1. health and fitness
2. disorders
3. mental disorder
4. panic and anxiety

University of Waterloo
Department of Mechanical Engineering
ME 322 - Mechanical Design 1
Partial notes – Part 4 (Fatigue)
(G. Glinka)
Fall 2005
1
FATIGUE - What is it?
Ni = ?
Np = ?
NT = ?
Metal Fatigue is a process which causes premature irreversible damage or
failure of a component subjected to repeated loading.
2
Metallic Fatigue
•
A sequence of several, very complex phenomena encompassing several
disciplines:
– motion of dislocations
– surface phenomena
– fracture mechanics
– stress analysis
– probability and statistics
• Begins as an consequence of reversed plastic deformation within a single
crystallite but ultimately may cause the destruction of the entire component
• Influenced by a component’s environment
• Takes many forms:
– fatigue at notches
– rolling contact fatigue
– fretting fatigue
– corrosion fatigue
– creep-fatigue
Fatigue is not cause of failure per se but leads to the final fracture event.
3
The Broad Field of Fracture Mechanics
(from Ewalds & Wanhil, ref.3)
4
Intrusions and Extrusions:
The Early Stages of Fatigue Crack Formation


5
Schematic of Fatigue Crack Initiation Subsequent Growth
Corresponding and Transition From Mode II to Mode I
c
Δσ
Locally, the crack grows in shear;
Δσ
macroscopically it grows in tension.
6
The Process of Fatigue
The Materials Science Perspective:
• Cyclic slip,
• Fatigue crack initiation,
• Stage I fatigue crack growth,
• Stage II fatigue crack growth,
• Brittle fracture or ductile rupture
7
Features of the Fatigue Fracture Surface of a Typical
Ductile Metal Subjected to Variable Amplitude Cyclic
Loading
A – fatigue crack area
B – area of the final static
failure
(Collins, ref. 22 )
8
Appearance of Failure Surfaces Caused by
Various Modes of Loading (SAE Handbook)
9
Factors Influencing Fatigue Life
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Applied Stresses
Stress range – The basic cause of plastic deformation and consequently the
accumulation of damage
Mean stress – Tensile mean and residual stresses aid to the formation and
growth of fatigue cracks
Stress gradients – Bending is a more favorable loading mode than axial
loading because in bending fatigue cracks propagate into the region of lower
stresses
Materials
Tensile and yield strength – Higher strength materials resist plastic
deformation and hence have a higher fatigue strength at long lives. Most
ductile materials perform better at short lives
Quality of material – Metallurgical defects such as inclusions, seams,
internal tears, and segregated elements can initiate fatigue cracks
Temperature – Temperature usually changes the yield and tensile strength
resulting in the change of fatigue resistance (high temperature decreases
fatigue resistance)
Frequency (rate of straining) – At high frequencies, the metal component
may be self-heated.
10
Strength-Fatigue Analysis Procedure
Material
Properties
Component
Geometry
Loading
History
Stress-Strain
Analysis
Damage
Analysis
Allowable Load - Fatigue Life
Information path in strength and fatigue life prediction
procedures
11
Stress Parameters Used in Static Strength and
Fatigue Analyses
a)
b)
S
Stress
M
Stress
peak
n
r
S

Kt 
n
peak
peak
n
r
0
T

0
y
dn
y
dn
T

peak
S
12
Constant and Variable Amplitude Stress Histories;
Definition of a Stress Cycle & Stress Reversal
Constant amplitude stress history
Stress
a)
max
m
min
One
cycle
0
In the case of the peak stress history
the important parameters are:
peak
peak
 peak   max
  min
;

peak
a

peak
m
peak
  mipeak
 peak  max
n


2
2
Time
Variable amplitude stress history
Stress
b)
One
reversal
0
Time

peak
peak
 max
  min
2
;
 mipeak
R  penak
 max
13
Stress History and the “Rainflow” Counted Cycles
Stress
Stress history
Rainflow counted cycles
i+1
i-1
i-2
i+2
Time
i
A rainflow counted cycle is identified when any two adjacent reversals in thee
stress history satisfy the following relation:
ABS  i 1   i  ABS  i   i 1
14
The Mathematics of the Cycle Rainflow Counting Method
for Fatigue Analysis of Stress/Load Histories
A rainflow counted cycle is identified when any two adjacent reversals in thee
stress history satisfy the following relation:
ABS  i 1   i  ABS  i   i 1
The stress amplitude of such a cycle is:
The stress range of such a cycle is:
ABS  i 1   i
a 
2
  ABS  i 1   i
The mean stress of such a cycle is:
m 
 i 1   i
2
15
16
Stress History
6
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
11
12
13
14
-2
-3
Stress (MPa)x10
6
2
2
Stress (MPa)x10
5
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-2
-3
Reversal point No.
17
Stress History
6
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
11
12
13
14
-2
-3
Stress (MPa)x10
6
2
2
Stress (MPa)x10
5
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-2
-3
Reversal point No.
18
Stress History
6
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
11
12
13
14
-2
-3
Stress (MPa)x10
6
2
2
Stress (MPa)x10
5
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-2
-3
Reversal point No.
19
Stress History
6
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
10
11
12
13
14
-2
-3
Stress (MPa)x10
6
2
2
Stress (MPa)x10
5
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
-2
-3
Reversal point No.
20
Number of Cycles
According to the
Rainflow Counting
Procedure (N. Dowling, ref. 2)
21
The Fatigue S-N method
(Nominal Stress Approach)
•
The principles of the S-N approach (the nominal stress method)
•
Fatigue damage accumulation
•
Significance of geometry (notches) and stress analysis in fatigue
evaluations of engineering structures
•
•
Fatigue life prediction in the design process
22
Wöhler’s Fatigue Test
Note! In the case of smooth
components such as the
railway axle the nominal stress
and the local peak stress are
the same!
S 
B
A
peak
Smin
Smax
23
Infinite life
Part 1
Part 2
Stress amplitude, Sa (ksi)
Su
Part 3
Fatigue S-N curve
S103
Sy
Se
Number of cycles, N
Fully reversed axial S-N curve for AISI 4130 steel. Note the break at the LCF/HCF transition and
the endurance limit
Characteristic parameters of the S - N curve are:
Se - fatigue limit corresponding to N = 1 or 2106 cycles for
steels and N = 108 cycles for aluminum alloys,
m
A
3
3
S10 - fully reversed stress amplitude corresponding to N = 10
a
cycles
m - slope of the high cycle regime curve (Part 2)
S  C  N  10  N m
24
Relative stress amplitude, Sa/Su
Most of available S - N fatigue data has been obtained from fully reversed rotational bending tests.
However, material behavior and the resultant S - N curves are different for different types of loading.
It concerns in particular the fatigue limit Se.
S103
Se
1.0
0.5
Bending
Axial
0.3
Torsion
0.1
103
10
105
106
4
10
7
Number of cycles, Log(N)
The stress endurance limit, Se, of steels (at 106 cycles) and the fatigue strength, S103 corresponding
to 103 cycles for three types of loading can be approximated as (ref. 1, 23, 24):
S103 = 0.90Su
and
Se = S106 = 0.5 Su
- bending
S103 = 0.75Su
and
Se = S106 = 0.35 - 0.45Su - axial
S103 = 0.72Su
and
Se = S106 = 0.29 Su
- torsion
25
Approximate endurance limit for various materials:
Magnesium alloys (at 108 cycles) Se = 0.35Su
Copper alloys (at 108 cycles)
0.25Su< Se <0.50Su
Nickel alloys (at 108 cycles)
0.35Su <Se < 0.50Su
Titanium alloys (at 107 cycles)
0.45Su <Se< 0.65Su
Al alloys (at 5x108 cycles) Se = 0.45Su (if Su ≤ 48 ksi) or Se = 19 ksi (if Su> 48 ksi)
Steels (at 106 cycles)
Se = 0.5Su (if Su ≤ 200 ksi) or Se = 100 ksi (if Su>200 ksi)
Irons
Se = 0.4Su (if Su ≤ 60 ksi)
(at 106 cycles)
or Se = 24 ksi (if Su> 60 ksi)
S – N curve
Sa  C  N m  10 A  N m
or N  C

1
m
 Sa 

 S
S
 103 
1
103

m   log 
 and A  log 
3
Se
 Se 

1
m

2
C

A
m
 Sa 
1
m




26
Fatigue Limit – Modifying Factors
For many years the emphasis of most fatigue testing was to gain
an empirical understanding of the effects of various factors on
the base-line S-N curves for ferrous alloys in the intermediate
to long life ranges. The variables investigated include:
- Rotational bending fatigue limit, Se’,
- Surface conditions, ka,
Fatigue limit of a machine
part, Se
- Size, kb,
- Mode of loading, kc,
Se = ka kb kc kd ke kf·Se’
- Temperature, kd
- Reliability factor, ke
- Miscellaneous effects (notch), kf
27
Surface Finish Effects on Fatigue Endurance Limit
The scratches, pits and machining marks on the surface of a material add stress concentrations to the
ones already present due to component geometry. The correction factor for surface finish is sometimes
presented on graphs that use a qualitative description of surface finish such as “polished” or “machined”.
Ca
ka
Below a generalized empirical graph
is shown which can be used to
estimate the effect of surface finish
in comparison with mirror-polished
specimens [Shigley (23), Juvinal
(24), Bannantine (1) and other
textbooks].
Effect of various surface finishes
on the fatigue limit of steel.
Shown are values of the ka, the
ratio of the fatigue limit to that
for polished specimens.
(from J. Bannantine, ref.1)
28
Size Effects on Endurance Limit
Fatigue is controlled by the weakest link of the material, with the probability of existence (or density) of a
weak link increasing with material volume. The size effect has been correlated with the thin layer of
surface material subjected to 95% or more of the maximum surface stress.
There are many empirical fits to the size effect data. A fairly conservative one is:
kb 
Se 1

'
Se  0.869d 0.097
or
Se 1.0
kb  '  
Se 1.189d 0.097
d  0.3 in 

if 0.3 in  d  10.0 in 
if
if
if
d  8 mm


8  d  250 mm 
• The size effect is seen mainly at very long lives.
• The effect is small in diameters up to 2.0 in (even in bending and torsion).
Stress effects in non-circular cross section members
In the case of non-circular members the approach is based on so called effective diameter, de.
The effective diameter, de, for non-circular cross sections is obtained by equating the volume of material
stressed at and above 95% of the maximum stress to the same volume in the rotating-bending
specimen.
29
max
The effective diameter, de, for members
with non-circular cross sections
0.95max
+
The material volume subjected to stresses
  0.95max is concentrated in the ring of
0.05d/2 thick.
0.05d/2
The surface area of such a ring is:
A0.95 max 
-
 2
2
d   0.95d    0.0766d 2
4

t
0.95t
* rectangular cross section under bending
A  Ft
A0.95 max  Ft  0.95t  0.05Ft
Equivalent diameter
0.0766d e2  0.05 Ft
F
d e  0.808 Ft
30
Loading Effects on Endurance Limit
The ratio of endurance limits for a material found using axial and rotating
bending tests ranges from 0.6 to 0.9.
Se ( axial )  (0.7  0.9) Se ( bending )
kc  0.7  0.9 ( suggested by Shigley kc  0.85)
The ratio of endurance limits found using torsion and rotating bending tests
ranges from 0.5 to 0.6. A theoretical value obtained from von Mises-HuberHencky failure criterion is been used as the most popular estimate.
 e ( torsion )  0.577 Se ( bending )
kc  0.57( suggested by Shigley kc  0.59)
31
Temperature Effect
From: Shigley and Mischke, Mechanical Engineering Design, 2001
Se ,T  Se , RT kd  Se , RT
Su ,T
Su , RT
;
kd 
Su ,T
Su , RT
32
Reliability factor ke
The reliability factor accounts for the scatter of reference data such
as the rotational bending fatigue limit Se’.
The estimation of the reliability factor is based on the assumption that
the scatter can be approximated by the normal statistical probability
density distribution.
ke  1  0.08  za
The values of parameter za associated with various levels of
reliability can be found in Table 7-7 in the textbook by Shigley et.al.
33
S-N curves for assigned probability of failure; P - S - N curves
(source: S. Nishijima, ref. 39)
34
Stress concentration factor, Kt, and the
notch factor effect, kf
Fatigue notch factor effect kf depends on the stress
concentration factor Kt (geometry), scale and material
properties and it is expressed in terms of the Fatigue Notch
Factor Kf.
1
kf 
Kf
35
F
2
Stresses in axisymmetric
notched body
2
2
C
peak
C
2
2
2
2
3
A, B
3
11
A
3
3
2
2
n
D
D
B
1
F
n  S 
A
and
 peak  Kt n
3
11
3
3
F
36
Stresses in prismatic notched body
2
2
F
A,
B, C
2
 peak
2
2
F
n  S 
A
and
C
2
D
11
2
 peak  K t n
n
11
 Kt S
E
2
2
A
D
B
E
3
1
3
3
3
3
F
37
Stress concentration factors used in fatigue
analysis
M
S
n, S
r
0
x
dn
W
 peak
Kt 
n


n
r
peak
S
 peak
Stress
Stress
 peak
x
0
dn
W
38
Stress concentration
factors, Kt, in shafts
S=
Bending load
S=
Axial load
39
S=
40
Similarities and differences between the stress field near the notch
and in a smooth specimen
P
S
Stress
peak
n=S
peak= n=S
r
x
0
dn
W
41
The Notch Effect in Terms of the Nominal Stress
Stress range
Smax
S
n1
N (S)m = C
S
n2
S2
Sesmooth
n3
n4
np
Kf 
Fatigue notch factor!
Senotched
N2
N0
Sesmooth

Kf
cycles
K f  K t !!!
42
Definition of the fatigue notch factor Kf
 22   peak
S

2
notched
e
Se
1
3
Stress
22= peak
Nsmooth
Stress
2

M
smooth
e
 enotched
2
1
1
Nnotched
Nnotched
 esmooth
K f  notched
e
peak
for
N smooth  N notched
43
PETERSON's approach
Kt  1
K f  1
 1  q  K t  1
1 a r
1
q
;
1 a r
1.8
a – constant,
r – notch tip radius;
 300 
3
a
  10  in.
 Su 
for S u in  in.
NEUBER’s approach
Kt  1
K f  1
1 r r
ρ – constant,
r – notch tip radius
44
The Neuber constant ‘ρ’ for steels and aluminium alloys
45
Curves of notch sensitivity index ‘q’ versus notch radius
(McGraw Hill Book Co, from ref. 1)
46
Illustration of the notch/scale effect
Plate 1
W1 = 5.0 in
d1 = 0.5 in.
pea
k
pea
k
m1
m2
Su = 100 ksi
Kt = 2.7
q = 0.97
Kf1 = 2.65
Plate 2
d2
d1
r
r
W2= 0.5 in
d2 = 0.5 i
W1
W2
Su = 100 ksi
Kt = 2.7
q = 0.78
Kf1 = 2.32
47
Procedures for construction of approximate fully reversed
S-N curves for smooth and notched components
f ’
Collins method
Juvinal/Shigley method
Nf (logartmic)
Sar, ar – nominal/local
stress amplitude at zero
mean stress m=0 (fully
reversed cycle)!
Nf (logartmic)
48
Procedures for construction of approximate fully reversed
S-N curves for smooth and notched components
Manson method
Sar (logartmic)
0.9Su
Se’kakckbkdke
Se’kakckbkdkekf
Se
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
2·106
Nf (logartmic)
Sar, ar – nominal/local stress amplitude at zero mean stress m=0
(fully reversed cycle)!
49
NOTE!
• The empirical relationships concerning the S –N curve data are
only estimates! Depending on the acceptable level of uncertainty
in the fatigue design, actual test data may be necessary.
• The most useful concept of the S - N method is the endurance
limit, which is used in “infinite-life”, or “safe stress” design
philosophy.
• In general, the S – N approach should not be used to estimate
lives below 1000 cycles (N < 1000).
50
Constant amplitude cyclic stress histories
Fully reversed
Pulsating
m = 0, R = -1
m = a R = 0
Cyclic
m > 0 R > 0
51
Stress amplitude, Sa
Mean Stress Effect
sm> 0
0
sm< 0
time
Stress amplitude, logSa
sm= 0
sm< 0
sm= 0
sm> 0
No. of cycles, logN
2*106
52
The tensile mean stress is in general detrimental while the compressive mean stress is beneficial or
has negligible effect on the fatigue durability.
Because most of the S – N data used in analyses was produced under zero mean stress (R = -1)
therefore it is necessary to translate cycles with non- zero mean stress into equivalent cycles with
zero mean stress producing the same fatigue life.
There are several empirical methods used in practice:
The Hiagh diagram was one of the first concepts where the mean stress effect could be accounted
for. The procedure is based on a family of Sa – Sm curves obtained for various fatigue lives.
Steel AISI 4340,
Sy = 147 ksi
(Collins)
53
Mean Stress Correction for Endurance Limit
2
Gereber (1874)
Goodman (1899)
Sa  S m 
  1
Se  S u 
Sa S m

1
Se S u
Soderberg (1930)
Sa S m

1
Se S y
Morrow (1960)
Sa S m
 ' 1
Se  f
Sa – stress amplitude
applied at the mean
stress Sm≠ 0 and fatigue
life N = 1-2x106cycles.
Sm- mean stress
Se- fatigue limit at Sm=0
Su- ultimate strength
f’- true stress at fracture
54
Mean stress correction for arbitrary stress
amplitude applied at non-zero mean stress
Gereber (1874)
Sa
S ar
Goodman (1899)
Soderberg (1930)
Sa
 Sm 


 Su 

Sm
S ar
Su
Sa
Sm

S ar
2
1
1
Sy
1
Sa – stress amplitude
applied at the mean
stress Sm≠ 0 and
resulting in fatigue life of
N cycles.
Sm- mean stress
Sar- fully reversed stress
amplitude applied at
mean stress Sm=0 and
resulting in the same
fatigue life of N cycles
Su- ultimate strength
Morrow (1960)
Sa
S ar

Sm
1
f’- true stress at fracture
'
f
55
Comparison of various
methods of accounting
for the mean stress effect
Most of the experimental data lies between the Goodman and the yield line!
56
Approximate Goodman’s diagrams for ductile
and brittle materials
Kf
Kf
Kf
57
The following generalisations can be made when discussing
mean stress effects:
1. The Söderberg method is very conservative and seldom used.
3. Actual test data tend to fall between the Goodman and Gerber curves.
3. For hard steels (i.e., brittle), where the ultimate strength approaches the
true fracture stress, the Morrow and Goodman lines are essentially the
same. For ductile steels (of > S,,) the Morrow line predicts less
sensitivity to mean stress.
4. For most fatigue design situations, R < 1 (i.e., small mean stress in
relation to alternating stress), there is little difference in the theories.
5. In the range where the theories show a large difference (i.e., R values
approaching 1), there is little experimental data. In this region the yield
criterion may set design limits.
6. The mean stress correction methods have been developed mainly for the
cases of tensile mean stress.
For finite-life calculations the endurance limit in any of the equations can be
replaced with a fully reversed alternating stress level corresponding to that
finite-life value!
58
Procedure for Fatigue Damage Calculation
n1
1
Ni(i)m = a
Stress range, 
n2
2
3
n3
n4
'e
NT
D
e
n1 cycles applied at  1
N1 cycles to failure at  1

N1
N2
n2 cycles applied at  2
N 2 cycles to failure at  2
N3 No
....  ...
cycles
ni cycles applied at  i
N i cycles to failure at  i
i
ni
n
n1
n2
D  Dn1  Dn 2  .....  Dni 

 ... 
 i
N1 N 2
Ni
1 Ni
LR 
1
1

D n1 N1  n2 N 2  .... ni N i
59
n1 - number of cycles of stress range 1
n2 - number of cycles of stress range 2
ni - number of cycles of stress range i,
D1 
D2 
1
N1
1
N2
- damage induced by one cycle of stress range 1,
n1
Dn1 
N1
- damage induced by one cycle of stress range 2,
Dn 2 
1
Di 
Ni
- damage induced by n1 cycles of stress range 1,
n2
N2
- damage induced by n2 cycles of stress range 2,
- damage induced by one cycle of stress range i,
Dni 
ni
Ni
- damage induced by ni cycles of stress range i,
60
Total Damage Induced by the Stress History
D
n cycles applied at  i
n cycles applied at  2
n1 cycles applied at  1
....  ... i
 2
N i cycles to failure at  i
N 1 cycles to failure at  1 N 2 cycles to failure at  2
i
n
ni
n2
n1
 i
 ... 

D  Dn1  Dn 2  .....  Dni 
Ni
N1 N 2
1 Ni
It is usually assumed that fatigue failure occurs when the cumulative damage
exceeds some critical value such as D =1,
i.e.
if
D>1
- fatigue failure occurs!
For D < 1 we can determine the remaining fatigue life:
LR 
1
1

D n1 N1  n2 N 2  .... ni N i
N  LR  n1  n2  n3  .....  ni 
LR - number of repetitions of
the stress history to failure
N - total number of cycles to failure
61

N j = a  j

m
if
j > e .
It is assumed that stress cycles lower than the fatigue limit, j < e, produce no damage (Nj=) in
the case of constant amplitude loading however in the case of variable amplitude loading the
extension of the S-N curve with the slope ‘m+2” is recommended. The total damage produced by
the entire stress spectrum is equal to:
j
D   Dj
j 1
It is assumed that the component fails if the damage is equal to or exceeds unity, i.e. when D  1.
This may happen after a certain number of repetitions, BL (blocks), of the stress spectrum, which
can be calculated as:
BL = 1/D.
Hence, the fatigue life of a component in cycles can be calculated as:
N = BLNT,
where, NT is the spectrum volume or the number of cycles extracted from given stress history.
NT = (NOP - 1)/2
If the record time of the stress history or the stress spectrum is equal to Tr, the fatigue life can be
expressed in working hours as:
T = BL Tr.
62
Main Steps in the S-N Fatigue Life Estimation Procedure
• Analysis of external forces acting on the structure and the component
in question,
• Analysis of internal loads in chosen cross section of a component,
• Selection of individual notched component in the structure,
• Selection (from ready made family of S-N curves) or construction of SN curve adequate for given notched element (corrected for all effects),
• Identification of the stress parameter used for the determination of the
S-N curve (nominal/reference stress),
• Determination of analogous stress parameter for the actual element in
the structure, as described above,
• Identification of appropriate stress history,
• Extraction of stress cycles (rainflow counting) from the stress history,
• Calculation of fatigue damage,
• Fatigue damage summation (Miner- Palmgren hypothesis),
• Determination of fatigue life in terms of number of stress history
repetitions, Nblck, (No. of blocks) or the number of cycles to failure, N.
• The procedure has to be repeated several times if multiple stress
concentrations or critical locations are found in a component or
structure.
63
Example #2
An unnotched machine component undergoes a variable amplitude
stress history Si given below. The component is made from a steel
with the ultimate strength Suts=150 ksi, the endurance limit
Se=60 ksi and the fully reversed stress amplitude at N1000=1000
cycles given as S1000=110 ksi.
Determine the expected fatigue life of the component.
Data: Kt=1, SY=100 ksi Suts=150 ksi, Se=60 ksi, S1000=110 ksi
The stress history:
Si = 0, 20, -10, 50, 10, 60, 30, 100, -70, -20, -60, -40, -80, 70, -30,
20, -10, 90, -40, 10, -30, -10, -70, -40, -90, 80, -20, 10, -20, 10, 0
Stress History
64
Si = 0, 20, -10, 50, 10, 60, 30, 100, -70, -20, -60, -40, -80, 70, -30,
20, -10, 90, -40, 10, -30, -10, -70, -40, -90, 80, -20, 10, -20, 10, 0
Stress History
100
80
60
Stress (ksi)
40
20
0
-20 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-40
-60
-80
-100
Reversal point No.
65
N S a   C
m
log N  m log S a  log C
log 1000  m log 110  log C

6
log
10
 m log 60  log C

3  m log 110  log C

6  m log 60  log C
C  1.886  10 26 m  11.4
66
S-N Curve
Stress amplitude (ksi)
1000
100
10
1000
10000
100000
1000000
10000000
No. of cycles
67
Goodman Diagram
SY
100
Stress amplitude (ksi)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-100
-50
Suts
0
50
100
150
Mean stress (ksi)
Sa Sm

1
Se Suts
1
for fatigue endurance
Sa
S
 m  1 for any stress amplitude
S a ,r Suts
S a ,r  at Sm 0

S 
 1  m  S a
 Suts 
S a ,r  at Sm 0 
Sa
S
1 m
Suts
68
Calculations of Fatigue Damage
a) Cycle No.11
Sa,r=87.93 ksi
N11= C( Sa,N)-m= 1.866102687.93-11.4=12805 cycles
D11=0.000078093
b) Cycle No. 14
Sa,r=75.0 ksi
N14= C( Sa,N)-m= 1.866102675.0-11.4=78561 cycles
D14=0.000012729
c) Cycle no. 15
Sa,r=98.28 ksi
N14= C( Sa,N)-m= 1.866102698.28-11.4=3606 cycles
D14=0.00027732
69
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
n0=15
S
30
40
30
20
50
30
100
20
30
30
170
30
30
140
190
Results of "rainflow" counting
Sm
Sa
Sa,r (Sm=0)
5
15
15.52
30
20
25.00
45
15
21.43
-50
10
10.00
-45
25
25.00
5
15
15.52
20
50
57.69
-20
10
10.00
-25
15
15.00
-55
15
15.00
5
85
87.93
-5
15
15.00
-5
15
15.00
10
70
75.00
5
95
98.28
D=
D=0.000370
LR = 1/D =2712.03
N=n0*LR=15*2712.03=40680
Damage
Di=1/Ni=1/C*Sa-m
2.0155E-13
0
4.6303E-11
0
7.9875E-12
0
1.3461E-15
0
4.6303E-11
0
2.0155E-13
0
6.3949E-07
0
1.3461E-15
0
1.3694E-13
0
1.3694E-13
0
7.8039E-05 7.80E-05
1.3694E-13
0
1.3694E-13
0
1.2729E-05 1.27E-05
0.00027732 0.000277
0.00036873 3.677E-04
D=3.677E-04
LR = 1/D =2719.61
N=n0*LR=15*2719.61=40794
70