See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/316280674

A simple analytical bending stress model of parabolic leaf spring

Article  in  Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · June 2017
DOI: 10.1177/0954406217709302

CITATIONS READS

8 1,428

4 authors:

Akram Atig R. Ben Sghaier

Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Souss higher institute of applied sciences and technology of sousse
12 PUBLICATIONS   61 CITATIONS    26 PUBLICATIONS   155 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Raoudha Seddik R. Fathallah

Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Arts et Métiers University of Sousse
20 PUBLICATIONS   98 CITATIONS    70 PUBLICATIONS   865 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

fatigue design approach of parabolic leaf spring View project

LSP Technology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Akram Atig on 26 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Original Article

Proc IMechE Part C:

J Mechanical Engineering Science
A simple analytical bending stress model 0(0) 1–13
! IMechE 2017

of parabolic leaf spring Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0954406217709302
journals.sagepub.com/home/pic

Akram Atig1,2, Rabii Ben Sghaier1,2, Raoudha Seddik1

and Raouf Fathallah1

Abstract
The evaluation of stress distribution, produced by vertical loading along a parabolic leaf spring, presents an essential
aspect during the design stage. Commonly, designers utilize the finite element analysis to simulate the stress behaviour of
a parabolic leaf spring. Nevertheless, the use of such method is a time-consuming process during the deterministic and
the reliability-based fatigue design optimisation. In this study, we propose three analytical models describing the bending
stress distribution of a simply supported single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring: (i) an initially curved single asymmetric
parabolic leaf spring, subjected to a concentrated load; (ii) a straight single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring, subjected to
a uniform load and (iii) an initially curved single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring, subjected to a uniform load. Bending
stress distribution results of classical, finite element and proposed models are compared for several case studies. It is
observed that the third model is the most precise model compared to the finite element analysis of single asymmetric
parabolic leaf spring. Therefore, the suggested model can be used to generate fatigue life diagram that predicts the
required mean and alternating load values for a desired fatigue life with an acceptable accuracy and a reduced compu-
tational time.

Keywords
Parabolic leaf spring, bending stress, finite element analysis, fatigue life diagram, morrow fatigue criterion

Date received: 21 June 2016; accepted: 18 April 2017

Introduction a high level and a uniform distribution of the applied

Suspension systems are essential for reaching an ade-
quate road handling behaviour and guaranteeing a
high level of passengers’ comfort. Automotive suspen-
sion systems are composed principally by springs,
shock absorbers (bumpers) and anti-roll bars.1 Leaf
springs are important elastic components of a vehicle
suspension system. It is used to absorb and smooth
out shocks caused by irregularities in road surfaces.2
Beside the act of a spring element, the leaf spring is
used as a connecting element to link the axle to the
vehicle chassis.3–5 The attachment of the leaf spring to
the axle is effected through a U-bolt and to the vehicle
chassis through master leaf eyes (rolled ends).4 In
order to reduce the weight and enhance the efficiency
of leaf springs, multi-leaf springs are replaced in light
commercial vehicles by single tapered leaf springs.5,6
Based on advances of the leaf spring manufacturing
technology, single parabolic leaf spring becomes more
useful than the multi-leaf spring.4 Furthermore, the
parabolic leaf spring presents a high capability of
storing energy per kilogram, leading to an important
reduction of unsprung weight.6 In fact, the parabolic
variation of the depth along the length introduces
stress and provides an adequate load-carrying
capacity.6,7
It should be emphasised that the metallurgical and
the mechanical properties of the parabolic leaf spring
steel may be greatly influenced by the different man-
ufacturing processes, which include hot forming, heat
treatment and mechanical surface treatment pro-
cesses.8–10 During the manufacturing stage, flat bars
are sheared to a required length, heated around
900  C and profile-rolled for achieving a required
parabolic distribution of thickness along the length
of the spring. Next, the spring eyes are heat-formed
during the end rolling process and the desired
1
Laboratory of Mechanics, Materials and Processes (LMMP), National
Engineering School of Sousse, University of Sousse, Tunisia
2
Higher Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology of Sousse,
University of Sousse, Tunisia
Corresponding author:
Akram Atig, National Engineering School of Sousse, BP 264, Sousse
Erriadh 4023, Tunisia.
Email: akram.atig@gmail.com
2 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)
elliptical shape is carried out through the cambering
operation. Over the heat treatment stage, the para-
bolic leaf springs are heated to a temperature between
950 and 1050  C and quenched in the oil with a con-
trolled cooling rate.11 Afterwards, the parabolic leaf
springs are tempered to obtain a martensitic micro-
structure and to impart toughness to the spring steel.
After hot forming and heat treatment stages, para-
bolic leaf spring is commonly subjected to mechanical
treatment such as the shot peening process. This cold
surface treatment involves impacting the inner surface
of the parabolic leaf spring with small spherical shots,
generally made of hard steel, at relatively high velo-
cities (20–100 m/s).12,13 Shot peening is a relatively
cost-effective process and is widely employed in the
leaf spring industry to induce favourable compressive
residual stresses at the near-surface to improve the
fatigue behaviour of the parabolic leaf springs.8,9
Thus, the influence of the compressive residual
stress, during the parabolic leaf spring manufacturing
processes, should be taken into consideration in the
fatigue behaviour prediction.
To predict the fatigue failure of a parabolic leaf
spring, the finite element analysis (FEA) is widely
used to simulate the applied stress distribution
and fatigue behaviour in the design stage.14–20
Nevertheless, the deterministic and probabilistic opti-
misation of leaf spring design parameters, which need
a large number of stress model calls,21–23 involve a
considerable computational effort by using a FEM
of parabolic leaf spring (PLS). Therefore, it is very
important to use a simple and precise model to
carry out the applied stress distribution. A classical
analytical bending stress model of single asymmetric
parabolic leaf spring (SAPLS), based on the
Bernoulli–Euler straight beam theory is proposed by
the leaf spring design manual.6 However, the examin-
ation of an initially curved beam using the Bernoulli–
Euler straight beam theory can be unacceptable in
terms of model accuracy.24–27 Moreover, the classical
model assumes that the vertical loading caused by
road irregularities, is considered as a concentric
force applied on the middle of the leaf seat length.
This assumption can be an important source of
inaccuracy and may induce a stress concentration at
the load application position.
The aim of this paper is to suggest a simple method
for calculating the bending stress distribution of the
SAPLS. The suggested model takes into account the
Figure 1. Single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring assumed as a straight beam subjected to concentric load.
initial curvature and the uniform distribution of the
vertical load. The applied stress distributions along
the SAPLS length are compared with both: (i) the
classical model based on the consideration of the
SAPLS as a simply supported straight beam subjected
to concentrated vertical load and (ii) the FEM. It is
observed for different studied cases that the proposed
model is more accurate than the straight beam model
compared with the FEM. In addition, our proposed
model introduces the curvature radius as a PLS design
parameter. The effect of this parameter on the max-
imum bending stress has been highlighted. A signifi-
cant effect has been carried out for a small radius of
curvature values. The effect of large radii of curvature
has no signification and the maximum bending stress
tends to reach the value obtained by straight beam
models. The suggested analytical bending stress
model may be very suitable, for a leaf spring designer,
to implement the fatigue life diagrams that depict the
estimated fatigue life iso-line diagram as a function of
the mean and range applied loadings. Such a diagram
presents a graphical solution, for industrials, to select
the permissible loadings field for a required number of
cycles to failure or to predict the fatigue life for a
couple of mean and alternating loads.6,28,29
Theoretical background
Analytical model of PLS based on Bernoulli–Euler
straight beam theory and concentrated vertical
load (classical model)
As shown in Figure 1, most PLS designers assimilate
the single leaf spring as a simply supported straight
beam with a rectangular section. The spring is laid
down between two roller supports. The vertical load-
ing P is assumed to be a concentric force applied on
the middle of seat length. In this study, the spring seat
is inspected as unclamped and it is considered as an
active part when the PLS is subjected to the bending
load.
The bending stress  b is in the form of:30,31
Mbz ðxÞ:tðxÞ
 b max ðxÞ¼ ð1Þ
2:IGZ ðxÞ
where Mbz is the bending moment, IGZ is the second
moment about the loading axis (z-axis) and t is the
thickness of the SAPLS at a position x. For the
Atig et al.
rectangular cross section of a maximum thickness tmax
and a width w, the moment of inertia is given by:
wt3max
IGZ ¼
12
The maximum bending stress is located at the
middle of seat length, and it is expressed as:
6P  ðL1a þ0:5  LS Þ  ðL2a þ0:5  LS Þ
 max ¼
wt2max  ðL1a þL2a þLS Þ
Life prediction based on Morrow mean
stress correction
The Morrow fatigue criterion is commonly used to
predict the fatigue life of leaf springs.8,15,17 This cri-
terion takes into account the mean stress effect and
covers both low and high cycle fatigue regions.32 The
relation describing the Morrow fatigue criterion is
expressed as follows33:
f0   m
"a ¼ ð2Nf Þb þ"0f ð2Nf Þc
E tially curved beam with a rectangular cross section.
where "a is the total strain amplitude, E is the Young
modulus, f0 is the fatigue strength coefficient,  m is
the mean stress, b is the fatigue strength exponent, "0f
is the fatigue ductility coefficient, c is the fatigue duc-
tility exponent and Nf is the number of cycles to
failure.
Figure 2. Single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring assumed as an initially large curved beam subjected to a uniform vertical load.
3
For high cycle fatigue region, where the behaviour
is assumed to be elastic represented by the Hook’s
law, the morrow criterion equation can be written as
a stress-based form8:
ð2Þ
a
ð2Nf Þb ¼  0  ð5Þ
f  m
When the effect of the residual stress is considerable
on the fatigue behaviour, it is commonly superim-
ð3Þ
posed with the applied mean stress correction.34–36
Therefore, to take into account the influence of the
residual stress  r , the high cycle fatigue Morrow cri-
terion is described as follows8:
a
ð2Nf Þb ¼  0  ð6Þ
f   m   r
Analytical model with consideration of
both uniform load distribution and the
initial curvature (model 3)
The SAPLS is considered as a simply supported ini-
ð4Þ
The applied load is considered as a uniformly distrib-
uted vertical load applied on the seat part. In this
work, the shear stress is neglected in order to simplify
the analytical model and only the normal bending
stress is taken into account.
Figure 2 illustrates a schematic presentation of the
loading conditions applied on the SAPLS. The seat
4 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

length angular position is presented by  measured The bending moment and the bending stress are
from the middle of the seat length, the front and rear expressed as follows:
cantilever angular positions are presented respectively When ð1 þ Þ44  
by ð þ 1 Þ and ð þ 2 Þ.
The bending stress b is expressed along the P  R  sinð2 þ Þ
Mb ðÞ ¼
SAPLS length as follows: sinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ Þ ð15Þ
 ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ
Mb ðÞ  tðÞ
b ðÞ ¼ ð7Þ
2  IGZ ðÞ When 44

where  is the angular position. For a rectangular PR

Mb ðÞ ¼   sin2 
cross section, IGZ has the form: 4  sinðÞ
P  R  ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ ÞÞ
w  t3 ðÞ þ  sin 
IGZ ðÞ ¼ ð8Þ 2  ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞ
12  
P  R  ð4  sinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ Þ
The bending stress becomes:
 sin   ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞÞ
þ
6  Mb ðÞ 4  ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞ
b ðÞ ¼ ð9Þ
w  t2 ðÞ ð16Þ

The shear force VðÞ and the reactions at the two When 442 þ 
eyes of SAPLS, V1 and V2 , are expressed as follows:
When ð1 þ Þ44   P  R  sinð1 þ Þ
Mb ðÞ ¼
sinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ Þ
P  L2 P  sinð2 þ Þ  ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ ð17Þ
VðÞ ¼ V1 ¼ ¼
L1 þ L2 sinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ Þ
ð10Þ Figure 3 illustrates a simplified representation of
the SAPLS. The thickness of the SAPLS is constant
When 44 along the centre part and the two ends. However, it
has a parabolic profile in function of the length for the
P two intermediate parts.
VðÞ ¼   sinðÞ
2  sinðÞ The thickness distribution of the SAPLS is defined
ð11Þ by intervals. Indeed, it is expressed in function of the
P  ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ ÞÞ
þ angle  as:
2  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ
 
When 442 þ  3 tmax
For  ð1 þ Þ44  1 þ  tðÞ ¼
4 2
P  L1
VðÞ ¼ V2 ¼  ð18Þ
L1 þ L2
ð12Þ  
P  sinð1 þ Þ 3
¼ For  1 þ  44  
sinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ Þ 4
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð19Þ
The total applied loading is expressed as P ¼ q  Ls ð1 þ Þ þ 
tðÞ ¼  tmax
where q is the linear load density. The maximal bend- 1
ing moment value occurs at the angle max when VðÞ
changes the sign. The angle max is given by the For  44 þ  tðÞ ¼ tmax ð20Þ
following equation:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
  3 ð2 þ Þ  
2  sinðÞ  ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ ÞÞ For 44 2 þ  tðÞ ¼  tmax
max ¼ arcsin 4 2
sinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ Þ
ð13Þ ð21Þ

The geometrical parameters , 1 , 2 , L1 and L2 are 3 tmax

For 2 þ 442 þ  tðÞ ¼ ð22Þ
defined in Figure 2. The bending moment can be 4 2
obtained by the following equation:
Z The thickness is commonly considered as the most
important geometrical design parameter of the
M¼ V dx ð14Þ
SAPLS. The two constant parts at the end of the
SAPLS have quarter of the active length and half of
Atig et al. 5

Figure 3. Schematic presentation of the thickness variation of a SAPLS.

the maximum thickness. The parabolic part presents Table 1. Geometrical parameters of SAPLS.
three quarters of the active length. For the front and
Geometrical parameters Values (mm)
rear parabolic parts, the depth varies according to
equations (17) and (19). Maximum thickness 13.2
The description of the bending stress analytical Width 63
model over the length of the SAPLS can be divided Active length of rear cantilever 850
in six intervals:   Active length of front cantilever 600
For ð1 þ Þ44  34 1 þ  Seat length 100
Radius of curvature 1680
12  P  R  sinð2 þ Þ
b ðÞ ¼
w t2max ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ ð23Þ
 ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ
3 
For  4 1 þ  44   Table 2. Mechanical proprieties of SAE 5160.

Mechanical properties of SAE 5160 steel Value

6  P  R  sinð2 þ Þ
b ðÞ ¼ 1 þþ
w  ð 1 Þ  t2max  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) 1584
Yield strength (MPa) 1487
 ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ ð24Þ
Young modulus (GPa) 207
Density (kg/m3) 7850
For 44 Fatigue strength coefficient (MPa) 2063
Fatigue strength exponent 0.08
3PR
b ðÞ ¼   sin2 
2  sinðÞ  w  t2max
3  P  R  ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ ÞÞ
þ  sin 
ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞ  w  t2max Finite element procedure
 
3  P  R  ð4  sinð2 þ Þ  sinð1 þ Þ
To validate the analytical model, the FEA of a
 sin   ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞÞ SAPLS case has been carried out in order to compare
þ
2  ðsinð2 þ Þ þ sinð1 þ ÞÞ  w  t2max the bending stress distribution along the SAPLS span.
ð25Þ A parametrical three-dimensional model of the
SAPLS has been implemented using commercial
For 44 34 2 þ  finite element software ANSYSÕ WorkbenchÕ .
Table 1 illustrates the geometric parameters of the
6  P  R  sinð1 þ Þ SAPLS.
b ðÞ ¼
w  ð2 þ 2
2 Þ  tmax  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ For material assignation, the linear elastic
material model is considered. In this study, the
 ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ
applied material is the SAE 5160 steel, typically
ð26Þ employed in the leaf spring manufacturing.37 The
mechanical proprieties of SAE 5160 are illustrated
For 34 2 þ 442 þ  in Table 2.38
Generally, leaf springs are linked to the automotive
12  P  R  sinð1 þ Þ chassis through the eyes and mounted to the vehicle
b ðÞ ¼
w  t2max  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ axle by the seat length part.4,6 Therefore, as depicted
 ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ ð27Þ in Figure 4, the leaf spring eyes are allowed to rotate
in X-axis and translate in Y-axis.16,39,40 The applied
6 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Figure 4. Leaf spring loading and boundary conditions.

Figure 5. (a) Distribution of bending moment along the SAPLS length and (b) near the SAPLS centre.

loading is assimilated as a vertical force uniformly to assure a good accuracy for the maximum principal
distributed on the seat surface. For solid meshing, stress value and avoid any additional computational
eight-node hexahedra elements are used with a max- time. Consequently, 25,662 hexahedra elements with
imal length of 3 mm. This meshing is selected in order 146,202 nodes are generated.
Atig et al. 7

Figure 6. Bending stress distribution regarding (a) the SAPLS length and (b) near the SAPLS centre.

Figure 7. Maximum principal stress distribution of SAPLS (MPa).

8 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)
Figure 8. Maximum thickness effect on maximum bending stress.
Figure 9. Radius of curvature effect on maximum bending stress.
Results and discussion
The distributions of the bending moment along the
span, evaluated from different SAPLS models, are
shown in Figure 5. For both the classical model and
model 2, the bending moment is represented by an
increasing straight line for the negative span position
and a decreasing straight line for the positive span
position. The consideration of a uniform distributed
load generates a parabolic zone (second-order poly-
nomial equation) of the bending moment along the
seat length (case of the first and third models). It is
observed that the consideration of the uniform dis-
tributed load avoids the stress peak and induces the
slight change of the maximum bending moment pos-
ition from the origin.
Figure 6 represents the distribution of the normal
stress along the SAPLS span. For the classical model,
the distribution of the normal stress is presented by a
horizontal line.
The stress peak is located at the zero position.
Compared to the FEA results, shown in Figure 7,
the maximal stress value evaluated by classical
model presents an overestimation of 6.7%. This
error is explained through tow assumptions:
(i) the SAPLS is assimilated as a straight beam and
(ii) the vertical load is assimilated as a concentric force
applied on the middle of the seat length. Furthermore,
as depicted in Figure 7, the FEA confirms that the
most critical zone of the applied stresses is located
at the inner surface of the SAPLS.
The first model, which takes into account the linear
distribution of the vertical loading, eliminates the
second source of the normal stress error and reduces
the error to 3% compared to FEA. The second model,
which considers the initial curvature of the SAPLS
Atig et al.
Figure 10. Fatigue life diagram: number of cycles to failure iso-lines.
eliminates the error derived from the first assumption
which represent 3.6% of the error in this studied case.
The third model, taking into account the uniform dis-
tribution of vertical load on the seat length and the
initial curvature, presents a model error of 0.4% com-
pared with the FEM. The uniform distribution of the
vertical load avoids the stress concentration point,
occurring when the vertical applied loading is con-
sidered as a concentric load.
As depicted in Figure 8, the variation of the max-
imum thickness has a significant effect on the max-
imum normal stress. It is observed that the decrease
in the maximum thickness increases the normal stress
peak value and reduces the margin error of the ana-
lytical models compared with FEA. It is clearly noted
that the proposed model (third model) is in a good
agreement with the numerical one (FEM).
The radius of the curvature effect on the maximal
normal stress is displayed in Figure 9. The maximal
margin error does not exceed 0.4% compared to the
FEM for the various radii of the curvature values.
For the large curvature, the effect of the radius becomes
insignificant and the maximum bending stress tends to
reach the values obtained by straight beam models. The
suggested model (model 3) presents an accurate model
compared to the FEM. It can substitute the FEM with a
high reduction in computing time. It should be noted
that the FEM computation requires 3 min (i7-3770
3.40 GHz) for an optimised mesh size. However, the
computational cost of the optimisation process will be
prohibitive when the FEM is directly coupled with opti-
misation algorithms, which often involve a large
number of FEM iterations before convergence.
In the same context, the FEA may be ineffective to
perform the fatigue life iso-line diagram because the
implementation of fatigue life iso-lines is an inverse
problem; i.e. it involves finding the couple of mean
and alternating loads, which provide the required fati-
gue life of the component. Consequently, the building
of a fatigue life iso-line diagram necessitates an
9
accurate and fast-running model that proposes the
loadings as outcomes and the fatigue life as an input
parameter.
In this study, the fatigue life prediction has been
computed according to the Morrow criterion with the
consideration of the beneficial induced residual stress
effect. Based on the published experimental investiga-
tions, the industrial shot peening process of parabolic
leaf spring may induce a surface compressive residual
stress level of 575 MPa.41 Other experimental inves-
tigations have proved that in case of high-strength
steels, the relaxation of the compressive residual
stress is not observed for high cycle fatigue condi-
tions.42–44 Thus, the relaxation of the initial residual
stress is supposed to be insignificant and may be neg-
lected. Figure 10 shows the estimating fatigue life dia-
gram of the studied case in function of the mean and
range load. It indicates the expected number of cycles
to failure iso-lines. For a given mean load value and
desirable fatigue life, the fatigue life diagram provides
the optimal alternating load value. The use of the sug-
gested model (model 3) allows the generation of the
estimating fatigue life diagram with a short computing
time and an acceptable accuracy level.
Conclusion
In this paper, we put forward an analytical model for
calculating the normal stress of SAPLS. Compared
with classical model assumptions, the recommended
model takes into account both the uniform distribution
of the vertical load on the parabolic leaf spring seat part
and the initial curvature. The effects of the curvature
radius and the maximum thickness have been studied
for different models. It is noticeable that the suggested
model results are in a good agreement with those of the
FEA. Therefore, it is very advantageous to replace the
FEM by the proposed model during the implementa-
tion of the fatigue life iso-line diagram and during the
structural optimisation process, which need a large
10
number of repetitive calls of the parabolic leaf spring
stress model.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
1. Reimpell J, Stoll H and Betzler JW. The automotive
chassis: engineering principles. 2nd ed. Oxford:
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2001.
2. Morello L, Rossini LR, Pia G, et al. The automotive
body. vol. 1, Dordrecht: Springer Verlag, 2011.
3. Heißing B and Ersoy M. Chassis handbook. 1st ed.
Berlin: Vieweg & Teubner Verlag, Springer
Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, 2011.
4. Nunney MJ. Light and heavy vehicle technology.
Routledge, 2007.
5. Kaiser B and Berger C. Fatigue behaviour of technical
springs. Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik
2005; 36–11: 685–696.
6. SAE Spring Committee. Spring design manual.
Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers,
1996.
7. Knowles D. Automotive suspension and steering systems.
Cengage Learning, 2002.
8. Landgraf R and Francis R. Material and processing
effects on fatigue performance of leaf springs. SAE
Technical Paper 790407, 1979.
9. Gonzales MAC, Barrios DB, Lima NBD, et al.
Importance of considering a material micro-failure cri-
terion in the numerical modelling of the shot peening
process applied to parabolic leaf springs. Latin Am J
Solids Struct 2010; 7(1): 21–40.
10. Aggarwal ML, Khan RA and Agrawal VP.
Investigation into the effects of shot peening on the
fretting fatigue behaviour of 65Si7 spring steel leaf
springs. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications 2005; 219(3): 139–147.
11. Giannakis E, Malikoutsakis M and Savaidis G. Fatigue
design of leaf springs for new generation trucks. In: IOP
conference series: materials science and engineering,
2016, p.0120652.
12. Seddik R, Bahloul A, Atig A, et al. A simple methodol-
ogy to optimize shot-peening process parameters using
finite element simulations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2017; 90(5): 2345–2361.
13. Seddik R, Sghaier RB, Atig A, et al. Fatigue reliabil-
ity prediction of metallic shot peened-parts based on
Wöhler curve. J Constr Steel Res 2017; 130: 222–233.
14. Borkovic P, Sustarsic B, Malecevic M, et al. Fatigue-life
behaviour and a lifetime assessment of a double-leaf
spring using FEM-based software. Mater Technol
2012; 46(4): 345–349.
15. Kong YS, Omar MZ, Chua LB, et al. Fatigue life pre-
diction of parabolic leaf spring under various road con-
ditions. Eng Fail Anal 2014; 30(46): 92–103.
Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)
16. Kanbolat A, Soner M, Erdogus T, et al. Parabolic leaf
spring optimization and fatigue strength evaluation on the
base of road load data, endurance rig tests and non linear
finite element analysis. SAE technical paper 2011-01-
0438.
17. Refngah F, Abdullah S, Jalar A, et al. Life assessment
of a parabolic spring under cyclic strain loading. Eur J
Sci Res 2009; 28(3): 351–363.
18. Kong YS, Abdullah S, Omar MZ, et al. Failure assess-
ment of a leaf spring eye design under various load
cases. Eng Fail Anal 2016; 63: 146–159.
19. Karditsas S, Savaidis G and Malikoutsakis M.
Advanced leaf spring design and analysis with respect
to vehicle kinematics and durability. Int J Struct
Integrity 2015; 6(2): 243–258.
20. Malikoutsakis M, Savaidis G, Savaidis A, et al. Design,
analysis and multi-disciplinary optimization of high-
performance front leaf springs. Theor Appl Fract
Mech 2016; 83: 42–50.
21. Atig A, Ben Sghaier R, Seddik R, et al. Reliability-
based high cycle fatigue design approach of parabolic
leaf spring. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design
and Applications 2017; doi:10.1177/1464420716680499.
22. Sghaier RB, Bouraoui C, Fathallah R, et al.
Probabilistic high cycle fatigue behaviour prediction
based on global approach criteria. Int J Fatigue 2007;
29(2): 209–221.
23. Bouraoui C, Sghaier RB and Fathallah R. An engineer-
ing predictive design approach of high cycle fatigue reli-
ability of shot peened metallic parts. Mater Des 2009;
30(3): 475–486.
24. Liu W. Nonlinear analysis theory of single leaf steel
springs. SAE technical paper no. 881744.
25. Rahman MA, Siddiqui MT and Kowser MA. Design
and non-linear analysis of a parabolic leaf spring.
J Mech Eng 2007; 37: 47–51.
26. McEvily AJ. Metal failures: mechanisms, analysis, pre-
vention. John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
27. Ghuku S and Saha KN. A theoretical and experimental
study on geometric nonlinearity of initially curved can-
tilever beams. Eng Sci Technol: Int J 2016; 19(1):
135–146.
28. Kumar K and Aggarwal ML. Fatigue life prediction: a
comparative study for a three layer EN45A parabolic
leaf spring. Eng Solid Mech 2015; 3(3): 157–166.
29. Arora VK, Bhushan G and Aggarwal ML. Fatigue life
assessment of 65si7 leaf springs: a comparative study.
International Scholarly Research Notices, 2014.
30. Timoshenko S. Strength of materials. New York: : D.
Van Nostrand Company Inc, 1930.
31. Young WC and Budynas RG. Roark’s formulas for
stress and strain. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002.
32. Stephens RI, Fatemi A, Stephens RR, et al. Metal fati-
gue in engineering. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
33. Morrow J. Fatigue design handbook. Adv Eng 1968;
4(3.2): 9–21.
34. Soady KA. Life assessment methodologies incorporat-
ing shot peening process effects: mechanistic consider-
ation of residual stresses and strain hardening Part 1
– Effect of shot peening on fatigue resistance. Mater
Sci Technol 2013; 29.6: 637–651.
35. Webster GA and Ezeilo AN. Residual stress distribu-
tions and their influence on fatigue lifetimes. Int J
Fatigue 2001; 23: 375–383.
Atig et al. 11

36. Flavenot JF and Skalii N. A comparison of multiaxial  

fatigue criteria incorporating residual stress effects. In: P P L1  L2
VðxÞ ¼  x þ  ð29Þ
ICBMFF2, 2013. Ls 2 LT
37. Yamada Y and Kuwabara T. Materials for springs.
Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media, 2007. 1 1
For Ls 4x4 Ls þ L2a
38. Boardman B. Crack initiation fatigue – data, analysis, 2 2
trends and estimation. SAE technical paper no. 820682, ð30Þ
P  ðL1 þ 0:5  Ls Þ
1982. VðxÞ ¼ V2 ¼ 
LT
39. Scuracchio BG, de, Lima NB and Schön CG. Role of
residual stresses induced by double peening on fatigue
durability of automotive leaf springs. Mater Des 2013; The maximal bending moment value occurs at the
31;47: 672–676. position Xmax when V change the sign. The position
40. Soner M, Guven N, Kanbolat A, et al. Parabolic leaf Xmax is given by the following equation:
spring design optimization considering FEA & rig test
correlation. SAE technical paper no. 2011-01-2167,
 
Ls L2  L1
2011. Xmax ¼  ð31Þ
2 LT
41. De la Rosa CEF, Trejo MH, Román MC, et al. Effect
of decarburization on the residual stresses produced by
For  12 Ls 4x4 12 Ls , the bending stress has a para-
shot peening in automotive leaf springs. J Mater Eng
Perform 2016; 25(7): 2596–2603. bolic form described by the following equation:
42. Totten G, Howes M and Inoue T. Handbook of residual
stress and deformation of steel. ASM International. 3P 3  P  ðL2  L1 Þ
b ðxÞ ¼  2
 x2 þ x
2002, pp.54–69. Ls  w  tmax LT  w  t2max
43. Hanagarth H, Vöhringer O and Macherauch E.  
3  P  8  L2  L1 þ 3  Ls  ðL1 þ L2 Þ þ L2s
Relaxation of shot peening residual stresses of the þ
steel 42CrMo4 by tensile or compressive deformation. 4  LT  w  t2max
In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on ð32Þ
shot peening. Tokyo: The Japan Society of Precision
Engineering, 1990, pp.337–345.
44. Koh SK and Stephens RI. Mean stress effects on low Appendix 2
cycle fatigue for a high strength steel. Fatigue Fract Eng
Mater Struct 1991; 14(4): 413–428. Model 2: Analytical model considering
the curvature
This model is schematised in Figure 12, the SAPLS is
Appendix 1 examined as a curved beam with a concentric applied
Model 1: Analytical model considering the uniform vertical loading at the middle of the seat length.
The description of bending stress analytical model
load distribution over the length of the SAPLS can be divided in six
As presented in Figure 11, the SAPLS is considered as intervals:  
a straight beam with a uniform vertical loading For ð1 þ Þ44  34 1 þ 
applied on the seat length.
The shear-force diagram is described using the fol- 12  P  R  sinð2 þ Þ
b ðÞ ¼
lowing system of equations: w  t2max  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ ð33Þ
 ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ
1 1
For L2a  Ls 4x4  Ls 3 
2 2 For  4 1 þ  44  
P  ðL2 þ 0:5  Ls Þ
VðxÞ ¼ V1 ¼ ð28Þ 6  P  R  sinð2 þ Þ
LT b ðÞ ¼
w  ð1 þþ 2
1 Þ  tmax ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ
1 1
For  Ls 4x4 Ls  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ ð34Þ
2 2

Figure 11. Single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring assumed as a straight beam subjected to a uniform vertical load.
12 Proc IMechE Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science 0(0)

Figure 12. Single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring assumed as an initially large curved beam subjected to concentric load.

For 440
tðÞ thickness of the SAPLS at an angle
6  P  R  sinð2 þ Þ  (m)
b ðÞ ¼ 2 tðxÞ thickness of the SAPLS at a position
w  tmax  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ ð35Þ
X (m)
 ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinðÞÞ
tmax maximum thickness of the SAPLS (m)
For 044 þ  VðÞ shear force at angle  (N)
w width of the SAPLS (m)
6  P  R  sinð1 þ Þ E Young’s modulus (Pa)
b ðÞ ¼ IGZ ðÞ second moment about the loading axis
w  t2max  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ ð36Þ
(z axis) at a cross section defined by an
 ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ angle  (m4)
IGZ ðxÞ second moment about the loading axis
For 44 34 2 þ 
(z axis) at a cross section distant x
meters from the SAPLS centre (m4)
6  P  R  sinð1 þ Þ
b ðÞ ¼ L1a active length of front leaf spring canti-
w  ð2 þ
2 Þ  t2max  ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ lever (m)
 ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ ð37Þ L2a active length of rear leaf spring canti-
lever (m)
Ls seat length (m)
For 34 2 þ 442 þ  Mbz ðxÞ bending moment at a cross section dis-
tant x meters from the SAPLS centre
12  P  R  sinð1 þ Þ (Nm)
b ðÞ ¼
w t2max ðsinð1 þ Þ þ sinð2 þ ÞÞ ð38Þ Mbz ðÞ bending moment at an angle  from the
 ðsinð2 þ Þ  sinðÞÞ SAPLS centre (Nm)
Nf number of cycles to failure
P vertical loading (N)
R radius of leaf spring curvature (m)
Appendix V1 reaction force at the front eye (N)
V2 reaction force at the rear eye (N)
Notation Xmax position of maximal bending
b fatigue strength exponent moment (m)
c fatigue ductility exponent 1 angle of the front active length (rad)
 Atig et al. 13

2 angle of the rear active length (rad) f0 fatigue strength coefficient (Pa)
max angle of maximal bending moment m mean stress (Pa)
(rad)
 angle between the leaf spring centre and
the end of the seat length (rad)
Abbreviations
"a total strain amplitude
"0f fatigue ductility coefficient FEA finite element analysis
b ðÞ maximum bending stress at an angle  FEM finite element model
from the leaf-spring’s centre (Pa) PLS parabolic leaf spring
 bmax ðxÞ maximum bending stress at a cross SAPLS single asymmetric parabolic leaf spring
section distant x meters from the
SAPLS centre (Pa)

View publication stats