Fatigue Failure in Variable Loading

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
1
 Outline
• Fatigue Introduction
• Fatigue Life Methods
– Stress-based Approach
– Strain-based Approach
– Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics
• Endurance Limit and Fatigue Strength
• Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses
• Fatigue Failure Criteria for Fluctuating Stresses
• Combination of Loading Modes

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
2
 Introduction to Fatigue
• Cyclic loading produces stresses that are variable,
repeated, alternating, or fluctuating
• Fracture at maximum stresses well below yield
strength (SY)
• Failure occurs after many stress cycles (100, 000
cycles)
• Failure is by sudden ultimate fracture
• No visible warning in advance of failure

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
3
 History
In May 1842, a train to Paris crashed in Meudon because the
leading locomotive broke an axle. The picture tells it all; at least 55
passengers were killed.

A first explanation of what might have happened came from

William John Macquorn Rankine one of the many famous Scottish
physicists. He had investigated broken axles, highlighting the
importance of stress concentration, and the mechanism of crack
growth with repeated loading or "vibrations". This means that he
was the first to suggest that the basic mechanisms of fatigue is tied
to vibrations. ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
4
 Haviland Crash
Two de Havilland Comet passenger jets (the first commercial jet planes!)
broke up in mid-air and crashed within a few months of each other in 1954.
The crashes were a result of metal fatigue, caused by the repeated
pressurization and de-pressurization of the aircraft cabin

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
5
Aloha Airline Accident

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
6
Damage due to Fatigue

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
7
Cyclic Loading on Fuselage

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
8
Failure Analysis

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
9
ICE Accident due to Fatigue of Wheel

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
10
 Failure Stages
• Stage I – Initiation of micro- crack due
to cyclic plastic deformation
• Stage II–Progresses to macro-crack
which forms plateau-like surface that
repeatedly opens and closes, creating
bands called beach marks
• Stage III–Crack has propagated far
enough that remaining material is
insufficient to carry the load, and fails
by simple ultimate failure
Started at A propagated towards B
and finally sudden failure at C
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
11
Fatigue Fractured Surfaces

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
12
Fractured
Schematics of Surface in Torsion
Fatigue Fracture Surfaces

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
13
 Fatigue Fracture – Examples
Fatigue Fracture Examples

AISI 4320 drive

shaft
B– crack initiation at
stress concentration
in keyway
C– Final brittle
failure

Fig. 6–3
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design

14
 Fatigue Fracture – Examples
• Fatigue failure of forged
connecting rod
• Crack initiated at flash
line of the forging at the
left edge of picture
• Beach marks show crack
propagation halfway
around the hole before
ultimate fracture

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
15
 Fatigue Life Methods
• Three major fatigue life models
• Methods predict life in number of cycles to failure, N, for a
specific level of loading
• Stress-life method (used in most designs)
– Least accurate, particularly for low cycle applications
– Most traditional, easiest to implement
• Strain-life method
– Detailed analysis of plastic deformation at localized regions
– Several idealizations are compounded, leading to uncertainties
in results
• Linear-elastic fracture mechanics method
– Assumes crack exists
– Predicts crack growth with respect to stress intensity
•
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
16
 Standard Fatigue Strength Sn’
R. R. Moore Fatigue Testing Machine
Empirical data from R.R. Moore fatigue test
(Highly standardized and restricted conditions)

Rotating-beam fatigue-testing machine

Pure bending (zero traverse shear)

1750 rpm

various

N cycles of tension-to-compression-to-tension
Courtesy: Instron

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
17
 Stress-Life Method
• Test specimens are subjected to repeated stress while counting
cycles to failure
• Most common test machine is R. R. Moore high-speed rotating-
beam machine
• Subjects specimen to pure bending with no transverse shear
• As specimen rotates, stress fluctuates between equal
magnitudes of
• Tension and compression, known as completely reversed stress
cycling
• Specimen is carefully machined and polished

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
18
 S-N Diagram
• Number of cycles to failure at varying stress levels is plotted on log-
log scale
• For steels, a knee occurs near 106 cycles
• Strength corresponding to the knee is called endurance limit Se

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
19
 S-N Diagram
• Stress levels below Se (Endurance Strength) predict infinite life
• Between 103 and 106 cycles, finite life is predicted
• Below 103 cycles is known as low cycle, and is often considered quasi-
static. Yielding usually occurs before fatigue in this zone.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
20
S-N Diagram for Non-ferrous Materials

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
21
 Strain-Life Method
• Strain-life method uses a detailed analysis of plastic
deformation at localized regions
• Compounding of several idealizations leads to significant
uncertainties in numerical results
bud29281_ch06_265-357.qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 277 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder

• Useful for explaining nature of fatigue

• Not so useful in Machine Design Fatigue

Figure 6–12 1st reversal

! 3d
A
True stress–true strain 5th
hysteresis loops showing the
first five stress reversals of a
cyclic-softening material. The
graph is slightly exaggerated
for clarity. Note that the slope
of the line AB is the modulus
of elasticity E. The stress ∆! "
range is !σ , !ε p is the
plastic-strain range, and
!εe is the elastic strain range.
The total-strain range is
!ε = !ε p + !εe .

4th
B

2d ∆"p ∆"e
∆"

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Figure 6–13 10 0
"'F
22
A log-log plot showing how
 first five stress reversals of a
cyclic-softening material. The
graph is slightly exaggerated
for clarity. Note that the slope
of the line AB is the modulus
of elasticity E. The stress

Strain-Life Method
∆! "
range is !σ , !ε p is the
plastic-strain range, and
!εe is the elastic strain range.
The total-strain range is
• Fatigue ductility coefficient εʹF is the true strain !ε = !ε p + !εe .

corresponding to fracture in one reversal (point A 4th

B

in Fig. 6–12). The plastic-strain line begins at this 2d ∆"p

∆"
∆"e

point in Fig. 6–13.

• Fatigue strength coefficient σFʹ is the true
Figure stress
6–13 10 0
"'F
corresponding to fracture in one reversal (point
A log-log plot showingA how

in Fig. 6–12). Note in Fig. 6–13 that thetheelastic-

the fatigue life is related to
true-strain amplitude for 10–1
c

Strain amplitude, ∆"/2

strain line begins at σ Fʹ / E . hot-rolled SAE 1020 steel.
(Reprinted with permission ! F'
1.0

from SAE J1099_200208 10–2

• Fatigue ductility exponent c is the slope© 2002
of SAE the
E
International.) Total strain
Plastic strain

plastic-strain line in Fig. 6–13 and is the power to

b
1.0
–3
10

which the life 2N must be raised to be proportional Elastic strain

to the true plastic- strain amplitude. If the number 10– 4

100 101 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 106
of stress reversals is 2N, then N is the number of Reversals to failure, 2N

cycles.
Fig 6.13
The report contains a plot of this relationship for SAE 1020 hot-ro
has been reproduced as Fig. 6–13. To explain the graph, we first d
terms:
• Fatigue ductility coefficient ε′F is the true strain corresponding t
versal (point A in Fig. 6–12). The plastic-strain line begins at thi
• Fatigue strength coefficient σ F′ is the true stress corresponding
ME 423: Machine Design reversal (point A in Fig. 6–12). Note in Fig. 6–13 that the elastic
′
Instructor: Ramesh Singh σ F /E .
• Fatigue ductility exponent c is the slope of the plastic-strain
23 line
the power to which the life 2N must be raised to be proportiona
 Strain-Life
The total strain is given by,
∆" ∆"% ∆"'
= +
# # #
The equation of plastic strain line
∆"'
#
= ()* 2, -

The equation of elastic strain line

∆"% ./0 2
= 2,
# 1
0
∆" .
()* -+ ()* 2
/
= 2, 2,
# 1

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
24
 function of N for three stress levels ("σ )3 > ("σ )2 > ("σ )1 , where ("K
("K I )2 > ("K I )1 for a given crack size. Notice the effect of the higher stress ran
Fig. 6–14 in the production of longer cracks at a particular cycle count.
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics When the rate of crack growth per cycle, da/d N in Fig. 6–14, is plotted as sh
in Fig. 6–15, the data from all three stress range levels superpose to give a sigm
curve. The three stages of crack development are observable, and the stage II dat
linear on log-log coordinates, within the domain of linear elastic fracture mech
• Fatigue cracks nucleate and grow when the stresses vary. Let
(LEFM) validity. A group of similar curves can be generated by changing the s
the stress variation be ratio R = σmin /σmax of the experiment.
Here we present a simplified procedure for estimating the remaining life of a c
∆" = "$%& − "$() cally stressed part after discovery of a crack. This requires the assumption that plane s

• The stress intensity change is given by,

∆*+, = -∆"
Figure 6–14 ./
∆"0< ∆" <initial
2an
from
∆"
The increase in crack length a
3 of a as a
length i
function of cycle count for (∆!)3 (∆!)2 (∆!)1
three stress ranges, ("σ )3 >
Crack length a

("σ )2 > ("σ )1 . da

a

dN

ai

Log N

Stress cycles N

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
25
 Regions of Crack Growth
0 Mechanical Engineering Design

igure 6–15 Log da

dN
hen da/d N is measured
Fig. 6–14 and plotted on Region I Region II
g-log coordinates, the data Crack Crack
r different stress ranges initiation propagation Region III
perpose, giving rise to a Crack
Increasing
gmoid curve as shown. unstable
stress ratio
!K I )th is the threshold value R
!K I , below which a crack
oes not grow. From threshold
rupture an aluminum alloy
ill spend 85–90 percent of
e in region I, 5–8 percent in
gion II, and 1–2 percent
region III.

Kc
(∆K)th
Log ∆K

able 6–1
m/cycle in/cycle
Material C, "
ME 423: Machine Design
√ #m C, $ √ %m m
onservative Values of MPaSingh
Instructor: Ramesh m kpsi in
actor C and Exponent 26
−12 −10
 0 Mechanical Engineering Design

igure 6–15
Crack propagation in steady state
When da/d N is measured
Log da
dN

Fig. 6–14 and plotted on Region I Region II

g-log coordinates, the data Crack Crack

• In the steady state region the crack growth can be estimated

or different stress ranges initiation propagation Region III
uperpose, giving rise to a Crack
Increasing
by,
gmoid curve as shown.
!K I )th is the threshold value
stress ratio
R
unstable

f !K I , below which a crack

!" )
= % ∆ '(
oes not grow. From threshold
rupture an aluminum alloy
!#
ill spend 85–90 percent of

where C and m are material constants

fe in region I, 5–8 percent in
gion II, and 1–2 percent
region III.
#, / ", !"
∫+ - . = ∫
0 "(∆K)
5 Kc
1 2∆3 4"
th
Log ∆K

able 6–1
m/cycle in/cycle
Material C, " √ #m C, $ √ %m m
Conservative Values of MPa m kpsi in
actor C and Exponent
m in Eq. (6–5) for Ferritic-pearlitic steels 6.89(10−12 ) 3.60(10−10 ) 3.00
Various Forms of Steel Martensitic steels 1.36(10−10 ) 6.60(10−9 ) 2.25
. Austenitic stainless steels 5.61(10−12 ) 3.00(10−10 ) 3.25
R = σmax /σmin = 0)
From J. M. Barsom and S. T. Rolfe, Fatigue and Fracture Control in Structures, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1987, pp. 288–291, Copyright ASTM International. Reprinted with permission.
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
conditions prevail.8 Assuming a crack is discovered early in stage II, the crack growth in 27
region II of Fig. 6–15 can be approximated by the Paris equation, which is of the form
 As shown, a nick of size 0.004 in has been discovered on the bottom of the
the number of cycles of life remaining.

Solution The stress range "σ is always computed by using the nominal (uncracke

Example of Crack Propagation I

c
=
bh 2
6
=
0.25(0.5)2
6
= 0.010 42 in3

Therefore, before the crack initiates, the stress range is

• The bar shown in Figure below is subjected to a repeated moment 0 ≤ M ≤
"M 1200
135 Nm. The bar is AISI 4430 steel with "σ = SutI /c
= 1.28
= GPa, =
0.010 42
Sy = 1.17
115.2(10 3
)GPa,
psi =and
115.2 kpsi
KIc = 81 Mpa !. Materialwhich
testsis on various specimens of this material with
below the yield strength. As the crack grows, it will eventually
identical heat treatment indicate
enough such worst-case constants
that the bar will completelyofyield
C =or114x(10 -15)
undergo a brittle fracture
(m/cycle)/(Mpa ! )m andofm = ut3.0.
Sy /S it isAs shown,
highly a that
unlikely nicktheofbarsize
will0.1 mm
reach has yield. For b
complete
designate the crack length as af . If β = 1, then from Eq. (5–37) with
been discovered on the bottom of the bar. Estimate the number of cycles
approximate af as
of life remaining. 1
" #
K Ic 2 . 1
"
73 2
#
af = = = 0.1278 in
π βσmax π 115.2
6 mm
Figure 6–16 1
4 in

1
M M 2 in 12 mm

Nick

9
Op. cit.
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
28
 1.0
2.0

Solved in class
1.0
0 0.2 0.4
a!bratio
0.6 0.8

Figure 5–27
Beams of rectangular cross 2.0
h
section having an edge crack. a
M M
F

1.8
h
a
F F
2 2
l l
1.6

!
Pure bending

1.4

l =4
h
1.2
l =2
h

1.0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

a!hratio
244

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
29
 S-N Diagram
• Stress levels below Se (Endurance Strength) predict infinite life
• Between 103 and 106 cycles, finite life is predicted
• Below 103 cycles is known as low cycle, and is often considered quasi-
static. Yielding usually occurs before fatigue in this zone.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
30
 Modeling of Fatigue Strength
• For design, an approximation of the idealized S-N diagram is
desirable.
• To estimate the fatigue strength at 103 cycles, start with Eq.
from Strain-Life
∆"# &'(
= 2* +
2 )
The fatigue strength at specific number of cycles is approximated
as
( ∆"#
,' = )
- 2
• The fatigue strength at a specific number of cycles can be
expressed as,
,'( = &'( 2* +
-
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
31
 Modeling of Fatigue Strength
• The fatigue strength at 103 cycles,
!"# & = ("# 2×10- . = /!01
$%
234
/= 2×10- .
567
• The SAE approximation for steels with HB ≤ 500 may be used or use strain
hardening relationship
("# = !01 + 345 <=>
!"# = ("# 2@ .
?
At endurance values of !"# and @ are known,
!A# = ("# 2@A .

("#
log #
!A
B=−
log 2@A
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
32
 Fatigue Modeling
For a component the fatigue will be of the
form,
!" = $ % &
Write equation for S-N line from 103 to 106
cycles
Two known points
At N =103 cycles, Sf =f.Sut
At N =106 cycles, Sf = Se
Equations for line:
!" = $ % &
) "./0
b = − log
* .1
"./0 2
$=
.1
7
3415 8
%=
6

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
33
 Fatigue Modeling

• If a completely reversed stress !"#$ is given, setting Sf = !"#$

solving for N (cycles to failure) gives,
,
'()* -
• %= +
• Note that the typical S-N diagram is only applicable for
completely reversed stresses
• For other stress situations, a completely reversed stress with
the same life expectancy must be used on the S-N diagram

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
34
 Low Cycle Fatigue
• Low-cycle fatigue is defined for fatigue failures in the range
1≤ N ≤ 103
• On the idealized S-N diagram on a log-log scale, failure is
predicted by a straight line between two points (103, f Sut) and
(1, Sut)

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
35
bud29281_ch06_265-357.qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 286 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):MHDQ196/Budynas:

286
Worked Example
Mechanical Engineering Design

EXAMPLE 6–2 Given a 1050 HR steel, estimate

(a) the rotating-beam endurance limit at 106 cycles.
(b) the endurance strength of a polished rotating-beam specimen corresponding to 104
cycles to failure
(c) the expected life of a polished rotating-beam specimen under a completely reversed
stress of 55 kpsi.

Solution (a) From Table A–20, Sut = 90 kpsi. From Eq. (6–8),

Answer Se′ = 0.5(90) = 45 kpsi

.
(b) From Fig. 6–18, for Sut = 90 kpsi, f = 0.86. From Eq. (6–14),
[0.86(90)]2
a= = 133.1 kpsi
45
From Eq. (6–15),
! "
1 0.86(90)
b = − log = −0.0785
3 45
Thus, Eq. (6–13) is
S′f = 133.1 N −0.0785

Answer For 104 cycles to failure, S′f = 133.1(104 ) −0.0785 = 64.6 kpsi
(c) From Eq. (6–16), with σrev = 55 kpsi,
# $1/−0.0785
55
Answer N= = 77 500 = 7.75(104 ) cycles
133.1
Keep in mind that these are only estimates. So expressing the answers using three-place
ME 423: Machine Design
accuracy is a little misleading.
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
36
 Modifiers
Fatigue life modifiers
Experimental results are used to obtain modifiers

Se = ( ka kb kc kd ke k f ) S'e
Where:
ka = Surface condition modification factor
kb = Size modification factor
kc = Load modification factor
kd = Temperature modification factor
ke = Reliability modification factor
kf = Others…

S’e = Rotary-beam test endurance limit

Se = Predicted endurance limit for your part
ME 423: Machine Design
© Martin Culpepper, All rights reserved Instructor: Ramesh Singh 28
37
 Determining fraction f

Use f for different Sut from the plot

0/2009 4:23 pm Page 283 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):MHDQ196/Budynas:

S'f = f Sut at 103 cycles

Se = S’e= 0.5Sut at 106 cycles Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading 283

140
0.5
0.6
S 'e =
120 Carbon steels Su
Alloy steels 0.4
Wrought irons
100 105 kpsi
Endurance limit S 'e , kpsi

80

60

40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Tensile strength Su t , kpsi

Figure 6–17
Graph of endurance limits versus tensile strengths from actual test results for a large number of wrought
irons and steels. Ratios of Se′ /Sut of 0.60, 0.50, and 0.40 are shown by the solid and dashed lines. Note
also the horizontal dashed line for Se′ = 105 kpsi. Points shown having a tensile strength greater than ME 423: Machine Design
210 kpsi have a mean endurance limit of Se′ = 105 kpsi and a standard deviation of 13.5 kpsi. (Collated Instructor: Ramesh Singh
from data compiled by H. J. Grover, S. A. Gordon, and L. R. Jackson in Fatigue of Metals and Structures,
Bureau of Naval Weapons Document NAVWEPS 00-25-534, 1960; and from Fatigue Design Handbook, 38
SAE, 1968, p. 42.)
 Estimate for Endurance
Endurance limit depends on many factors
For ferrous materials, the following approximations may
be used for first pass design

0.5 S ut S ut 200kpsi
S 'e = 100kpsi S ut 200kpsi
700MPa S ut 1400MPa
This is for ideal conditions… but designs are never ideal
7 in Aluminum alloy 7075-T73
3
16 4.94 Rockwell B 85.5
25.5
10.200

Vs.
0.30 in
Lug (1 of 2)
Fracture
7 in R.
9
8 A 29
ME by
Figure 423: Machine Design
MIT OpenCourseWare. Adapted from Fig. 6-8 and 6-9 in Shigley & Mischke.
© Martin Culpepper, All rights reserved
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
39
qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 283 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):MHDQ196/Budynas:

Plots
Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading 283

140
0.5
0.6
S 'e =
120 Carbon steels Su
Alloy steels 0.4
Wrought irons
100 105 kpsi
Endurance limit S 'e , kpsi

80

60

40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Tensile strength Su t , kpsi

Figure 6–17 ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Graph of endurance limits versus tensile strengths from actual test results for a large number of wrought 40
irons and steels. Ratios of Se′ /Sut of 0.60, 0.50, and 0.40 are shown by the solid and dashed lines. Note
 Surface Modifier
Fatigue life modifiers: Surface condition
Experimental results are used to obtain modifiers

b
ka = a S
-357.qxd 12/02/2009 6:49 pm Page 288 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):

ut
Where:
a = function of fabrication process
b = function of fabrication process
echanical Engineering Design
• Why does finish matter?

–2 Surface finish Factor

Factor a
aSut, MPa
Exponent b
Sut, kpsi Exponent
rs for Marin Surface Finish Sut, kpsi Sut, MPa b
Ground 1.34 1.58 -0.085
Modification Ground Machined or cold-drawn 1.34 2.70 1.58
4.51 -0.265 −0.085
q. (6–19) Hot-rolled
Machined or cold-drawn 2.70 14.4 57.7
4.51 -0.718
−0.265
As-forged 39.9 272. -0.995
Hot-rolled 14.4 57.7 −0.718
© Martin Culpepper, All rights reserved
As-forged 39.9 272.
Figure by MIT OpenCourseWare. Adapted from Table 6-2 in Shigley & Mischke.
31
−0.995

From C.J. Noll and C. Lipson, “Allowable Working Stresses,” Society for Experimental
ME 423: Machine Design
Stress Analysis, vol. 3, no. 2, 1946Instructor:
p. 29. Reproduced by O.J. Horger (ed.) Metals
Ramesh Singh
Engineering Design ASME Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York. Copyright © 1953 by 41
The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Reprinted by permission.
 Cylindrical Bearing Surface

(a) GD (ground), (b) HN (honed), (c) HT (hard

turned) and (d) IF (isotropic finished) surfaces
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Muzaffarpur Institute of
Technology
 Example of the variation of ka
• For a steel with a Sut of 400 Mpa ka for different processes are
as follows:
– Grinding: 0.95
– Machining: 0.92
– Hot Rolled: 0.78
– As Forged: 0.70

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
43
 EXAMPLE 6–3 A steel has a minimum ultimate strength of 520 MPa and a machined surface.
Estimate ka.

Solution
Size Factor, kb
From Table 6–2, a = 4.51 and b = −0.265. Then, from Eq. (6–19)

Answer ka = 4.51(520)−0.265 = 0.860

• Larger diameter parts have high stress level in bending and torsion
()
as ! = −$ %; ' =
*
Again, it is important to note that this is an approximation as the data is typically
• Larger areas are subjected to higher stresses so likelihood of crack
quite scattered. Furthermore, this is not a correction to take lightly. For example, if in
initiation is higherthe previous example the steel was forged, the correction factor would be 0.540, a sig-
nificant reduction of strength.
• Size factor isSize
obtained
Factor kb from experimental data with wide scatter
The size factor has been evaluated using 133 sets of data points.15 The results for bend-
• For bendingingand torsion
and torsion loads,
may be the
expressed as trend of the size factor data is
given by ⎧
⎪ (d/0.3)−0.107 = 0.879d −0.107 0.11 ≤ d ≤ 2 in
⎪
⎪
⎨
0.91d −0.157 2 < d ≤ 10 in
kb = ( 6–20)
⎪
⎪ (d/7.62)−0.107 = 1.24d −0.107 2.79 ≤ d ≤ 51 mm
⎪
⎩
1.51d −0.157 51 < d ≤ 254 mm

For axial loading there is no size effect, so

• Applies only for round, rotating diameter kb = 1 (6–21)

but see kc .
• For axial load, One
thereof theis no size
problems effect,
that arises soEq.
in using kb(6–20)
= 1 is what to do when a round bar
in bending is not rotating, or when a noncircular cross section is used. For example,
what is the size factor for a bar 6 mm thick and 40 mm wide? The approach to be used
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
44
15
Charles R. Mischke, “Prediction of Stochastic Endurance Strength,” Trans. of ASME, Journal of Vibration,
 Load factor, kc
Loading Factor kc
• Accounts for changes in endurance limit for different types of
fatigue loading
Accounts for changes in endurance limit for different types of fat
loading.
• Only to be used for single load types. Use Combination
LoadingOnly to be(Sec.
method used6–14,
for single load types.
Shigley) Use Combination
when more than one Loading
load typemethod (Sec. 6–14) when more than one load type is present.
is present

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
45
 Temperature Factor, kd
• At lower temperature chances of brittle facture is high
whereas at higher temperature
bud29281_ch06_265-357.qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 291 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):MHDQ196/Budynas:

• This relation is summarized in Table 6–4 in Shigley’s book

Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading 291

Table 6–4 Temperature, °C ST/SRT Temperature, °F ST/SRT

Effect of Operating 20 1.000 70 1.000
Temperature on the 50 1.010 100 1.008
Tensile Strength of 100 1.020 200 1.020
Steel.* (ST = tensile 150 1.025 300 1.024
strength at operating 200 1.020 400 1.018
temperature; 250 1.000 500 0.995
SRT = tensile strength 300 0.975 600 0.963
at room temperature; 350 0.943 700 0.927
0.099 ≤ σˆ≤ 0.110) 400 0.900 800 0.872
450 0.843 900 0.797
500 0.768 1000 0.698
550 0.672 1100 0.567
600 0.549

*Data source: Fig. 2–9.

ME 423: Machine Design

Finally, it may be true that there is no fatigue limit for materials operating at high tem-
Instructor:
peratures. Because of the reduced fatigueRamesh
resistance, Singh
the failure process is, to some
extent, dependent on time. 46
The limited amount of data available show that the endurance limit for steels
 Reliability Factor, ke
• From Fig. 6–17, S'e= 0.5 Sut is typical of the data and
357.qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 293 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):MHDQ196/Budynas:

represents 50% reliability.

• Reliability factor can help develop a conservative estimate of
endurance limit Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading 293

le 6–5 Reliability, % Transformation Variate za Reliability Factor ke

ability Factors ke 50 0 1.000
responding to 90 1.288 0.897
rcent Standard 95 1.645 0.868
iation of the 99 2.326 0.814
urance Limit 99.9 3.091 0.753
99.99 3.719 0.702
99.999 4.265 0.659
99.9999 4.753 0.620

ure 6–19 S e (case)

ME 423: Machine Design
ailure of a case-hardened ! or "
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
n bending or torsion. In 47
xample, failure occurs in Case
 Miscellaneous Effects
• Reminder to consider other possible factors
– Residual stresses
– Directional characteristics from cold working
– Case hardening
– Corrosion
– Surface conditioning, e.g. electrolytic plating and metal
spraying
– Cyclic Frequency
– Frettage Corrosion
• Limited data is available.
• May require research or testing.
ME 423: Machine Design
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
48
 Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses
• All the previous analysis for fatigue life has been presented for complete
stress reversal just as in the R-R Moore Tests where the stresses reverse
from compression to tension
• However, there can be fluctuating stresses as well
Fluctuating Stresses
– Sinusoidal or Non-sinusoidal

General
Fluctuating

Repeated

Completely
Reversed

Fig. 6–23 Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
49
 Characterizing Fluctuating Stresses
Fluctuating stresses
• Important Stress Definitions
luctuating Stresses Stress values of concern
min Minimum stress
max Maximum stress
a Amplitude component = ( max - min)/2

m Midrange component = ( max + min)/2

s Steady component

R Stress ratio = min / max

A Amplitude ratio = a / m

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design
50
© Martin Culpepper, All rights reserved
 ao mo a m
of a notch they are K f σao and K f σmo , respectively, as long as the material remains
Stress Intensity Factor K for Fluctuating Stresses
without plastic strain. In other words,f the fatigue stress-concentration factor K f is
applied to both components.
• For fluctuating
When theloads at points
steady stress component with stress
is high enoughconcentration, theyield-
to induce localized notch
ing, the designer has a problem. The first-cycle local yielding produces plastic strain
best approach is to design
and strain-strengthening. This to avoid all
is occurring localized
at the plastic
location where fatiguestrain
crack nucle-
ation and growth are most likely. The material properties (Sy and Sut ) are new and
• Kf should be applied to both alternating and midrange stress
difficult to quantify. The prudent engineer controls the concept, material and condition
components
of use, and geometry so that no plastic strain occurs. There are discussions concerning
possible ways of quantifying what is occurring under localized and general yielding
• When inlocalized
the presence strain does
of a notch, occur,
referred to assome methods
the nominal (e.g.
mean stress nominal
method, residual
20
mean stress method
stress method, and theand
like. residual
The nominal stress method)
mean stress method recommend
(set σa = K f σao and
σm = σmo ) gives roughly comparable results to the residual stress method, but both are
only applying Kf to the alternating stress
approximations.
There is the method of Dowling21 for ductile materials, which, for materials with a
• The Dowling
pronounced method recommends
yield point and approximatedapplying Kf to the plastic behavior
by an elastic–perfectly
alternating stress andexpresses
model, quantitatively Kfm tothethe mid-range
steady stress,
stress component where Kfmfactor
stress-concentration is
K f m as
Kfm = Kf K f |σmax,o | < Sy
Sy − K f σao
Kfm = K f |σmax,o | > Sy (6–39)
|σmo |
Kfm = 0 K f |σmax,o − σmin,o | > 2Sy
For the purposes of this book, for ductile materials in fatigue,
ME 423: Machine Design
• Avoid localized plastic strain at a notch.
Instructor: Set
Ramesh K f σa,o and σm = K f σmo .
Singh
σa =
51
• When plastic strain at a notch cannot be avoided, use Eqs. (6–39); or conservatively,
 Methods of plotting data
• Vary the sm and sa to learn about the fatigue resistance under
fluctuating loading
• Three common methods of plotting results are as follows:
– Plotting mid-range stress on the abscissa and other stress components on
ordinate
– The abscissa represents the ratio of the midrange strength Sm to the ultimate
strength, with tension plotted to the right and compression to the left. The
ordinate is the ratio of the alternating strength to the endurance limit
– Another way is to four of the stress components as well as the two stress
ratios

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
52
 Plot of Alternating vs Midrange Stress
• Most common and simple to use is the plot of sa vs sm
• Known as Goodman or Modified Goodman diagram
• Modified Goodman line from Se to Sut is one simple
representation of the limiting boundary for infinite life

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
53
 Experimental Plot of Normalized Alternating vs
Midrange Stress
• The abscissa represents the ratio of the midrange strength Sm
to the ultimate strength, with tension plotted to the right and
compression to the left
• The ordinate is the ratio of the alternating strength to the
endurance limit

Demonstrates little effect

of negative midrange
stress and BC represents
modified Goodman

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
54
 Commonly Used Failure Criteria
81_ch06_265-357.qxd 11/30/2009 4:23 pm Page 305 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs):M

• Five commonly used failure criteria are shown

• Gerber passes through the data (best Fit)
• ASME-elliptic passes through data and incorporates rough
Fatigue Failure Resulting from Variable Loading

yielding check
Figure 6–27 Sy
Fatigue diagram showing
various criteria of failure. For Yield (Langer) line
each criterion, points on or
“above” the respective line
Alternating stress !a

indicate failure. Some point A Se

Gerber line
on the Goodman line, for Load line, slope r = Sa/Sm
example, gives the strength Sm
as the limiting value of σm Modified Goodman line
corresponding to the strength Sa
A
Sa, which, paired with σm , is ASME-elliptic line
the limiting value of σa. Soderberg line

0
0 Sm Sy Sut
Midrange stress !m

ME 423: Machine Design

When theInstructor:
midrange stressSingh
Ramesh is compression, failure occurs whenever σa = S
whenever σmax = Syc , as indicated by the left-hand side of Fig. 6–25. Neither
55 a fat
diagram nor any other failure criteria need be developed.
 Sa Sm y e ut
+ =1 Sm =
Se Sut Sut − Se

Intersection Points with Gerber and

Sa Sm bud29281_ch06_265-357.qxd 12/02/2009 9:29 pm Page 308 pinnacle s-171:Desktop Folder:Temp Work:Don't Delete (Jobs)
+ =1 Sa = S y − Sm , rcrit = Sa /Sm
Sy Sy

Fatigue factor of safety

ASME Ellipitical with Langer

1
nf = σa σm
+
Se Sut
308 Mechanical Engineering Design

Intersecting Equations Table 6–8

Intersection Coordinates Intersecting Equations Intersection Coordinates
⎡ %Amplitude and ⎤ #
ady ! "2 ! "2 Steady ! "2 ! "2 $ 2 2 2
Sa Sm r 2 Sut
2 2S e Sa Sm $ r Se Sy
ength + =1 Sa = ⎣−1 + Coordinates
1+ of
⎦ Strength + =1 Sa = % 2
Se Sut 2Se r Sut Se Sy Se + r 2 Sy2
and Important
rst Sa Sa Intersections in First Sa
Load line r = Sm = Load line r = Sa/Sm Sm =
er and Sm r Quadrant for ASME- r
teria Sa Sm r Sy Elliptic and Langer Sa Sm r Sy
+ =1 Sa = + =1 Sa =
Sy Sy 1+r Failure Criteria Sy Sy 1+r
Sa Sy Sy
Load line r = Sm = Load line r = Sa/Sm Sm =
Sm 1+r 1+r
⎡ % ⎤ ! "2 ! "2
! "2 ! "2 ! "
Sa Sm 2
Sut 2Se Sy Sa Sm 2Sy Se2
+ =1 Sm = ⎣1 − 1 + 1− ⎦ + =1 Sa = 0,
Se Sut 2Se Sut Se Se Sy Se2 + Sy2
Sa Sm
Sa Sm + =1 Sm = Sy − Sa, rcrit = Sa/Sm
+ =1 Sa = S y − Sm , rcrit = Sa /Sm Sy Sy
Sy Sy
Fatigue factor of safety
Fatigue factor of safety &
⎡ % ⎤ 1
! "2 ! "2 nf = ' (2
1 Sut σa ⎣ 2σm Se
nf = −1 + 1+ ⎦ σm > 0 (σa/Se )2 + σm /Sy
2 σm Se Sut σa

criteria. The first column gives the intersecting equations and the second column th
intersection coordinates.
There are two ways to proceed with a typical analysis. One method is to assum
that fatigue occurs first and use one of Eqs. (6–45) to (6–48) to determine nor size
depending on the task. Most often fatigue is the governing failure mode. The
follow with
ME 423: Machine a static check. If static failure governs then the analysis is repeated usin
Design
Eq. (6–49).
Instructor: Ramesh Singh
Alternatively, one could use the tables. Determine the load line and establish whic
56
criterion the load line intersects first and use the corresponding equations in the tables
Some examples will help solidify the ideas just discussed.
 Commonly Used Failure Criteria
• Modified Goodman is linear, so simple to use for design. It is
more conservative than Gerber
• Soderberg provides a very conservative single check of both
fatigue and yielding
• Langer line represents standard yield check and it is
equivalent to comparing maximum stress to yield strength.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
57
 Commonly Used Failure Criteria
• A fatigue criterion, rather than being a “fence,” is more like a
zone or band wherein the probability of failure could be
estimated.
• Failure criterion of Goodman has certain advantages
– It is a straight line and the algebra is linear and easy
– It is easily graphed, every time for every problem
– It reveals subtleties of insight into fatigue problems
– Answers can be scaled from the diagrams as a check on the algebra
• Note that this model is deterministic but the phenomenon is
not deterministic

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
58
 Commonly Used Failure Criteria
Equations for Commonly Used Failure Criteria
• Intersecting a constant slope load line with each failure
Intersecting
criteria produces a constant
design slope load line with each failure criteria
equations
produces design equations
• n is the design factor
n is the designor factor
factor of safety
or factor forforinfinite
of safety fatiguelifelife
infinite fatigue

ME 423: Machine Design Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
59
 S S S a Sy Sa
a Load
+r =line r1 = Sa/Sm Sm = S = S −SmS =, r = S /S
d line m
=
Sy S y Sm Factor of⎡ Safety
a r y
1+
%
r
m crit a m
⎤
!Sa "2Sm ! r Sy "2 ! "
Sm +
Fatigue factor of 1
=safety 2
Sut Sa = 2Se Sy
S
+ y• Modified S=y 1 Goodman and ⎣
Sm =Langer 1Failure
− 1+ 1 +
criteria r 1− ⎦
Sut
12Se Sut Se
nf = σa σ Sy
SLoad line r = Sa/Sm Sm =
m
+
−utSm , rcrit = Sa1/S+r
m
+ =1 SaS=e Sy S m
S!y "2 ! "2
Sa Sm 2Sy Se2
• Gerber
gue factor of+safetyand Langer
= 1 Failure criteria Sa = 0, 2 2
Se Sy ⎡ S
⎤ e + S y
Intersecting Equations %Intersection Coordinates
! "2 ! "2
Sa Sn m =
1 Sut σa ⎣ 2σm Se ⎦
−1 + 1 + Sm⎡ = Sy − %Sa, rcrit
σm =>S 0a/S⎤
!+ "f 2= 12 σm Se Sut σa ! " 2 m
S
Sa y Sm y S 2 2
r Sut ⎣ 2Se
+ =1 Sa = −1 + 1 + ⎦
Se Fatigue Sutfactor of safety 2Se r Sut
• ASME Elliptic and Langer Failure criteria
&
Sa S1a
Load line r = nf = Sm =2 ' (2
Sm (σa/Se ) +r σm /Sy
Sa Sm rS
ME 423: Machine Design
y Singh
+ =1 Sa =
Instructor: Ramesh
Sy Sy 1+r 60
 Problem: Solved in class
• A 40 mm-diameter bar has been machined from an AISI 1050
cold-drawn bar. This part is to withstand a fluctuating tensile
load varying from 0 to 70 kN. Because of the ends, and the
fillet radius, a fatigue stress-concentration factor Kf is 1.85 for
106 or larger life. Find Sa and Sm and the factor of safety
guarding against fatigue and first-cycle yielding, using (a) the
Gerber fatigue line and (b) the ASME-elliptic fatigue line.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
61
 Solution Steps
• Find Sy and Sut from data
• Find the modifiers for the endurance limit
• Determine the stress components and correct them for stress
concentration Kf
• Determine the factor of Safety for Gerber line and Yield line
• Find Sa (intersection with load line r= σa/σm occurring at B).
Also find Sm. You can check the factor of safety
• Sm (intersection with yield line occurring at D) for Gerber
Line. Find Sa
• Find the critical slope.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
62
Table A–20

Deterministic ASTM Minimum Tensile and Yield Strengths for Some Hot-Rolled (HR) and Cold-Drawn (CD) Steels
[The strengths listed are estimated ASTM minimum values in the size range 18 to 32 mm ( 34 to 1 14 in). These
strengths are suitable for use with the design factor defined in Sec. 1–10, provided the materials conform to ASTM
A6 or A568 requirements or are required in the purchase specifications. Remember that a numbering system is not a
specification.] Source: 1986 SAE Handbook, p. 2.15.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Tensile Yield
SAE and/or Process- Strength, Strength, Elongation in Reduction in Brinell
UNS No. AISI No. ing MPa (kpsi) MPa (kpsi) 2 in, % Area, % Hardness

G10060 1006 HR 300 (43) 170 (24) 30 55 86

CD 330 (48) 280 (41) 20 45 95
G10100 1010 HR 320 (47) 180 (26) 28 50 95
CD 370 (53) 300 (44) 20 40 105
G10150 1015 HR 340 (50) 190 (27.5) 28 50 101
CD 390 (56) 320 (47) 18 40 111
G10180 1018 HR 400 (58) 220 (32) 25 50 116
CD 440 (64) 370 (54) 15 40 126
G10200 1020 HR 380 (55) 210 (30) 25 50 111
CD 470 (68) 390 (57) 15 40 131
G10300 1030 HR 470 (68) 260 (37.5) 20 42 137
CD 520 (76) 440 (64) 12 35 149
G10350 1035 HR 500 (72) 270 (39.5) 18 40 143
CD 550 (80) 460 (67) 12 35 163
G10400 1040 HR 520 (76) 290 (42) 18 40 149
CD 590 (85) 490 (71) 12 35 170
G10450 1045 HR 570 (82) 310 (45) 16 40 163
CD 630 (91) 530 (77) 12 35 179
G10500 1050 HR 620 (90) 340 (49.5) 15 35 179
CD 690 (100) 580 (84) 10 30 197
G10600 1060 HR 680 (98) 370 (54) 12 30 201
G10800 1080 HR 770 (112) 420 (61.5) 10 25 229
G10950 1095 HR 830 (120) 460 (66) 10 25 248

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
63
 From the first panel of Table 6–7, r = σa /σm = 1,
⎧ ⎫

Gerber Plot
&
⎨ ' (
(1)2 1002 2(33.9) ⎬
2
Answer Sa = −1 + 1 + = 30.7 kpsi
2(33.9) ⎩ (1)100 ⎭

Figure 6–28 100

Principal points A, B, C, and D
on the designer’s diagram
84
drawn for Gerber, Langer, and
oad line.
Stress amplitude !a, kpsi

50 Load line
C
42
Langer line
33.9 B
211.9 MPa 30.7 Sm at D
Sa at B D
rcrit
20 Gerber
fatigue curve
A
8.38

0
0 8.38 30.7 42 50 64 84 100
Midrange stress !m, kpsi
442 MPa

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
64
 Answer nf = = 3.75
(8.38/33.9) 2 + (8.38/84) 2

Again, this is less than ny = 5.01 and fatigue is predicted to occur first. From the first

ASME Elliptic Plot

row second column panel of Table 6–8, with r = 1, we obtain the coordinates Sa and
Sm of point B in Fig. 6–29 as

Figure 6–29 100

Principal points A, B, C, and D
on the designer’s diagram
drawn for ASME-elliptic, 84

Langer, and load lines.

Stress amplitude !a, kpsi

50 Load line
C
42
Langer line
B
31.4
217MPa23.5 D

162 MPa ASME-elliptic line

A
8.38

0
418 MPa
0 8.38 31.4 42 50 60.5 84 100
Midrange stress !m , kpsi

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
65
 Problem
A steel bar undergoes cyclic loading such that σmax = 420 MPa
and σmin = −140 Mpa. For the material, Sut = 560 MPa, Sy = 455
MPa, a fully corrected endurance limit of Se = 280 MPa, and f =
0.9. Estimate the number of cycles to a fatigue failure using:
(a) Modified Goodman criterion.
(b) Gerber criterion.

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
66
Solved in Class

ME 423: Machine Design

Instructor: Ramesh Singh
67