are considered to be


  n1    n1  
  N1  N i1   n2 
  N1  N i1  
N p 2 1      N p 2 1     Equation 4.14
  N p1   N2   N p1  
    
   

Where N p2 = Np/N = crack propagation life fraction at stress 2.

46
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

4.4 Corten-Dolan’s Cumulative Damage Theory


Corten and Dolan [22] took a different approach to other cumulative damage
researchers. They reduced the study of damage accumulation down to the atomic
level as opposed to treating damage on a continuum basis. They also determined a
method of dealing with periodic variations in stress amplitude, such as those shown in
the figure 4.5 below [23].

Figure 4.5 Periodic variations in stress amplitude [23].

nr = total number of cycles in each repeated block.


 = fraction of nr cycles that are incurred at the higher stress level S1.
In this instance  = 2/5
Their theory allows a direct method of determining the number of remaining cycles to
failure ‘nf’.
N
nf  d d d
Equation 4.15
S  S  S 
1   2  2    3  3  ..........i  i 
 S1   S1   S1 

47
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

where N = cycles to failure at the highest stress amplitude S1.


1,2,….i = the fraction of cycles imposed at stresses S1, S2….,Si,
respectively.
d = material constant.
Corten and Dolan experimentally obtained the mean value of ‘d’ which was 6.57 for
an alloy steel and 6.0 for an aluminium alloy.
If a large amount of periodic stress variation occurs in a component, the theory is
quite suitable because equation 4.15 is a geometric progression and can be easily
inserted into a computer program.
For a two-level-stress test equation 4.15 can be modified to yield ‘nf’.
N
nf  d Equation 4.16
 S 2 
 S1 

4.5 Marin’s Cumulative Damage Theory


Marin’s theory states that damage is a function of cycle ratio, as shown below in
figure 4.6 [24].

Figure 4.6 Damage as a function of cycle ratio for seven different stress levels [24].

48
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Each stress level has its own damage curve. Lines of constant damage are plotted on
an S-N curve. For example, a damage line of D = 0.4 is shown in figure 4.7 which is
extrapolated from points 1 to 7 in figure 4.6.

Figure 4.7 S-N plot showing lines of constant damage developed by Marin’s theory [24].
He approximated the shape of the S-N curve to be
SxN = K Equation 4.17
where x is an exponent describing the shape of the curve. He also defined
q=y-x Equation 4.18
where y is a material constant (same as ‘d’ in Corten and Dolan’s theory).

The number of cycles to failure is given by


 n1   S1 
q
 n2   S 2 
q
 ni 1   Si 1 

n f  N i  1        ........    Equation 4.19
 N 1  i 
S  2  i 
N S  i 1   i 
N S

where Ni = number of cycles to failure at the last stress level Si.

For a two-level-stress test equation 4.19 simplifies to give

 n1   S1  
q


n f  N 2  1      Equation 4.20
 N 1  S2  

49
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

4.6 Manson’s Double Linear Cumulative Damage Rule

This rule can be considered as Miner’s rule applied to both the crack initiation and
crack propagation stages of fatigue. Through an empirical method he discovered that
a special point ‘P’ was common to all S-N curves regardless of damage level [25].
Refer to figure 4.8 below.

Figure 4.8 Manson’s cumulative damage rule applied to a two-level-stress test [25].

The number of cycles to failure for a two-level-stress test is given by

N2
log NP
 n  log N1 N P
n f  N 2 1  1  Equation 4.21
 N1 

4.7 Henry’s Cumulative Damage Theory


This theory is based on the concept that the fatigue limit decreases after each load.
Fatigue damage is defined as the ratio of the reduction in fatigue limit to the original
fatigue limit of virgin material, that is
E 0  E1
D1  Equation 4.22
E0

where E0 = original fatigue limit


E1 = fatigue limit after damage

50
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

This may be solved for E1 to give

E1 

S 1 n N  Equation 4.23
 S  E 0 
  n
E0   1  N 
where S = applied stress

n/N = cycle ratio.

If equation 4.23 is substituted into equation 4.22 a damage equation can be


formulated, to give

D1 
n N  Equation 4.24
E 

1   0 S  E  1  n N
0

The value of E0 must be updated after the application of each stress level, using
equation 4.23 above, to yield E0, E1, E2…., where E1 is the fatigue limit after applying
n1 cycles at stress level S1 and so on. Failure will occur when the sum of damage
fractions equals unity [26].
D = 1  failure.

4.8 Henry’s Modified Cumulative Damage Theory

Henry hypothesised that damage accumulation is a function of the change in the


endurance limit after each stress application. This theory can be applied to a semi-log
S-N curve. Equation 4.23 can be used to find the new fatigue limit after each stress
level. This new endurance limit is plotted at 106 cycles and connected to the point
‘Su’ at one cycle by a straight line [23]. Refer to figure 4.9 below.

51
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 4.9 Illustration of the set of new S-N curves according to Henry’s modified cumulative damage
theory.

This method yields a new S-N curve after each new load which can then be used to
predict failure. For example, in figure 4.9 above, the application of a third stress level
‘S3’ will produce failure at n = 103 cycles.

4.9 Gatts’s Cumulative Damage Theory


Gatts postulated that the fatigue strength and the fatigue limit change continuously
with the application of each stress cycle [27] [23]. This is different to Henry’s theory
in that the fatigue limit changes with each stress cycle as opposed to each stress level
application. He developed a non-dimensionalised version of the S-N curve and used
this to formulate the damage expression shown below.
 
 
 1 
 e   1 Equation 4.25
   



1 C  1
 1  

where e = Se/Seo = fatigue limit ratio (ratio of current value of fatigue limit to the
original value of fatigue limit).
 = S/Seo = stress amplitude ratio (ratio of the stress amplitude to the original
value of the fatigue limit).

52
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

 = n/N = cycle ratio (ratio of number of cycles applied to number of cycles to


failure at stress amplitude S).
C = material constant.

Gatts’s theory calculates the new endurance limit ‘Se’ after stressing. This new value
can be substituted into equation 4.24 from Henry’s theory, to evaluate the damage
fraction ‘D1’. The same failure criteria applies to Gatts’s and Henry’s theory, which
is
D = 1  failure.

For two-level-stress test the number of cycles to failure is given by

 D2 S e 
 D2  S2  Se  N 2
n2  Equation 4.26
DS
1 2 e S  S
2 e

where D2 = 1 - D1

4.10 Unified Theory of Cumulative Damage


This theory is based on the relationship between the rate of change of damage and the
rate of change of the non-dimensional endurance limit. The theory was developed by
Dubuc et als [28], who managed to combine work from previous researchers such as
Sheh and Shanley, and Valluri and Gatts. Damage growth may be expressed in
differential form as follows.

dD  d 
  e  Equation 4.27
dn  dn 

Where µ is a weighting coefficient used to yield a value of unity to the


damage function at failure.

53
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

dD
= damage growth.
dn

 e = instantaneous non-dimensional endurance limit.

  e /  eo

The determination of the rate of change of the non-dimensional endurance limit is the
backbone of the theory. Once this was found an expression relating the damage
fraction ‘D’ to cycle ratio ‘’, to maximum cyclic stress and to original ultimate
tensile strength, was derived.

D 
Equation 4.28
 
m

 1       
   u  


  1

β = Cycle ratio.

 = non-dimensional maximum cyclic stress =  /  eo

u = non-dimensional original ultimate tensile strength =   /  o

m = constant greater than 1.

A recurring theme in cumulative damage prediction, is the search for an equivalent


cycle ratio at the new stress level, that would have caused the same damage to occur
at the original stress level. The equivalent cycle ratio ‘βek’ corresponding to the last
stress level, which would cause the same amount of damage De may be evaluated by
means of equation 4.28.

   
m

 k   k   
  uk  
De
  1
ek 
k
Equation 4.29
   
m
De  1   k   
  uk  
1
 k  1

54
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The theoretical number of cycles that the specimen will sustain at the last level  k is

nk  N K 1  ek  Equation 4.30

For a two-level step test, the number of remaining cycles can be found by

n2  N 2 1  e2  Equation 4.31

4.11 Marco-Starkey’s Cumulative Damage Theory

This theory is based on the following assumptions [23].


1) Damage curves for each level of sinusoidal stress amplitude may be defined by the
relationship,
mi
 n
D  Equation 4.32
 N

Where mi is a function of the stress level. This approximates the non-linear


relationship between damage and cycle ratio.

2) Failure will occur when ‘D’ reaches unity and when  (n/N) reaches a critical
value.

The critical value ‘ (n/N)’ can be determined from the damage history on a damage
vs. cycle ratio plot. Consider figure 4.10.

55
Life Prediction Theory Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 4.10 Fatigue damage as a function of cycle ratio for low-high stressing, illustrating Marco-
Starkey cumulative damage theory.

For a low-high, two-level-stress test, S1 is applied for a cycle ratio (n/N) of 0.5,
followed by S3 until failure occurs at D = 1. Path 0-A-B-C represents the damage
history. The critical value of n/N may be computed from the curve as

n  n  n
      Equation 4.33
N  N  S1  N  S3

From figure 4.10, for example, it can be observed that the critical value is

n/N = 0.5 + (1 - 0.1) = 1.4

56
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 5
5.1 Experimental Programme
All tests were carried out using the Avery-Denison Fatigue testing machine. The
experimental programme consisted of five parts, each with its own purpose.
1. Determination of the S-N curve for cast vitalliumtm.
2. Determination of the S-N curve for notched vitalliumtm with a notch radius of
1.5mm
3. Determination of the S-N curve for notched vitalliumtm with a notch radius of
2.5mm
4. Determination of the S-N curve for HIPed vitalliumtm.
5. Two-level-stress tests for a cumulative damage analysis.

5.2 Specimen Preparation


The vitalliumtm test specimens were cast using the investment casting process, as
described earlier in chapter three. Howmedica were requested to cast sixty test
specimens with 3 mm thickness. The casting dye had to be modified to produce the
required thickness. The process proved to be troublesome and produced test
specimens that included shrinkage voids. From the sixty specimens, twenty two
failed. The remaining thirty eight specimens were then X-rayed to determine the
existence of internal voids. About half of these contained minute shrinkage voids. A
decision had to be made as to whether they should be scrapped or not. The outcome
of this was to keep all thirty eight specimens. The decision was based on the fact that
the micro-voids were all contained in areas of low stress, well away from the centre of
the specimen where the maximum stress was designed to occur. Also, the majority of
the specimens (sixteen in all), which contained the shrinkage voids were hot
isostatically pressed. HIPing is a special process that uses high temperature and

57
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

pressure to densify cast components. This process eliminated all traces of the micro-
voids. This meant that thirty eight specimens were available for testing.

All specimens were ground in a longitudinal direction according to BS 3518


specifications. Grinding proved to be slow because a cut, no larger than 0.002 mm
could be machined at one pass. Notched fatigue test specimens should have their
notches machined in the same direction that they were cast. That is, across flow as
opposed to along flow, during casting.

5.3 Preparation of Notched Specimens


A sufficient number of notched test pieces should be tested to allow for scatter in
notch condition due to manufacturing variables. A total of ten notched test pieces
were chosen to allow for an exploratory analysis. The notch sensitivity ‘q’ does not
change very much above a notch radius of 3mm [13]. In general, materials are more
notch sensitive at small radii. The author therefore chose round notch radii below
3mm.

Two types of notch were chosen for the analysis.


1) Opposite single U-shaped notches in a finite width plate.
2) Opposite single semi-circular notches in a finite width plate.

Vitalliumtm is an extremely hard material to machine. It was decided to machine semi-


circular notches as opposed to elliptical or V-notches due to the machining difficulties
of resilient vitalliumtm. Blunt notches were chosen above sharp notches for
machining practicality.

58
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A rough guide for obtaining maximum stress concentration in a test specimen is to


make the smaller width about 3/4 of the larger width, assuming the radius ‘r’ and the
thickness ‘D’ are given. Specimen dimensions are shown in Appendix A.2.

5.4 Apparatus

Figure 5.1 Front view of the Avery-Denison Fatigue testing machine.

Figure 5.2

59
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 5.3

1 Motor 9 Dial gauge


2 Rev-counter 10 Adjustable thimble
3 Start-stop switches 11 Plunger
4 Indicator lights 12 Torsion bar arm
5 Dashpot switches 13 Test specimen
6 Torsion bar housing 14 Nuts
7 Crank 15 Oscillating spindle
8 Eccentric wheel

60
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

5.5 Standard Fatigue Test Precautions


1. In attaching the specimen to the grips of the fatigue machine, one should be
careful not to prestrain the specimen excessively, since large strains can
influence the results [30].
2. When the test is running, the test engineer should study the behaviour of the
specimen to determine whether there is excessive vibration or heat build-up
[30].
3. When a test is started or stopped without specimen failure, there may be
spurious loads or strains applied to the specimen that may influence the test.
To take account of this load, strain-time traces should be recorded for
inclusion in the test log.

5.6 Experimental Procedure


1. When all grinding processes were finished the width ‘B’ and thickness ‘d’ of each
specimen was measured. The required bending moment for that specimen at the
desired stress was found using
 . B. D 2
M Equation 5.1
6

(Refer to Appendix A.1 for derivation).


2. The dial gauge deflection which corresponds to the bending moment was
determined from the calibration chart. The 30 Nm torsion bar was used for high
stresses and the 10 Nm torsion bar was used for stresses that required less than 10
Nm of bending moment.
3. The eccentric wheel was set to zero.
4. The test specimen was clamped to the machine.
Note: The four allen head bolts were tightened evenly to prevent uneven
stress levels across the specimen.

61
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

5. The top and bottom dial gauges were both set to zero when contact was made with
the torsion bar arm.
6. The eccentric wheel was offset by four wheel divisions.
7. The upper and lower deflections of the torsion bar arm were adjusted until they
were the same. This ensured that the neutral axis was in the centre of the test
specimen. The adjusting was done using the two allen head bolts (adjusters) on
the machine head.
Note: One bolt was loose while the other was being tightened and both bolts
were tight when the eccentric was rotated by hand.
8. Both dial gauges were offset by the value of deflection obtained from the
calibration chart.
9. The eccentricity of the connecting rod was increased until both dial gauges
registered a tiny deflection. This indicated that the deflection in the torsion bar
delivered the required stress to the specimen and that it occurred at the centre of
the specimen.
10. The number of revolutions on the rev-counter was recorded, the dial gauges were
removed from the machine and the adjusters were both tightened.
11. The upper contact on the switch was lowered until the red light illuminated. The
stop button was pressed and the switch lowered again until the red light
illuminated. The stop button was pressed again. This was repeated until the red
light remained on. The switch connection was broken with the use of a phase-
tester and the machine was started. The switch was lowered until the shortest
spark length was obtained.
12. The steps, one to eleven, were repeated for each application of stress.
13. The same procedure was carried out for the cumulative damage tests, with the
exception that the machine was manually turned off after the application of the
first stress level and reset for the application of the second stress level.

62
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

5.7 Test Problems and Solutions


Various problems were encountered during the test programme, most of which were
associated with the switching mechanism. These problems were either solved or
compromised. They are discussed below.

1. The dashpot switch proved to be a problem, especially with high cycle tests.
Through experimentation it was found that the switch was optimal when the spark
between the switching contacts was at a minimum length. When the spark length
was allowed to increase, the machine cut out. During high cycle tests the point of
the switch flattened due to the high level of repeated contact. This meant that the
spark length was allowed to increase; resulting in machine cut out when the
specimen had not yet fractured. To overcome this problem the point of the lower
contact had to be sharpened with rough emery paper between each test. Also, for
high cycle tests, the upper contact had to be slightly lowered approximately every
four hours. This ensured a short spark length until the specimen fractured.

2. The Avery-Denison fatigue testing machine contains two dashpot switches. The
lower switch was missing parts and the remaining parts were broken. The upper
switch was capable of doing the job on its own so it was decided not to use the
lower switch at all.

3. During low cycle testing the machine was not cutting out when the specimen
fractured. Through an investigation the problem was discovered. The oil in the
dashpot switch contained wear particles. These particles made the oil less
viscous. This meant the dashpot piston was too slow to come down the necessary
distance to allow full contact across the switch. The problem was solved by
changing the oil every four or five tests.

63
Experimentation Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

4. Some oil splashing occurred. This seeped down the thread of the adjustable upper
contact and across the switch, cutting out the machine. The solution was to put
the bare minimum of oil into the dashpot to eliminate splashing.

5. The pivot screws in the dashpot switch tended to loosen and needed to be
tightened throughout the test programme. This was also the case for the two
tapered bolts which secured the torsion bar.

6. Two adjusters were used to centre the position of the load in the test specimen.
The internal and external threads on one of the adjusters completely wore out.
The reason for this must be that the torque exertion at the adjuster was excessive.
However, it was necessary to apply such a high torque, to bend the test specimen
with the torsion bar. The problem was rectified by taking the machine apart, re-
boring and re-tapping the internal thread to a larger size (M10).

7. The front damping plate, which supports the machine head, cracked at the end of
testing program. A crack initiated at a point of high stress concentration and
appeared to propagate across the plate. This problem can be solved by making
another plate and replacing the damaged one.

8. The screw which bounces continuously off the torsion bar arm has worn it down.
Therefore when high stresses were applied the screw bounced higher than usual
causing the switch to close. This had the random effect of switching off the
machine when the piece had not broken. The problem was solved by damping the
screw. The worn area of the torsion bar arm was covered with paper and wrapped
with insulating tape. Even though it was a temporary job it improved the switch
performance immensely.

64
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 6
Experimental Results

Stress Required Bending Cycles to Cycles to Comments


Amplitude Moment Failure Run-out
MPa Nm
650 23.54 2x104 - valid
4
580 19.58 2.9x10 - valid
5
400 11.22 1.47x10 - valid
5
370 9.05 1.46x10 - questionable
validity
6
300 9.13 1.13x10 - valid
250 6.55 - 1.51x106 valid

Table 6.1 S-N curve results for cast vitalliumtm.

Notch Stress Required Cycles to Cycles to Comments


Radius Amplitude Bending Moment Failure Run-out
mm MPa Nm
2.5 580 11.57 2.3x104 - valid
4
2.5 510 12.01 8.6x10 - valid
2.5 300 7.06 5.81x105 - valid
6
2.5 200 5.05 1.15x10 - valid

1.5 580 15.87 9.5x103 - valid


4
1.5 510 10.86 9.2x10 - valid
5
1.5 400 10.24 1.91x10 - valid
1.5 300 8.1 7.78x105 - valid
6
1.5 200 4.71 - 2.34x10 valid
Table 6.2 S-N curve results for notched cast vitalliumtm.

65
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Stress Required Bending Cycles to Cycles to Comments


Amplitude Moment Failure Run-out
MPa Nm
650 22.18 1.4x104 - valid
4
580 15.92 5.7x10 - valid
500 12.89 7.8x104 - valid
5
400 11.78 3.86x10 - valid
6
300 9.99 1.34x10 - valid. Switch
problem, therefore
may be as much
as .25x106 higher.

Table 6.3 S-N curve results for HIPed cast vitalliumtm.

Cumulative Damage Results

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Miner
Non-conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 2,500 3,700 non-con


4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 92,000 67,414 con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 62,000 53,333 notched
specimen
con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 8,649 con


5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 8,500 7,928 con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 33,500 14,976 con
450 1.24x105 100,000 550 1.05x105 25,000 20,322 con

Table 6.4 Miner’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

66
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2  n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Subramanyan
Non-
conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 .811 2,500 3,062 non-con
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 .687 92,000 52,304 con
Tests 600 9x103 6,000 500 1.6x104 .687 62,000 38,924 con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 1.233 14,000 9,152 con
5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 1.111 8,500 8,565 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 1.111 33,500 15,568 con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 1.588 25,000 30,383 non-con

Table 6.5 Subramanyan’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Ben-Amoz
Non-
conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 2,500 3,700  n2 non-con


 3,062
Low 600 1.45x104 6,000 500 1.15x105 92,000 67,414  n2 con
 52,304
53,333  n2
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 62,000 con
 38,924

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 8,649  n2 con


 9,152
High 550 1.05x105 60,000 580 1.85x104 8,500 7,928  n2 correct
 8,565
Tests 550 1.05x105 20,000 580 1.85x104 33,500 14,976  n2 con
 15,568
20,322  n2
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 25,000 correct
 30,383

Table 6.6 Ben-Amoz’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

67
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Corten-Dolan
Non-conservative)
d = 6.3
High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 2,500 20,500 non-con
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 92,000 45,731 con
Tests 600 9x103 6,000 500 1.6x104 62,000 28,384 con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 4,878 con


5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 8,500 13,239 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 33,500 13,239 con
Does not take
n1 into a/c for
2 level test.
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 25,000 29,658 non-con

Table 6.7 Corten-Dolan’s prediction for two level-stress-tests (d=6.30).

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Corten-Dolan
Non-conservative)
d = 9.82
4 4
High- 650 1.0x10 8,000 580 1.85x10 2,500 30,616 very non-con
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 92,000 86,881 con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 62,000 53,926 con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 3,266 con


5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 8,500 10,981 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 33,500 10,981 con
Does not take
n1 into a/c for
2 level test.

450 1.24x105 100,000 550 1.05x105 25,000 14,634 con

Table 6.8 Corten-Dolan’s prediction for two level-stress-tests (d=9.8 ).

68
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2 q n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative / Non-
Experimental Marin
conservative)
4 4
High- 650 1.0x10 8,000 580 1.85x10 4.42 2,500 6,122 non-con
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 -1.53 92,000 51,003 con
Tests 600 9x103 6,000 500 1.6x104 -5.96 62,000 17,992 very con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 4.42 14,000 5,227 con
5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 -22.8 8,500 26,711 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 -22.8 33,500 50,455 non-con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 6.68 25,000 5,318 con

Table 6.9 Marin’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Manson
Non-
conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 2,500 2,038 con


4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 92,000 39,121 very con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 62,000 6,985 very con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 8,994 con


5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 8,500 11,440 non-con
Tests 550 1.05x105 20,000 580 1.85x104 33,500 16,410 con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 25,000 21,695 con

Table 6.10 Manson’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

69
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments
(Conservative /
Experimental Modified
Non-
Henry conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 2,500 7,000 non-con


4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 92,000 45,000 con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 62,000 12,300 very con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 14,000 5,500 con


5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 8,500 10,400 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 33,500 11,700 con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 25,000 10,800 con

Table 6.11 Modified Henry’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

70
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2 D1 D2 E1 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments (Conservative /
Non-conservative)
Experimental Henry

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 .694 .306 85.4 2,500 6,304 non-con
Low 600 1.45x104 6,000 500 1.15x105 .273 .727 203.4 92,000 94,053 non-con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 .516 .484 75 62,000 83,907 non-con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 .074 .926 259 14,000 9,543 con
5 4
High 550 1.05x10 60,000 580 1.85x10 .395 .605 169.2 8,500 12,652 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 .103 .897 251 33,500 17,372 con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 .611 .389 108.7 25,000 46,446 non-con

Table 6.12 Henry’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

1 N1 n1 2 N2 C D2 Se1 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments (Conservative /


Non-conservative)
Experimental Gatts

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 .338 .306 233.3 2,500 7,852 non-con
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 .338 .727 252 92,000 96,984 non-con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 .218 .484 148.4 62,000 91,466 non-con

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 .338 .926 270.9 14,000 9,553 con
High 550 1.05x105 60,000 580 1.85x104 .338 .605 233.2 8,500 13,304 non-con
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 .338 .897 266 33,500 17,425 con
5 5
450 1.24x10 100,000 550 1.05x10 .338 .389 189.9 25,000 51,771 non-con
Table 6.13 Gatts’s prediction for two level-stress-tests.

71
Results Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

1 N1 n1 2 N2 1 1 u1 2 D1 e2 n2 = nf n2 = nf Comments


(Conservative / Non-
Experimental Unified Theory
conservative)

High- 650 1.0x104 8,000 580 1.85x104 .8 2.32 2.95 2.07 .708 .820 2,500 3,330 non-con
good
4 5
Low 600 1.45x10 6,000 500 1.15x10 .41 2.14 2.95 1.78 .277 .464 92,000 61,640 con
3 4
Tests 600 9x10 6,000 500 1.6x10 .66 2.14 4.59 1.78 .508 .599 62,000 64,070 non-con
good

Low- 580 1.85x104 2,500 650 1.0x104 .14 2.07 2.95 2.32 .079 .124 14,000 8,760 con
High 550 1.05x105 60,000 580 1.85x104 .57 1.96 2.95 2.07 .398 .554 8,500 8,251 con
good
5 4
Tests 550 1.05x10 20,000 580 1.85x10 .19 1.96 2.95 2.07 .105 .181 33,500 15,152 con
450 1.24x105 100,000 550 1.05x105 .81 1.61 2.95 1.96 .618 .764 25,000 24,780 con
good

Table 6.14 The Unified Theory prediction for two level-stress-tests.

72
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 7
7.1 Determination of S-N Curve
An S-N curve for cast vitalliumtm was constructed from data provided by the previous
researcher, Michael Moloney [29] and the author. The experimental curve was
insufficient to do constant life calculations because it existed only between 104 and
106 cycles.

The first part of the curve was plotted on the basis of Juvinall & Marsheks’ estimate
[1], which is that the material loses one tenth of its fatigue strength between 1 cycle
and 103 cycles. This can be done as it yields a good correlation with the experimental
results obtained at 104 cycles.

It was evident from exploratory tests that the S-N curves for machined vitalliumtm and
cast vitallium tm were different. Refer to figure 7.1. The curve for machined
vitalliumtm is to the right and above the cast S-N curve, indicating that it has a greater
fatigue resistance than cast vitalliumtm.

73
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 7.1 S-N Curves for Machined and Cast Vitallium

900

800
Stress Amplitude (Mpa)

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07 Juvinall and Marshek

Machined
Number of cycles to Failure
Cast

74
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

7.2 Mean Stress Effects on Machined Vitalliumtm


It is important to quantify the effect of maximum allowable mean stress. This is done
by using the mean stress correction equations of Goodman, Gerber and Soderberg.
The Soderberg equation yields conservative allowable mean stresses, Gerber yields
realistic allowable mean stresses and Goodman yields a result somewhere in-between.
The Goodman criterion was chosen for this analysis.
Goodman  a =  N (1 - (  m /  ts) Equation 7.1

Where  a Stress Amplitude

N Nominal Stress

m Mean Stress

 ts Ultimate Tensile Strength

The effects of applying a mean stress can be seen in figure 7.2. The maximum
allowable mean stress of 280 MPa yields an S-N curve much lower than the original
S-N curve. This curve was constructed by using the Goodman criteria of mean stress.
Stress Amplitude

1000
800
600
Mean Stress = 0
400
Mean Stress = 100
200
0 Mean Stress = 200
1.00E+02 1.00E+05 1.00E+08 Mean Stress = 280

Log N (no. of cycles to failure)

Figure 7.2 The reduction of the fatigue strength of machined Vitalliumtm due mean stress effects,
according to Goodman’s mean stress criteria.

75
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

7.3 Constant Life Diagram for Machined Vitaliumtm


Engineers use constant life diagrams to predict the combination of stress amplitude
and mean stress that a material can take at a specified lifespan. These diagrams are
useful because they can be used to find the maximum allowable cyclic stresses that
can be applied to a material for their required life expectancy.
A Haigh constant life diagram was constructed for machined vitalliumtm (figure 7.3)
with the use of it’s S-N curve [1].
Stress Amplitude (MPa)

1.00E+03
800
0 1.00E+04
700 0 1.00E+05
600 0
0 3.00E+05
500
0 1.00E+06
400 0 1.00E+08
300 Yield Stress
200
100 Ultimate Tensile
Strength
0 531-Yield Strength 827
0 200 400 600 800 1000

Mean Stress (MPa)

Figure 7.3 Haigh constant life diagram for machined Vitalliumtm.

This diagram shows that a maximum of 280 MPa of mean stress can be applied for
infinite life. This is substantially less than the estimated endurance limit of 377 MPa
for machined vitalliumtm, when zero mean stress is applied.

76
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

7.4 Constant Life Diagram with Mean Stress Correction for Machined
Vitalliumtm
Another constant life diagram was constructed (figure 7.4) using the S-N curve for a
mean stress of 280 MPa.

Haigh Constant Life Diagram


Stress Amplitude (MPa)

600 1.00E+03
1.00E+04
400 1.00E+05
3.00E+05
200 1.00E+06
1.00E+08
0 Yield Stress
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Mean Stress (MPa)

Figure 7.4 Constant life diagram for machined Vitalliumtm with mean stress correction.

This constant life diagram shows that a maximum mean stress of 402 MPa can be
applied, for infinite life conditions so long as the stress amplitude does not exceed
127 MPa. Having mean stress correction in a constant life diagram has the effect of
increasing the materials chances of yielding before actual failure. This reduces the
possibility of catastrophic failure due to mean stress.

This chart can be used if the application of a mean stress is unavoidable. This constant
life diagram still is not complete, as stress concentration and fatigue notch factors
have not been considered.

77
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

7.5 Fatigue Strength Diagram for Cast VitalliumTM

A Haigh constant life diagram was also constructed for non-machined cast vitalliumtm
with the use of its own S-N curve.
The constant life diagram was then converted into a fatigue strength diagram [5], by
considering the relationship between the maximum stress [Smax], minimum stress [S-
min] and the mean stress [Sm].

Figure 7.5 Relationship between mean stress, maximum stress and minimum stress in a typical fatigue
situation.

It can be seen that Sm = ½ (Smax + Smin) Equations 7.2


Sa = ½ (Smax - Smin) = Smax - Sm

When there is zero mean stress Smax and Smin both have a magnitude of Sa. .Refer to
figure 7.5 above. Points A and B were plotted giving one point on each curve. If the
mean stress were equal to the ultimate tensile stress ‘Su’ (827 MPa), the specimen can
withstand no further load, hence the corresponding stress amplitude ‘Sa’ is zero.
Then Smax and Smin are the same and equal to Su. Thus both curves pass through the
point C. The curves AC and BC were assumed to be straight [17]. The line OC in
figure 7.5 slopes upwards at 45° because C was plotted with both coordinates equal to
Su. The vertical distance to an arbitrary point on the line OC is the mean stress Sm

78
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

while the additional vertical distance to the line AC is the stress amplitude Sa. This
allows the stress amplitude (also known as alternating stress) to be determined, once
the maximum and mean stresses are known. This information was superimposed on
the constant life diagram to produce the fatigue strength diagram for cast vitalliumtm,
shown in figure 7.6.

79
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 7.6 Fatigue strength diagram constructed for heat treated, cast vitalliumtm.

80
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

7.6 Cumulative Damage

Figure 7.7 Comparison of cumulative damage theories with experimental data obtained for machined vitalliumtm.

81
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

There are several damage theories available. The author has investigated each theory
to see which cumulative damage theory is best suited to machined vitalliumtm. This
was done by comparing the experimental and theoretical results obtained from the
previous author. It can be seen from figure 7.7 that Subramanyan’s theory is the
closest to the experimental curve, especially in the region of S1/S2 > 1, where high-
low testing occurred.

A plot of Damage vs. Cycle Ratio for each two level step test was configured (figure
7.8).

Relationship between Damage Fraction and Cycle Ratio for


Vitallium

1
Damage Fraction

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 High-low Sequence
Cycle Ratio Low-high Sequence

Figure 7.8 Relationship between damage fraction and cycle ratio for vitalliumtm according to Henry’s
damage theory.
Damage was calculated using Henry’s damage equation.
According to Henry’s theory, damage can be quantified as a reduction in the
endurance limit after the initial loading has occurred. He postulated that the new
endurance limit was a function of the applied stress, the cycle ratio and the original
fatigue limit.
 n
 
 N
D Equation 7.3
 S fo  n
1     1  
 S nom  S fo   N

82
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Where D = Damage
n/N = Cycle ratio
Sfo = Original endurance limit
Snom = Nominal stress

The plot shows that the low-high tests yield a straight line. This is almost identical to
Miner’s linear damage rule, which states that the damage accumulated is a linear
function of cycle ratio. This explains why Miner’s theory yielded relatively accurate
results. The plot also shows that the high-low tests yield a polynomial curve below
the straight line. This curve is similar to the curve that Subramanyan’s damage theory
would provide.

The plot suggests; for cast vitalliumtm, that Miner’s damage theory should be applied
to low-high stressing situations and that Subramanyan’s damage theory should be
applied to high-low stressing situations. More tests need to be conducted at higher
values of cycle ratio to confirm that this graph is a true representation of the
cumulative damage behaviour of cast vitalliumtm.

7.7 Notched Vitalliumtm


The S-N curve for notched vitalliumtm is to the left and below that for plain
vitalliumtm. Refer to figure 7.9. This indicates that vitalliumtm is a notch sensitive
material.

The endurance limit of the notched specimens is below 200 MPa and is estimated to
be 180 MPa. Using this information and Peterson’s stress concentration design charts
[13], the notch sensitivity ‘q’ of each notch geometry was determined.

83
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 7.9 S-N curves for plain/unnotched and notched vitalliumtm

84
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Figure 7.10 Peterson’s stress concentration chart used to determine the stress concentration factors of
both notch geometries [13].
The results were as follows.
At notch radius = 1.5 mm q = 0.585
At notch radius = 2.5 mm q = 0.855

Specimens with the smaller notch radii were more notch sensitive than those with the
larger radii. This was to be expected. However, the specimens with the smaller radii
seem to have a better resistance to fatigue than do the specimens with the larger notch
radii (figure 7.9). This suggests that vitalliumtm is notch sensitive because of the
stress concentration factor, not the fatigue notch factor.

7.8 HIPed Vitalliumtm


It can be seen from figure 7.11 that the specimens that were hot isostatically pressed
had increased fatigue resistance compared with specimens that were not HIPed. The
benefits of HIPing vitalliumtm are discussed further in Chapter 9.5.

85
Analysis of Data Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

S-N Curves for Plain and HIPed Vitallim


900

800

700

600
Stress Amplitude (MPa)

500

400

300

200

100

0
1.00E+00 1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07 Plain Vitallium
Number of Cycles to Failure HIPed Vitallium

Figure 7.11 S-N curves for plain/unnotched and HIPed vitalliumtm

86
Inspection Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 8

8.1 Microscopic Examination


Microscopic analysis entails a visual examination under a microscope. Samples of
failed specimens were bonded in bakelite plastic, ground and polished. They were
then etched electrolytically in a nitric acid and methanol solution. It was difficult to
get a good view of the microstructure. It is suspected that more current is necessary
to etch the surface better. However, some reasonably good magnified photographs
were taken of the fatigued surface.

8.2 Procedure for Microstructure Analysis


1. Small pieces of vitalliumtm were cut away from the fractured surface of two
broken test specimens.
2. They were bonded in a bakelite matrix under high temperature and pressure.
3. The bakelite specimens were ground flat using 600 grit silicon carbide paper.
4. The specimens were polished using a six micron diamond based polishing
lubricant. White spirits was sprayed on the rotating polishing wheel to allow
waste particles to disperse. This lasted for approximately ten minutes.
5. This was repeated using a one micron polishing agent for twenty five minutes.
6. The specimens were etched electrolytically for eight seconds with five per cent
Nital etching agent.
7. Once etched, they were examined under the electron microscope and
photographed.

87
Inspection Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

8.3 Results of Microstructural Inspection


Figure 8.1 shows tiny cracks which propagated around the crystal boundaries at the
fatigued surface. This follows the theory of crack propagation which states that
cracks will propagate in the direction of least resistance, i.e. along crystal boundaries.
Figure 8.2 shows a magnified view of the tiny cracks from figure 8.1.

Figure 8.1 Tiny cracks propagate around the crystal boundaries at the fatigued surface of vitallium tm.

Figure 8.2 A magnified view of the tiny cracks in figure 8.1.

88
Inspection Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Casting voids are shown in figures 8.3a and 8.3b. A cluster of defects can be seen in
figure 8.3a while a single defect next to a crystal boundary can be seen in figure 8.3b.

a b
Figure 8.3 8.3a Cluster of casting voids. 8.3b Single void close to a crystal boundary line.

The photograph in figure 8.4 shows polishing scratches across a specimen’s surface.
The specimens were re-polished until there were no more visible scratches.

Figure 8.4 Polishing scratches across a specimen’s surface.

89
Inspection Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

8.4 Macroscopic Inspection


Macroscopic inspection entailed a visual examination of the fracture surface of
specimens. It was noted that all specimens failed close to the minimum cross-
sectional area, as expected. The specimens failed in a brittle fashion. This is evident
due to the flaking of the material at the fracture line and by the clean break across the
specimen. Refer to figure 8.5.

Figure 8.5 Photograph of fractured specimen, showing a flaked fracture line. The scale at the bottom is
in millimetres.

Figure 8.6 Fatigue surface characterised by fibrous and crystalline areas.

90
Inspection Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

This brittle fracture is unexpected because vitalliumtm is a ductile material. This


could suggest that, cast vitalliumtm may work harden under completely reversed
bending conditions. Work hardening can make a metal less ductile and more brittle.
Completely reversed bending is an extreme case of maximum bending stress which
tests the material to its limits. Work hardening under completely reversed bending
could explain why ductile vitalliumtm fatigued in a brittle manner. Little or no
macroscopic distortion occurred during the fatigue process. This was to be expected
as it is a distinguishing characteristic of fatigue failure of ductile materials [1].

The picture of a fractured surface of vitalliumtm can be seen in figure 8.6. It is


apparent that it has failed by fatigue because of the two types of surface areas, the
fibrous and the crystalline. Cracks propagated from the specimen surface at the
smooth fibrous areas and catastrophic failure occurred at the bumpy crystalline areas.

91
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 9
Discussion
The test program had to be modified because of the late arrival of specimens. Certain
high cycle S-N curve tests, low stress cumulative damage two-level-stress tests and
cycle ratio hardness tests were thus eliminated from the program. These tests were
chosen because of test time considerations and lower priority. The various aspects of
the entire fatigue study and cumulative damage analysis are discussed below.

9.1 Machining Effects on Fatigue Resistance


The machined endurance limit, estimated to be 377 MPa, is much higher than the cast
endurance limit which lays in the range 250 to 300 MPa. It is apparent from figure
7.1 that the machined specimens have an overall fatigue resistance superior to that of
the plain cast specimens. The heavy machining may have introduced compressive
residual stresses on the specimen’s surface and made the specimens more resistant to
cyclic loads [4]. In other words, crack nucleation occurred at a slower rate in the
machined specimens than that in the cast specimens. Since all points on both S-N
curves, machined and cast, are consistent with this theory, it may be concluded that
heavy machining has a positive influence on the fatigue resistance of vitalliumtm.

9.2 Notch Analysis


It has been suggested to introduce a notch into the stem of bonded and press fitted hip
prosthesis, so as to reduce the effects of bone resorption. The theory is that the bone
in the femur will grow into the gap and halt bone loss due to stress shielding. The
notch would have to be of a gradual slope so as to reduce stress concentration which
might cause bone microfracture.

92
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The S-N curves for both notch geometry’s were lower than that for unnotched
vitalliumtm. Therefore, it can be said that vitalliumtm is a notch sensitive material.
The notch sensitivity increased with a decrease in notch radius. This was due to the
stress concentration, not the fatigue notch factor. It can be seen from figure 7.9 that
the notch with the smaller radius seems to have a better resistance to fatigue than the
larger notch. Fatigue resistance suffers with increased notches. There are not enough
points on the notched S-N curve to make any definite conclusions quantifying the
fatigue resistance of different size notches.

The endurance limit of notched vitalliumtm is a value below 200 MPa. It is estimated
to be approximately 180 MPa. More high cycle testing is required to obtain the true
value. The threshold notch sensitivity is a value in the range 0 to 0.585. A sharp
notch analysis with notch radii less than 1.5 mm is required to determine this value.

9.3 Damage Assessment


In order to apply a particular damage theory to find remaining life, it is quite helpful
to know whether the material is sensitive to microcrack formation, to dislocation
migration, or to both. It is hypothesised that brittle materials are more susceptible to
microcracks and that ductile materials are susceptible to dislocation migration.
Vitalliumtm is a ductile material and so should be more sensitive to dislocation
migration than microcrack formation. The author suggests, if at all possible, using
density or hardness as a damage indicator property, as opposed to endurance limit,
because these properties best describe the relationship between damage and cycle
ratio for ductile materials (Refer to literature survey, Chapter 3.9.2).

93
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

9.4 Cumulative Damage Theories


The cumulative damage tests were reproducibility tests to validate the work of
Michael Moloney, the previous author [29]. His tests were based on the S-N curve
for machined vitalliumtm. The present authors’ tests were based on the S-N curve for
cast vitalliumtm. Therefore, the same two-level-stress tests yielded different numerical
results. Moloney’s cumulative damage results were accurate to within 20% for most
theories.

The extremity of prediction accuracy for cast vitalliumtm was enormous. The most
accurate prediction (error of 0.76%) was for a low-high test using Subramanyan’s
theory 9 (table 6.5). The least accurate prediction (error of 1224%) was for a high-
low test using Corten-Dolan’s theory (Table 6.8). The author decided not to use
percentage difference, but instead orders of magnitude. All of the predictions of
remaining life were of the same order of magnitude. These predictions are acceptable
when dealing with the random nature of fatigue damage. Some theories were more
accurate than others.

9.4.1 Marco Starkey’s Theory


Marco Starkey’s theory represents a better approximation of cumulative damage than
Miner’s linear damage rule because it takes the non-linear relationship of damage into
consideration. However, it is completely dependent on established damage curves at
each stress level for each different material. These damage curves are simply not
available for vitalliumtm, so the author could not apply Marco Starkey’s cumulative
damage theory. The previous author approximated these curves from the
experimentally determined S-N curve for vitalliumtm. This was considered to be
inaccurate because it was an approximation of an already approximate method of
damage evaluation (as are all cumulative damage theories). To apply this theory it
would be necessary to experimentally determine each damage curve for each stress
level for vitalliumtm. This would require a method of damage evaluation for different

94
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

cycle ratios. Vitalliumtm is a ductile material. Therefore hardness or density would be


the best damage indicators if this experimental work were to be conducted.
Hardness testing would be the easier of the two methods of damage evaluation to
implement at the University of Limerick because the testing equipment is readily
available. This work was not conducted because the test specimens came too late and
too few. This hardness testing was sidelined for tests that had a higher priority.

9.4.2 Miner’s, Subramanyan’s and Ben-Amoz’s Theories


Miner’s theory yields conservative estimates for both types of test which are high-low
tests and low-high tests, (table 6-4). Subramanyan’s theory, is less conservative but
more accurate, (table 6-5). These two theories are combined to produce Ben-Amoz’s
theory.

Ben-Amoz’s theory takes advantage of the two very useful theories of Miner and
Subramanyan. The cumulative damage scatter is taken into consideration and so
provides a conservative tool for failure prediction. The theory works best when crack
initiation information is available. This was not the case for vitalliumtm. However, it
was observed during testing that once a crack started to propagate, it failed
catastrophically very soon afterwards. This suggested that the vast majority of cycles
to failure are in the crack initiation phase. Therefore, it was considered quite
satisfactory to apply the simpler form of Ben-Amoz’s theory to vitalliumtm (Equations
4.10 and 4.1).
From the seven tests, two predictions were correct, four conservative and one non-
conservative. This is excellent by any standard. This accuracy can be further
increased by applying Ben-Amoz’s full theory using crack initiation information. The
author recommends the use of this theory for the prediction of the remaining life of
vitalliumtm.

95
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

9.4.3 Corten-Dolan’s and Marin’s Theories


Corten and Dolan’s theory is suited to conditions where there is several varied stress
levels contained in periodic blocks. It does not apply well to basic two-level-stress
tests, where the stress is only varied once. This is a distinct disadvantage when
carrying out two-level-stress tests. It is advantageous in modeling fatigue
accumulation, once the loading pattern is known in actual components subject to
repeated cycles of varied loads, such as those in prosthetic knee implants.

Corten-Dolan’s theory yields poor results when the constant ‘d’ is equal to 6.3 (i.e.
average between steel and aluminium) Refer to table 6.7. The overall accuracy is
greatly increased by using the average value of ‘d’ equal to 9.82 for vitalliumtm. (table
6.8). More tests need to be conducted to validate this value. It is a poor theory for
two-level stress testing because it does not take the initial number of stress cycles into
account. It’s application to vitalliumtm cannot be dismissed yet because it is a theory
designed for variable stress amplitude loading, not two-level-stress tests.

Marin’s theory yields random predictions and should not be applied to vitalliumtm.
Refer to table 6.9

9.4.4 Manson’s Theory


The main problem with this theory is the resolution of where the point ‘P’ lies on an
S-N curve for vitalliumtm. To determine ‘NP’ a high stress program would have to be
conducted for various cycle ratios at the ultimate tensile strength of the material. The
Avery-Denison fatigue machine was unable to apply the ultimate tensile strength of
812 MPa required for vitalliumtm.

The theory proposed by Manson yields very conservative predictions for high-
low tests, (table 6.10). It was the only theory which predicted failure at 2,500 cycles
for the first high-low test. Even though it is not accurate it can be considered as a safe

96
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

theory. However, this is true only when the value of “Np” is known for vitalliumtm.
The previous author used a value of Np equal to 1900 cycles. It is unknown whether
this is correct or not. More fatigue test are required to determine the value of “Np”.

9.4.5 Henry’s, Henry’s Modified and Gatts’s Theories


Henry’s cumulative damage theory utilises the new endurance limit ‘E’ as the damage
indicator. This may not be such a good idea for vitalliumtm because it has not yet
been shown experimentally that damage is a function of the new endurance limit. It is
unknown if the basic assumption of Henry’s theory applies to vitalliumtm.

E 0  E1
That is, if D1  Equation 9.1
E0

A possible test procedure to determine this would be to load eight test specimens at
the same stress, say 500MPa, for the same cycle ratio (n/N  D) of say 0.5, then to
apply different stress levels to the eight specimens to determine an S-N curve and a
new endurance limit ‘E1’. If the left hand side of equation 9.1 approximately equals
the right hand side of the equation then it could be said that Henry’s theory applies to
vitalliumtm.

Henry’s theory generally predicts non-conservative values, yet it is relatively


accurate. However, non-conservative estimates are dangerous. It is a theory that is
based on steels and possibly should not be applied to vitalliumtm (table 6.12).

Henry’s modified theory makes use of an S-N curve for each new damage level. It
probably should not be applied to vitalliumtm for two reasons. The first reason is that
the theory is approximate in its nature because the S-N curve is assumed to be linear.
This is rarely ever the case as most S-N curves are ogee-shaped. The second reason is

97
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

that the modified theory suggests that the slope of the S-N curve should start at 106
cycles. The use of this theory would produce false S-N curves for each damage level
because the S-N curve for vitalliumtm is not asymptotic to the endurance limit at 106
cycles. If the theory were to be modified to produce an S-N curve at say 5x106 cycles
instead of 106 cycles, it would yield a better approximation.

Henry’s modified theory yields poor predictions for remaining life. Refer to table
6.11. This is because it assumes a linear S-N curve. This assumption cannot be made
for vitalliumtm because of the definite curved nature of its S-N curve.

Gatts’s and Henry’s cumulative damage theories are similar in that they both use the
reduction in endurance limit as their damage indicator. Gatts’s theory cannot be
readily applied to vitalliumtm for the same reason that Henry’s theory which is that
damage may not be a function of the new endurance limit for vitalliumtm.

The same points for Henry’s theory are valid for Gatts’ theory. The values of “C”,
0.338 and 0.218, for unnotched and notched vitalliumtm are questionable. However,
these values give better results than do the constants for the steel equivalent. Gatts’
theory generally yields non-conservative predictions and should therefore not be
applied to vitalliumtm.

9.4.6 Unified Theory


The unified theory presented very good overall accuracy for both types of tests. This
suggests that making use of non-dimensionalised fatigue data is useful to determine
the equivalent cycle ratio “Be2” caused by residual stressing. From seven tests, there
were five conservative predictions and two non-conservative predictions. The non-
conservative predictions however were quite accurate. The author believes that this
theory should be applied to vitalliumtm when accurate life predictions are required.

98
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

To conclude, Ben-Amoz’s cumulative damage theory is the best theory to apply to


vitalliumtm because it is conservatively accurate and simple to use. When absolute
accuracy is required the more complex unified theory should be used to predict
remaining life.

9.5 HIPed Specimens


It was expected that HIPing would increase the fatigue life of the cast specimens.
Overall, this was observed except in one case. At a stress of 650 MPa the HIPed
specimen failed earlier than the as-cast plain specimen, at the same stress. As soon as
a tiny crack was observed on the surface a loud banging noise and catastrophic failure
occurred. There was little or no crack propagation phase at this high stress. The
author suggests this may be the reason why.
A crack will propagate until it reaches a stress absorber, such as a casting void. This
increases the crack propagation time because the crack has to overcome the void
before it can continue. HIPing vitalliumtm had the effect of densifying the structure.
At the high stress of 650 MPa the crack energy was extremely high. This energy
could not have been absorbed in HIPed vitalliumtm because casting voids were
eliminated. Instead this high energy was used to cut straight through the material
without any resistance and caused premature catastrophic failure. HIPing vitalliumtm
may reduce fatigue life at stresses above 580 MPa. More high stress tests are required
to make this conclusive.

However, for lower stresses, the opposite case seemed to exist. The energy required
to cause crack initiation was much higher for HIPed specimens than for plain
specimens. This was due to the lack of internal voids to act as stress raisers. This
meant that the crack initiation phase was increased and therefore the overall fatigue
life.

99
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

It was observed for HIPed specimens, at stresses below 580 MPa, that once a crack
started to propagate it failed much slower than specimens that were not HIPed. The
fracture line was straight and well defined for the HIPed specimens, whereas the
crack line was more random for the plain specimens. From this it was deduced that
HIPing had the effect of increasing the crack propagation phase and the overall
ductility of vitalliumtm. The HIPed vitalliumtm was more resilient to bending and
therefore, more ductile.

HIPing, on average increased the fatigue life of specimens by 92%. This can be
observed in figure 7.11 ;( take note that this is not completely obvious from the figure
because the abscissa of the graph has a logarithmic scale).
Despite the increase in fatigue life, it is still unsure whether HIPing actually increases
the endurance limit. Intuitively, the author believes this to be so. However, this is
opinion and not fact. It is estimated that the endurance limit exists in the range 280
MPa to 300 MPa, but it may be somewhat lower than this. A more conservative
estimate is 250 MPa to 300 MPa. More high cycle testing is required to make a final
determination on the endurance limit.

9.6 Mean Stress Effects


A Haigh constant life diagram was constructed for machined vitalliumtm (figure 7.3)
with the use of its S-N curve (Appendix IV). This diagram shows that a maximum of
280 MPa of mean stress can be applied for infinite life. A fatigue strength diagram
was constructed fore cast vitalliumtm (figure 7.6). It gives the failure envelopes for
different life requirements and can be used as an approximate design chart fore cast
vitalliumtm.

9.7 Inspection
The magnified photographs in figures 8.1 and 8.2 suggest that cracks propagate along
the crystal boundaries of vitalliumtm. This is in the direction of least resistance.

100
Discussion Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

The macroscopic inspection indicates that vitalliumtm fails in a brittle fashion (figure
8.5). This may be caused by work hardening of the specimen surface under cyclic
loading. The specimens’ surfaces were characterised by fibrous areas caused during
progressive crack propagation and crystalline areas which occurred during
catastrophic failure. Catastrophic failure did not occur in all cases. Therefore, the
surfaces of these specimens were not examined and failure was deemed to occur
when a deep crack was observed around the entire perimeter of the specimen.

9.8 The Fatigue Testing Machine


The stresses required, to conduct proper fatigue tests on vitalliumtm, seems to have
damaged the machine. Before further tests can be conducted the machine must be
repaired. The following repairs are required

1. The second adjuster needs to be re-bored and re-threaded to size M10.


2. The front damping plate needs to be replaced by a new one.
Note: The front damping plate supports the torsion bar housing.
3. The worn area on the torsion bar arm needs to be permanently repaired.

Although not totally necessary, it would be desirable to replace the dashpot switching
mechanism, to make it more reliable for high cycle tests.

101
Conclusions Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 10

Conclusions
1. Ben-Amoz’s cumulative damage theory works well for vitalliumtm.
2. The Unified cumulative damage theory yields accurate life prediction data for
vitalliumtm.
3. Vitalliumtm is a notch sensitive material.
4. HIPing increases the fatigue resistance and ductility of cast vitalliumtm.
5. Heavily machined vitalliumtm has a better fatigue resistance than cast vitalliumtm,
which has not been machined.
6. Vitalliumtm work hardens and fails in a brittle manner when subjected to
completely reversed bending cyclic loading.
7. Cracks propagate along the crystal boundaries of vitalliumtm.
8. The endurance limit of cast vitalliumtm lays within the range of 250 MPa to 300
MPa.
9. The endurance limit of HIPed vitalliumtm is estimated to lay within the range of
250 MPa to 300 MPa (and is expected to be greater than endurance limit of cast
vitalliumtm upon completion of further high cycle tests).
10. The endurance limit of the notched specimens is below 200 MPa and is estimated
to be 180 MPa.
11. The endurance limit of machined vitalliumtm is approximately 377 MPa.
12. The maximum allowable mean stress for infinite life that can be applied to
machined vitalliumtm under completely reversed bending conditions is 280 MPa.
13. The average value of ‘d’ for vitalliumtm, in Corten-Dolan’s cumulative theory was
found to be 9.82.
14. The threshold notch sensitivity of vitalliumtm is a value in the range 0 to 0.585.

102
Recommendations Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Chapter 11

Recommendations
1. Repair the fatigue testing machine as outlined in the discussion.
2. Conduct more tests on HIPed specimens to quantify better their increased fatigue
resistance.
3. The microstructure of HIPed vitalliumtm could be examined to check if any
casting defects exist.
4. Conduct more high cycle tests to properly determine the true endurance limit of
cast, notched and HIPed vitalliumtm.
5. The threshold notch sensitivity of vitalliumtm can be found by conducting another
notch analysis, with notch radii less than 1.5mm.
6. Conduct experiments to find the crack initiation information required to apply
Ben-Amoz’s full cumulative damage theory.
7. Conduct a test programme to determine whether a reduction in endurance limit is
a valid damage indicator for vitalliumtm.
8. Test the hardness of vitalliumtm for different cycle ratios of fatigue to discover if
hardness can be used as a damage indicator.
9. A variable stress amplitude fatigue test programme could be conducted to see if
Corten- Dolan’s cumulative damage theory applies to vitalliumtm.
10. It may be useful to conduct strain controlled fatigue tests. This type of test would
show the influence of randomised high strains that may occur in cast vitalliumtm.

103
Recommendations Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

References

1. JUVINALL, R.C., and MARSHEK, K.M., ‘Fundamentals of Machine Component


Design’, John Wiley & Sons, USA. 1991, p. 257-293.

2. HIGGINS, R.A., Materials for the Engineering Technician, Second Edition, p. 30-35, 71.

3. BARNBY, J.T, Fatigue M&B Technical Library, pp.13-31.

4. HEARN, E.J., ‘Mechanics of Materials’, Second Edition, Pergamon Press, 1992, p.842-
858.

5. BUCH, A., ‘Fatigue Strength Calculation’, Trans Tech SA, 1988, p.1-227.

6. AGOGINO, A.M., ‘Notch Effects, Stress State and Ductility’, Transactions of the
ASME, October 1978, V100, p.349-350.

7. SMITH, R.A., ‘Fatigue Crack Growth’, pp.117-129

8. WEI, R.P., 'Fracture Mechanics Approach to Fatigue Analysis in Design', Journal of


Engineering Materials and Technology, April 1978, V. 100, p. 113 - 120.

9. HARRISON, J.D., ' Damage Tolerant Design', Fatigue Crack Growth', (SMITH, R.A.).
pp. 117 - 129.

104
Recommendations Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

10. KITAGAWA, H., NAKASONE, Y., MIYASHITA, S., ‘Measurement of Fatigue


Damage by Randomly Distributed Small Crack Data’, Fatigue Mechanisms: Advances in
Quantitative Measurement of Physical Damage, ASTM STP 811, LANKFORD, J.,
DAVIDSON, D.L., MORRIS, W.L., WEI, R.P., Eds., ASTM, 1983, pp233-263.

11. McNAMARA, B.P., VICECONTI, M., CRISTOFOLINI, L., TONI, A., TAYLOR, D.,
‘Experimental and numerical pre-clinical evaluation relating to total hip Arthroplasty’,
Archives of Orthopaedic and Traumatic Surgery.

12. PLUVINAGE, G.C., RAGUET, M.N., 'Physical and Mechanical Measurements of


Damage in Low - Cycle Fatigue: Applications for Two-Level Tests, ' Fatigue
Mechanisms: Advances in Quantitative Measurement of Physical Damage, ASTM STP
811, LANKFORD, J., DAVIDSON, P.L. MORRIS, W.L., WEI, R.P., ASTM, 1983, PP.
139-150.

13. PETERSON, R.E., ‘Stress Concentration Factors’, John Wiley & Sons, 1953.

14. JAMES, P.J., ‘Isostatic Pressing Technology’, Applied Science Publishers, p.169-203,
221-238.

15. BS 3518: Part 1: 1993 ‘Fatigue Test Standards’.

16. ASTM, Handbook of Fatigue Testing, p. 13 - 14, 90-97.

17. MINER, M.A., ‘Cumulative Damage in Fatigue’, Journal of Applied Mechanics, 1945,
V12, p.159-164.

18. JOHNSON, J.B., OBERG, T, T., 'Airplane Propeller Blade Life', Metals and Alloys,
1938, V8, pp. 259 - 262.

105
Recommendations Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

19. BENHAM, P.P., CRAWFORD, R.J., 'Mechanics of Engineering Materials', p.559.

20. SUBRAMANYAN, S., ‘A Cumulative Damage Rule based on the Knee-point of the S-N
curve’, Transactions of the ASME, V98, October 1976, p.316-321.

21. BEN-AMOZ, M., ‘A Cumulative Damage Theory for Fatigue Life Prediction’,
Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 1990, V37, No. 2, pp. 341-347.

22. CORTEN, H.T., DOLAN, T.J., ‘Cumulative Fatigue Damage’, Proceedings of


International conference on Fatigue of Metals, ASME and IME, 1956.

23. COLLINS, J.A., ‘Failure of Materials in Mechanical Design’, John Wiley & Sons, USA,
1981, p. 255-274.

24. MARIN, J., ‘Mechanical Behaviour of Engineering Materials’, Prentice Hall 1962.

25. MANSON, S.S., FRECHE, J.C., ‘Application of a Double Linear Damage Rule to
Cumulative Fatigue’ Fatigue Crack Propagation, STP- 415, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1967,
p.384.

26. HENRY, D.L., ‘A Theory of Fatigue Damage Accumulation in Steel’, Transactions of


the ASME, 1955, V77, p. 913- 918.

27. GATTS, R.R., ‘Application of a Cumulative Damage Concept to Fatigue’, Transactions


of the ASME, 1961, p.531.

28. DUBUC, J., THANG, B.Q., BAZERGUI, A., BIRON, A., ‘Unified Theory of
Cumulative Damage in Metal Fatigue’, Canadian Welding Research Council (WRC),
Bulletin 162, p.1-19.

106
Recommendations Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

29. MOLONEY, M., ‘A Cumulative Damage Analysis of the Surgical Alloy, Vitalliumtm’,
Final year project report, 1996, p.1-145. (Not Published).

30. ASTM, ‘Handbook of Fatigue Testing’, p 90-97.

107
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

APPENDIX
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.1 Derivation of Equation 5.1

From bending theory

But the second moment of area I = BD3/12 for a rectangular beam

And the distance from the neutral axis to the surface is, y = D/2

Thus
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.2
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.3
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.4
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.5
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

A.6 Sample Calculations

All sample calculations shown in appendix are for the first high-low, two-level-stress test in
the cumulative damage analysis.
The details of which are
S1 = 650 MPa
N1 = 10,000
n1 = 8,000
S2 = 580 MPa
N2 = 18,500
n2 experimental = 2,500

Miner’s Life Prediction Theory

 n   8,000 
n2  N 2 1  1   18,5001    3,700 cycles
 N1   10,000 

Subramanyan’s Life Prediction Theory

580  280
  0.81
650  280

  8,000  0.81 
n2  18,5001      3,062
  10,000  

n2 = 3,062 cycles

Corten-Dolan’s Life Prediction Theory

The constant ‘d’ is taken as 6.3.

N 10,000
n2  6.3  6. 3  20,500 cycles
 S2   580 
   
 S1   650 
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Marin’s Life Prediction Theory

q yx
y  9.82

 18,500 
log 
 10,000 
x  4.42
 650 
log 
 580 

 n1   S1  
q
 8,000   650  
4 .42

n2  N 2  1       18,500 1      6,122
 N 1   S 2    10,000   580  

n2 = 6,122 cycles

Manson’s Life Prediction Theory

A value of Np = 1,900 was assumed.

log 18 ,5001, 900


 8,000  log 10 , 000
1, 900 
n2  18,500 1    2,038 cycles
 10,000 
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

Henry’s Life Prediction Theory

 8,000 
 
 10,000 
D1   0.694
 280   8,000 
1   1  
 650  280   10,000 

D2  1  D1  0.306

 8,000 
650 1  
 10,000 
E1   85.4 MPa
 650  280   8,000 
   1  
 280   10,000 

 0.306   .306 85.4 


  18,500
 580  85.4 
n2   6,304
 .306 85.4
1
580  85.4

n2 = 6,304 cycles

Gatt’s Life Prediction Theory

For most steels the original fatigue limit ‘Seo’ is about one half the ultimate tensile strength, giving a value
of ‘C’ equal to 0.5.

Therefore C = 280/827 = 0.338 for vitalliumtm.

The new endurance limit is given by

 
 
 
 1 
S e  S 1  
  n1   S  
  N1   S eo   n1  
 1 C

 S  .  1  N 1  
  S eo  1  
Appendix Cumulative Damage Analysis – Kieran J. Claffey

 
 
 
S e  6501  1   233.3 MPa


8,000
10,000


650
280  
1 

8,000  

 1  0.338 650  1  10,000  
 280 

  .306 233.3 
 0.306   18,500
 580  233.3 
n2   7,852
 .306 233.3
1
580  233.3

n2 = 7,852 cycles

Unified Life Prediction Theory

0.8
D1   0.708
  2.32  
8

1  0.8  2.32    
  2.95  
0.8 
132
.

  2.07  
8

.7082.07   
  2.95  
e 2  107
.  0.82
  2.07   8

0.7081   
  2.95  
1 107
.

n2  N 2 1  e 2   18,5001  0.82  3,330

n2 = 3,330 cycles