Fatigue properties from rotating bending tests If large numbers of specimens are tested at different values of stress amplitude

Sa, the resulting plot is called the S-N diagram. It is normal practice to plot log Sa vs. log N
S-N diagram
1

Sa/Su

Se

0.1 1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

N -cycles to failure

For ferrous alloys, (steels) it is usually found that, above about 106 cycles to failure, the plot levels off, i.e. there is a value of stress amplitude, Se, below which fatigue failure does not occur. This is called the endurance limit or fatigue limit. For most non-ferrous alloys, such as aluminum alloys, the S-N diagram does not level off.
S-N diagram for Aluminum alloys
1

Sa/Su 0.1
1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08 1.E+09

N - cycles to failure

Fatigue properties from rotating bending tests

There is no actual fatigue limit. It is common to use the value of Sa corresponding to 108 or 5*108 as the fatigue limit in this case.

S-N diagram
1

0.9Su

Sa/Su

Se = 0.506 Su

0.1 1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

N -cycles to failure

While it is always much preferred to use actual values for fatigue strength, for the purposes of this course, you will usually use an approximation to the S-N diagram for steels as shown above. Note that this corresponds to the median fatigue properties of the metal, i.e. 50% of the specimens will have survived for points below the line shown above. Also, it is good practice to only use the Se = 0.506 Su relation for Su < 1460 Mpa (212 ksi). For higher strength steels use Se = 740 MPa (107 ksi). The text gives a table of fatigue strength for Al alloys. See table E-24(b) on page 1212. These values are for a life of 50x107 cycles. Note that for most Al alloys, a usable approximation is to let Se = 0.4 Su unless Su > 350 MPa (50 ksi). In the latter case, use Se = 135 Mpa (19.5 ksi). Effect of surface finish: The surface of the standard rotating bending specimen is carefully finished by grinding and polishing to remove any circumferential scratches. Most actual parts have a less well finished surface and have a reduced endurance limit as a result. The surface factor ka is used to account for this. It is given by: Ka = a(Su)b The coefficient a and the exponent b are given in Table 7-5 (p. 373) in your text.

Fatigue properties from rotating bending tests

Effect of size: The probability of finding a bigger flaw increases as the size of components is increased. In part, this leads to a finding that, all other things being equal, larger components have a reduced fatigue strength. This whole subject is complicated by other size related effects such as the exact result of heat treatment and the effect of the stress gradient in the component. A commonly used method of accounting for size effects is: Size factor kb = 1.24d-0.107 for 2.79 < d < 51 mm Size factor kb = 0.859 0.000837d for 51 < d < 254 mm Size factor kb = 0.879d-0.107 for 0.11 < d < 2.0 in. Size factor kb = 1.24d-0.107 for 2.0 < d < 10.0 in. The basic endurance limit should be reduced by this factor. Also, this factor should be used only for round bars in rotating bending or torsion. For other geometries, refer to pp. 376-7 in your text. Effects of loading type: In the rotating bending test, all points on the surface of the specimen are subjected to the full range of the cyclic stress ( a). Material below the surface is subject to a smaller stress amplitude with a value falling to zero at the neutral axis. However, if a cyclic axial load is applied, the whole volume of the specimen is subject to the full range of stress. As fatigue failure originates at some microscopic flaw in the material, there will be a higher probability of finding a bigger flaw in the larger volume of material. The result is that the median fatigue strength is smaller when measured in an axial test. You should use the Marin loading factor kc given in Table 7-8 (p.378) for axial loading. For fully reversed torsion, we no longer have a simple uniaxial stress. The principal stresses are now such that s1 = -s2. Applying the distortion energy theory we find that we have to multiply the basic endurance limit by a factor kc of 1/3 = 0.577. Alternatively, we can use the torsional load factors given in Tables 7-9 and 7-10 (p.378). Note that this use of kc is limited to pure torsional loading. Reliability correction: Reliability factor kr: the above values for fatigue strength are all for the median life, i.e. a reliability of 50%. This is clearly not useful for design. Use the following factors, derived from a log-normal distribution of fatigue strength values, to correct Se for the desired reliability value:

Fatigue properties from rotating bending tests Reliability 90% 95% 99% 99.9% 99.99% Marin equation: The endurance limit (Se) at a specific point on a given part differs from the endurance limit (Se) found in the rotating bending test. This is due to the above factors and a few others. In general, in this course, we will deal only with room temperature conditions and will ignore the miscellaneous effects discussed in your text. The Marin equation will thus simplify to: kr 0.897 0.868 0.814 0.753 0.702

Se = kakbkckrSe