© All Rights Reserved

11 views

© All Rights Reserved

- ShipRightFOI23April20081.pdf
- (Meccanica Analitica e Appilcata)Dimensionamento a Fatica Di Sistemi Meccanici
- Fayik01
- hse
- leaf springs
- Disc Spring Catalogue
- MEL 311 Instruction Sheet
- Compressive Failure of Rocks
- F2012 Posted Notes for Advanced Topics Mec531
- 68
- Ansi Agma6001 d97
- IPEA_API579
- Fs Assessment-steel Hyd Struct
- WJ_1981_11_s231.pdf
- 1TOIMEJ (4)
- 2 Investigation of Fatigue
- Fatigue History.pdf
- Engineering Failure Analysis Volume 58 Issue 2015 [Doi 10.1016_j.engfailanal.2015.08.029] Li, Wei; Yan, Qing -- Failure Analysis of an Isometric Polygonal Shaft Fracture
- Fatigue Design
- HACON - A Program for Temperature and Stress Simulation

You are on page 1of 77

Dr. M. OMalley Master Notes

Spring 2008

Dr. D. M. McStravick

Rice University

Reading

Homework

Chapter 6

HW 4 available, due 2-7

Tests

suddenly

Fatigue failure is typically sudden and

complete, and doesnt give warning

Bolt Fatigue Failure [Text fig. 6-1]

Drive Shaft [Text fig. 6-3]

AISI 8640 Pin [Text fig. 6-4]

Steam Hammer Piston Rod [Text fig. 6-6]

Jacob Neu chair failure (in this classroom)

Fatigue Example 1

Fatigue

Estimating FS and EL

Modifying factors

Thus far weve studied static failure of machine elements

The second major class of component failure is due to dynamic loading

Variable stresses

Repeated stresses

Alternating stresses

Fluctuating stresses

material can sustain before failure assuming the load is applied only

once and held

A material can also fail by being loaded repeatedly to a stress level that

is LESS than Su

Fatigue failure

design

Strain Life Method

Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics Method

Not Accurate for Low Cycle Fatigue (<103)

Stress-life

Least accurate for low-cycle fatigue

Most traditional

Strain-life

Easiest to implement

Ample supporting data

Represents high-cycle applications adequately

Good for low-cycle fatigue applications

Some uncertainties exist in the results

Predicts crack growth with respect to stress intensity

Practical when applied to large structures in conjunction with computer

codes and periodic inspection

Fatigue analysis

2 primary classifications of

fatigue

Alternating no DC component

Fluctuating non-zero DC

component

increases, the fatigue strength

Sf (the point of failure due to

fatigue loading) decreases

For steel and titanium, this

fatigue strength is never less

than the endurance limit, Se

Our design criteria is:

S f (N )

approaches infinity (N ),

Sf(N) = Se (for iron or Steel)

like this to calculate our fatigue strength if

we know the material and the number of

cycles

We could use our factor of safety equation

as our design equation

But there are a couple of problems with this

approach

much more scarce than -e information

S-N diagram is created for a lab specimen

Smooth

Circular

Ideal conditions

estimating Sf(N) and Se

S f (N )

Infinite life

Se

Implies N

a

Finite life

S f (N )

Implies that the value of that strength (endurance limit) applies to a LAB SPECIMEN in

controlled conditions

Variables without a (Se, Sf)

First we find the prime value for our situation (Se)

Then we will modify this value to account for differences between a lab specimen and our

actual situation

This will give us Se (depending on whether we are considering infinite life or finite life)

Note that our design equation uses Sf, so we wont be able to account for safety factors until

we have calculated Se and Se

endurance limit (Se) based on the ultimate

strength of the material (Sut)

Steel

Se

= 0.5 Sut

for

Sut < 200 ksi (1400 MPa)

= 100 ksi (700 MPa) for all other values of Sut

Iron

Se

Note: ASTM # for gray cast iron is the min Sut

S f (N )

a

Se

a

Se

Alloys

Eventually, these materials will fail due to repeated loading

To come up with an equivalent endurance limit, designers

typically use the value of the fatigue strength (Sf) at 108 cycles

Aluminum alloys

Se (Sf at 108 cycles)

Copper alloys

Se (Sf at 108 cycles)

= 0.4 Sut

for

Sut < 48 ksi (330 MPa)

= 19 ksi (130 MPa) for all other values of Sut

= 0.4 Sut

for

Sut < 35 ksi (250 MPa)

= 14 ksi (100 MPa) for all other values of Sut

material strength due to infinite

loading

and see the difference in fatigue

strength after repeated loading

fatigue strength (Sf) is never less

than the endurance limit (Se)

that the fatigue strength (Sf)

eventually goes to zero (failure!),

but we will use the value of Sf at

108 cycles as our endurance limit

(Se) for these materials

fatigue with a known number of cycles

(N), we need to calculate the fatigue

strength (Sf)

We have two S-N diagrams

One for aluminum and copper

up with equations for calculating Sf

for a known number of cycles

Note: Book indicates that 0.9 is not

actually a constant, and uses the

variable f to donate this multiplier.

We will in general use 0.9 [so f=0.9]

Estimating Sf (N)

For f=0.9

S 'f N aN b

1 0.9Sut

b - log

3 S e

S 'f N aN b

1 0.9Sut

b - log

3 S e

Sf at N = 108

5.7

Correction factors

We need to account for differences between the lab specimen and a real

specimen (material, manufacturing, environment, design)

We use correction factors

These will account for differences between an ideal lab specimen and real life

Se = ka kb kc kd ke kf Se

Marin modification factors

ka surface factor

kb size factor

kc load factor

kd temperature factor

ke reliability factor

Kf miscellaneous-effects factor

Modification factors have been found empirically and are described in section 6-9 of

Shigley-Mischke-Budynas (see examples)

If calculating fatigue strength for finite life, (Sf), use equations on previous slide

Surface (ka)

Size (kb)

Accounts for effects of operating temperature (Not significant factor for T<250 C [482 F])

Reliability (ke)

Endurance limits differ with Sut based on fatigue loading (bending, axial, torsion)

Temperature (kd)

Axial (kb = 1)

Loading (kc)

Accounts for scatter of data from actual test results (note ke=1 gives only a 50% reliability)

Miscellaneous-effects (kf)

Reminder that these must be accounted for

Residual stresses

Corrosion

etc

Temperature Effect on Se

Reliability Factor, ke

Now what?

non-laboratory conditions

how do we use it?

Predict failure

> Sf(N)

Factor of safety

or Life of the part:

1

= Sf(N) /

b

N

Where

a

b = - 1/3 log (0.9 Sut / Se)

log (a) = log (0.9 Sut) - 3b

0.8 m long and supports a completely

reversing transverse load at the other end of +/1 kN. The material is AISI 1045 hot-rolled

steel. If the rod must support this load for 104

cycles with a factor of safety of 1.5, what

dimension should the square cross section

have? Neglect any stress concentrations at the

support end and assume f= 0.9.

brittle materials are significantly affected by

stress concentrations for repeated loading

cases

We use stress concentration factors to modify

the nominal stress

SC factor is different for ductile and brittle

materials

SC factor fatigue

= kfnom+ = kfo

t = kfstnom = kfsto

stress.

kf called fatigue stress concentration factor

Why reduced? Some materials are not fully sensitive

to the presence of notches (SCs) therefore,

depending on the material, we reduce the effect of

the SC

Fatigue SC factor

kf = [1 + q(kt 1)]

kfs = [1 + qshear(kts 1)]

q and qshear

Find using figures 6-20 and 6-21 in book (Shigley) for steels

and aluminums

Use q = 0.20 for cast iron

If kf ~ 1, insensitive (q = 0)

Example

Machined finish

Find Fmax for:

= 1.8

Infinite life

Design Equation:

= Se /

Example, cont.

= Se /

What do we need?

Considerations?

Se

Modification factors

Stress concentration (hole)

nom

P

P

F

2083 F

A b - d h 60 - 12 10

Example, cont.

1 qkt - 1 nom

k f nom

r = 6 mm

Sut = 448 MPa = 65.0 ksi

q ~ 0.8

Example, cont.

Unloaded hole

d/b = 12/60 = 0.2

kt ~ 2.5

q = 0.8

kt = 2.5

nom = 2083 F

1 qkt - 1 nom

1 0.82.5 - 12083F

4583F

Example, cont.

Now, estimate Se

Steel:

Se = 0.5 Sut for Sut < 1400 MPa (eqn. 6-8)

700 MPa else

AISI 1020 As-rolled

material strength due to infinite

loading

and see the difference in fatigue

strength after repeated loading

fatigue strength (Sf) is never less

than the endurance limit (Se)

that the fatigue strength (Sf)

eventually goes to zero (failure!),

but we will use the value of Sf at

108 cycles as our endurance limit

(Se) for these materials

Correction factors

We need to account for differences between the lab specimen and a real

specimen (material, manufacturing, environment, design)

We use correction factors

These will account for differences between an ideal lab specimen and real life

Se = ka kb kc kd ke kf Se

Marin modification factors

ka surface factor

kb size factor

kc load factor

kd temperature factor

ke reliability factor

Kf miscellaneous-effects factor

Modification factors have been found empirically and are described in section 6-9 of

Shigley-Mischke-Budynas (see examples)

If calculating fatigue strength for finite life, (Sf), use equations on previous slide

Example, cont.

Modification factors

Surface:

ka = aSutb (Eq. 6-19)

Machined

ka = (4.45)(448)-0.265 = 0.88

Example, cont.

Size:

Axial loading

kb = 1 (Eq. 6-21)

Load:

kb

kc

Axial loading

kc = 0.85 (Eq. 6-26)

Example, cont.

Temperature:

Reliability:

kf = 1

Endurance limit:

Miscellaneous:

Design Equation:

Se 177MPa

1.8

4583F

177x106

F

21.4 kN

45831.8

Alternating

Fluctuating

P

m

A

Mr

a

I

Alternating Stresses

Fluctuating stresses

Mean Stress

'm

2

Stress amplitude

'

a

max min

max - min

2

Together, m and a

characterize fluctuating

stress

Tension

Soderberg

Modified Goodman

Gerber

ASME-elliptic

Yielding

Points above the line: failure

Book uses Goodman primarily

Straight line, therefore easy algebra

Easily graphed, every time, for every problem

Reveals subtleties of insight into fatigue problems

Answers can be scaled from the diagrams as a check on the

algebra

investigated in an empirical manner

For m < 0 (compressive mean stress)

a > Sf

Failure

Same as with alternating stresses

Or,

a

Sf

<1

m

Sut

Failure

Static Failure

Note: m + a = max

Relationship is easily

seen by plotting:

Goodman Line

(for arbitrary fluctuations

in m and a )

a

Sf

m

Sut

Sf

m

Sut

Important point: Part can fail because of fluctuations in either a, m, or both.

Design for prescribed variations in a and m to get a more exact solution.

Case 1: m fixed

Sa

Case 2: a fixed

Sm

Case 3: a / m fixed

Sa

Sm

1

a

Sf

m

Sut

Example

Given:

Syt = 950 MPa

Heat-treated (as-forged)

Fmean = 9.36 kN

Fmax = 10.67 kN

d/w = 0.133; d/h = 0.55

Find:

Fmean is constant

Example, cont.

Find m and a

My

I

1

1

1

I bh3 w - d h 3 75 - 10183 3.16x10-8 m 4

12

12

12

h

ym ax 0.009 m

2

1

F L 1

M m m Fm L 9.36x103 0.3 702 Nm

4

2 2 4

1

F L 1

M m ax m ax Fm axL 10.67x103 0.3 800 Nm

4

2 2 4

M y

m m m ax 200 MPa

I

M y

m ax m ax m ax 228 MPa

I

a m ax - m 28 MPa

Example, cont.

loading,

m = 200 MPa

a = 28 MPa

nominal

the SC factors

Su = 1400Mpa

q ~ 0.95 (Figure 7-20)

kf = 2.14

k f 1 qkt - 1

a a k f a

nom

m m k f m

nom

2.1428 60 MPa

2.14200 428 MPa

Example, cont.

Find strength

Eqn. 7-8: Se = .504Sut

Modification factors

Surface:

Size :

Load :

ka aSut

Equation (7 - 19) :

2.8 d eq 51 mm

Bending

a 271

b -0.995

ka 0.201

d eq 0.808hb

kb 1.24d eq

kb 0.86

kc 1 (Eq. 7 - 25)

1

2

- 0.107

Example, cont.

Design criteria

Goodman line:

a

Se

m

S ut

1/ n

a and m,

a

121

121 1400

121 1400

1 60 428

121 1400

1.25

1400

Example, cont.

Fmean = constant from

problem statement

m = constant

Sa m

1

S e Sut

Sa

428

1

121 1400

Sa 84 MPa

S

84

a

1 .4

a 60

Less conservative!

Size factor depends on loading

SC factors also depend on loading

Could be very complicated calculation to keep track of each load

case

Assuming all stress components are completely reversing and

are always in time phase with each other,

1. For the strength, use the fully corrected endurance limit for

bending, Se

2. Apply the appropriate fatigue SC factors to the torsional stress,

the bending stress, and the axial stress components

3. Multiply any alternating axial stress components by the factor

1/kc,ax

4. Enter the resultant stresses into a Mohrs circle analysis to find

the principal stresses

5. Using the results of step 4, find the von Mises alternating stress

a

6. Compare a with Sa to find the factor of safety

Additional details are in Section 6-14

- ShipRightFOI23April20081.pdfUploaded bysailorgeorge1
- (Meccanica Analitica e Appilcata)Dimensionamento a Fatica Di Sistemi MeccaniciUploaded byantaie
- Fayik01Uploaded byalex
- hseUploaded bykkfemin
- leaf springsUploaded byShankar G
- Disc Spring CatalogueUploaded byjharsh87
- MEL 311 Instruction SheetUploaded byHari Harsha
- Compressive Failure of RocksUploaded bySamaptika Mohanty
- F2012 Posted Notes for Advanced Topics Mec531Uploaded byYousif Said
- 68Uploaded byMona Awad
- Ansi Agma6001 d97Uploaded byanhntran4850
- IPEA_API579Uploaded byJesus Soares
- Fs Assessment-steel Hyd StructUploaded byMohamed Nageeb Salem
- WJ_1981_11_s231.pdfUploaded bykhanto
- 1TOIMEJ (4)Uploaded byHadiBies
- 2 Investigation of FatigueUploaded byimran_chaudhry
- Fatigue History.pdfUploaded bytototo
- Engineering Failure Analysis Volume 58 Issue 2015 [Doi 10.1016_j.engfailanal.2015.08.029] Li, Wei; Yan, Qing -- Failure Analysis of an Isometric Polygonal Shaft FractureUploaded byAndri Ode
- Fatigue DesignUploaded byg401992
- HACON - A Program for Temperature and Stress SimulationUploaded byvalentinluc
- DME I SkillsUploaded bydurgaraokamireddy
- 8_FatigueUploaded byAsepYudhistira
- Failure Analysis of a Turbo DiskUploaded byAPI
- Cracking in Fire Tube BoilersUploaded byRui Alexandre
- 7189369.pdfUploaded byFrancesco Montagnoli
- sifi 2Uploaded byISsa Qafa'iti
- Research of Fatigue Crack Growth.pdfUploaded byGooftilaaAniJiraachuunkooYesusiin
- Project 1 2019(2)Uploaded byAmir Tanvir
- Bolt Profile Configuration and Load Transfer Capacity OptimisatioUploaded byalejandro
- ch06_m.pdfUploaded byKTMO

- MD VI Shaft DesignUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- Design of Variable Coupler Curve Four-bar MECHANISMUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- Gear FailureUploaded byVijay Choudhary
- gears_ch_29.pptUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- Machine Vision Toolbox for MatlabUploaded byjoseangmn
- CH19_Springs.pptUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- 142815474-Spring-Design.pptUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- basic mechanical pptUploaded bySundar Sivam
- book onMechatronic.pdfUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- Fasteners, Powers Screws, Connections.pptUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- ClutchesUploaded byanon_652792255
- Hopfield OptimizationUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- The Payment of Wages Act - 1936Uploaded byShaji Mullookkaaran
- ReportUploaded byShatendra Sahu
- Adventures_of_Tom_SawyerUploaded byTilak Patidar
- IS 808Uploaded bychrtrom

- THREAD ROLLING.pptxUploaded byShubham Sarkar
- Heat treatment with Salt bath furnacesUploaded byvairam44
- Cam-Clay Models Using Castem 2000© and Plaxis© for the Study of the Slope Stability of the “Corniche Ouest” of the Dakar Peninsula (Senegal, West Africa).pdfUploaded byvinoth_mani_1
- Simple Introduction to Angle Resolve Photo Emission Spectroscopy ARPESUploaded byousolid
- Elasto-Plastic Stress Analysis in a Ductile Adhesive & Aluminum AdherendsUploaded byvietnhut
- HardnessUploaded bySelva Kumar
- Cavitec GMA RecomendUploaded bymaguenhoyos
- 2.5 Insulation & Refractories.pdfUploaded byKantilal Malwania
- Silicon NitrideUploaded byNishanth Shannmugam
- 4. Polymer FailureUploaded byandriaerospace
- Liquids, Solutions, and Interfaces: From Classical Macroscopic Descriptions to Modern Microscopic Details (Topics in Analytical Chemistry) (Fawcett 2004)Uploaded bymy_Scribd_pseudo
- Wafer ProcessingUploaded byJohn Paul
- 3DFEMParametricAnalysisofStiffenedSteelLinersinHydroelectricPressureTunnels_rev4Uploaded byAdelmo Filho
- Light Transmitting Cable RegUploaded bykarunamoorthi_p
- PC-004_Access Gallery Standard Precast DesignUploaded byhasan_kygsz
- Design Calculations for the Dome Structure-type 1Uploaded bymsiddiq1
- dfsh.pdfUploaded bynkchandru
- HMTUploaded byHeny Martha
- Newman Esdep Wg 6Uploaded byfrancis
- EEEUploaded bySaurav Raj
- Dark Field MicroscopyUploaded byKanika Saini
- IJETAE_0213_57Uploaded byamd mhm
- 403Uploaded byjdupont732
- P12 (01) - Fabrication of Polymeric Scaffolds With a Controlled Distribution of PoresUploaded byBenni Wewok
- Rock MechanicsUploaded byOlio Montaño
- L5-Fundamentals of Metal CastingUploaded byKhayrulIslam
- 5. Performance and Efficiency Test of a Refrigeration Plant (Lecture)Uploaded byAnonymous xjV1llZS
- The assessment of the risk of damage to buildings due to tunnelling and excavations - J BurlandUploaded byFederico Singh Amadineep
- Graphite-To-diamond Transformation Induced by Ultrasound CavitationUploaded bydanielsocial
- Nx Nastran DesktopUploaded byThanakorn Vichiensamuth

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.