Anda di halaman 1dari 8

Life Prediction Under Multiaxial Fatigue

D. Ramesh and M.M. Mayuram Department of Mechanical Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Madras Chennai-600 036 (India) e-mail:

ABSTRACT Traditionally stress life characteristics of engineering materials are decided upon rotating bending fatigue test. The test data thus obtained are subjected to different corrections during design or analysis, to account other effects such as size effect, surface texture effect, material quality and also nature of loading (service factor) etc. With increasing complexities in application and use of components, which experience biaxial or triaxial stressing with varying stress amplitudes, precise design or accurate analysis is not possible. Hence increased attention has been directed towards multiaxial fatigue loading. In the present work experimental investigation was conducted on standard SAE 1040 steel, notched specimen samples. Experiments were conducted under combined bending and torsional cyclic loading on a modified Rotating Bending Machine The stress and strains induced at notch root have been determined by modeling specimen geometry using commercial software. Using the estimated stress and strain values, life prediction has been attempted through various mutliaxial fatigue theories and correlated with the experimental results.

1. INTRODUCTION Fatigue is one of the important factors in design since majority of engineering components are subjected to variable loading. Notches or geometric discontinuities are common in geometries of most engineering components such as shafts of automobiles, earth moving machinery etc. The induced stresses under such situations are complex in nature. Fatigue under such loading involving stresses along more than one axis is known as multiaxial fatigue [1]. Despite the significant advance made in understanding and prediction of endurance under uniaxial loading, the criterion for multiaxial loading does not reach satisfactory level. There has been limited research effort towards fatigue under multiaxial loading though assessment of multiaxial fatigue is an important design consideration for reliable operation and safe in-service use of many systems. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW The material fatigue behavior is defined in the form of a stress (or strain) parameter versus number of cycles to failure. Such characterization is usually obtained for smooth specimen under uniaxial loading. Multiaxial fatigue assessment is then carried out with the help of an appropriate criterion that reduces the complex multiaxial loading to

equivalent uniaxial loading. In general, the failure mechanism may involve two stages, viz. crack initiation and their subsequent propagation. The research in multiaxial fatigue can be divided into three main approaches namely stress based, strain based and energy based approaches. 2.1 Stress Based Approach: For stress based approach, the principal stress, or the maximum shear stress is used to compose the multiaxial fatigue parameter. This approach is often applied for high cycle fatigue. Instead of the magnitude of stresses some theories like McDiarmids [2], are based on the shear and normal stresses associated with a critical plane. The critical plane is the plane where the fatigue crack usually initiates. This is supported by some experimental observations also. 2.2 The strain based approach: Strain can be measured and has been shown to be excellent parameter for correlating with fatigue life. The most common application of the strain based approach, is fatigue of notch members. The local strains can be above the yield strain, and stresses are more difficult to estimate than strains. In notched specimen subjected to cyclic loads, the behavior of material at the notch root is best considered in terms of strain rather than stress. This local strain approach is now widely accepted as a tool for predicting crack initiation fatigue life in uniaxial loading situations. The strain life method often called local strain approach can be used for fatigue life predictions using material properties, geometry, stress strain analysis at the critical location, damage assessment and summation techniques. For strain-based approach involving multi axial fatigue the octahedral shear strain has been used to formulate the classical fatigue failure criterion. However as seen earlier fatigue crack usually initiate in the plane of maximum shear strain. Therefore, some theoretical approaches suggested that the parameter governing fatigue lives are related to the maximum shear strain or the combined effect shear and stress normal to the plane of maximum shear strain. The local strain approach has evolved to deal analytically with multi axial fatigue crack initiation and assumes that when the fluctuating state of strain at critical location in an engineering component is the same as the strain in uniaxial fatigue test specimen, a crack of similar proportions will develop in approximately the same number of fluctuations. Based on this it is often considered that the shear strain and normal strain in the critical plane, to be governing multiaxial fatigue parameter [3]. For the energy based approach, the stain energy density per cycle [4] has been used to form the fatigue parameter, which is related to fatigue life, and the concept of plastic work is introduced by Garud [5] considering strain energy density in the critical plane. In the present work experimental investigation was conducted on standard SAE 1040 steel, notched specimen samples. Experiments were conducted under combined bending and torsional cyclic loading on a modified Rotating Bending Machine. The stress and strains induced at notch root have been determined by modeling specimen geometry using commercial software. Using the estimated stress and strain values, life prediction has been attempted through various mutliaxial fatigue theories and correlated with the experimental results.

Experiments have been conducted under combined bending and torsional loading conditions. Rotating bending machine (RBM) is suitable to test the fatigue properties at zero mean stresses. An extension to chuck, holding the fatigue test specimen is made and a torsional exciter working on eddy current braking principle is added so as to produce input torque variations on the specimen under testing. 3.1 Test specimens The tests have been performed on notched cylindrical, smooth specimens. The geometry of these specimen are given in Fig .1 Components are fabricated from SAE1040 steel adopting standard manufacturing procedure and V notch of angle of 300, 450 and 600 to a depth of 1mm with 0.2 mm notch root radius and was introduced at the center. The composition and mechanical properties of the material is given in Table 1

F ig . 1 N o tc h e d T e s t s p e c im e n

N o tc h D e ta ils

Table 1 Composition and room temperature material properties of type SAE1040 steel

Material SAE1040

C 0.44

Si .23

Mn 0.70

Ni 0.3
* *

Cr 0.05

S 0.046

P 0.019

Cu 0.03

Fatigue Strength exponent b

-0.092 -0.445 2.05*105 0.3 948 380 0.260

Fatigue Ductility exponent c Young's Modulus E(MPa) Poissons Ratio * Fatigue Strength coefficient f *(MPa) Yield Stress ys (MPa) Fatigue Ductility coefficient f * Literature reported values.
3.2 Test Details

Experiments are conducted on completely reversed bending mode with torsional excitation of constant amplitude at five different stress level combinations. Test details are presented in Table 2

Table 2 Test details- Applied loadings and estimated stresses and strains
Bending moment (M) (N-m) Torsional Moment (T)(N-m) Bending stress (b) MPa Shear stress() MPa Applied vonMises stress(von) von = ( b2 + 3 2 ) Equival ent strain (von) from Ansys 0.00269 948.898 33.434 35.924 38.0245 40.1735 160.594 139.473 119.622 102.225 0.00234 936.62 7.0537 12.254 7.4661 9.803 7.888 7.352 74.894 0.00132 99.859 0.00165 840.168 0.34825 124.825 0.00195 862.88 0.2967 0.2971 0.2516 Fatigue strength coefficient ( f' )
' f

eq = (2Nf)b

eq = (2N)c
' f

Fatigue strength coefficient (f)



5.731 6.5647 174.75. 149.789




4. ANALYTICAL WORK Notch geometry effects were assessed for all the test conditions. Specimen geometry is meshed with 20 noded hexahedral elements. The experimental loading conditions are simulated in commercial software, Ansys to evaluate the resulting stresses and strains for particular loading conditions. To evaluate life of specimen under combined loading conditions, notch root vonMises stresses and strains are considered in the life prediction models

5. LIFE PREDICTION MODELS 5.1 Stress and strain life theory Generally the fatigue behavior of a material is depicted by its S-N (amplitude stress versus life) characteristics. Under multi axial loadings, instead of the amplitude stress an equivalent fatigue life parameter is evolved. Successful stress based multi axial fatigue damage parameter have the general form eq= + kn (1)

The basic premise of the local stress-strain approach is that the local fatigue response of the material at critical point is more dependant upon the strain than the stress. Manson- Coffins equation gives an empirical expression for the cyclic strain life curve. Separating the cyclic strain amplitude / 2 into elastic and plastic components the final expression yield to

' e p f = + = (2 N f ) b + 'f (2 N f ) c 2 2 2 2E


5.2 The Lohr and Ellison Approach This approach takes two types of strain, termed type A and type B, The difference between these shear strains is the direction in which they act in relation to the specimen surface and how the crack grow. Type A shear strain drive the crack along the surface of the specimen or component. Type B shear strain act into the depth of the specimen. Lohr and Ellison have proposed a critical plane theory [6], which attempts to resolve difference between type A and B shear behavior. They argued only crack being driven into the specimen (i.e. type B shear strain) is critical. Their formulation was presented in the form + k n = C (3)

A life relation based on these parameter can be developed from and the uniaxial case as

f + k n = 1.44 (2 N f ) b + 1.6 f (2 N f ) c E 2 2


with k=0.4. As in the Brown and Miller [7] critical plane approach, the normal strain to the plane of shear is thought to have a modifying influence. The normal strain is termed as

n 1 + 3 = 2 4


One of the objectives of the present work is to compare the results predicted by using existing multiaxial fatigue models with experimental data obtained under combined bending and torsional loading conditions for SAE 1040 steel. Notch geometry is simulated in commercial software; Ansys and resulting vonMises stress and strain for particular loading conditions are determined. Typical results from the analysis are shown in Fig .2 and 3. Maximum stress and strain occur at the root of the notch and distribution of stresses confirm to the theory. A plot of the vonMises strain versus experimentally observed life is shown in Fig. 4. The trend is similar to standard S-N characteristics. Assuming a strain life equation of the nature eq = 'f (2N)c the fatigue ductility co-efficient 'f and fatigue ductility exponent c values are successively calculated. A plot of these calculated values versus life is generated as shown in Fig 5 and a straight line fit is assigned. The intercept of this line is the true stain at fracture in uniaxial tensile testing. The resulting value is 0.2569 compared to the literature reported value of 0.260. On similar lines, in the stress based

approach, assuming a stress life equation of the nature eq = f (2Nf)b the fatigue strength co-efficient f and exponent b values are successively determined under specific experimental conditions. A plot of the f value versus life is generated as shown in Fig 6 and straight line fit is generated. The intercept of this line at 1 cycle is the true stress at fracture. A close match of this value was possible only if the equivalent (vonMises) stress is based on the basic theory i.e. eq = ( b2 + 3 2 ) and not on the notch root stresses determined from the Ansys. This is understandable because the elastic strains are to be dominant and life controlling aspect in this region. Now assuming an analytical expression on the lines of Manson-Coffins equation of the nature
' e p f = + = (2 N f ) b + 'f (2 N f ) c and 2 2 2 2E



experimental life values, the resulting strain amplitudes are determined. This plot of the strain amplitude versus life is also shown in Fig 4. for comparison. This expression predicts a higher magnitude of total strain value compared to the vonMises strain from the Ansys analysis. Finally based on the Lohr-Ellipson approach, using the normal and shear strains determined from the Ansys analysis and the material characteristics f ,

'f expected life ( 2 N f ) is predicted. A plot of the predicted life is shown in Fig 5. The
equivalent stress amplitude versus life plot is also included here for comparison. A close match could be observed at higher strain magnitude or in the strain controlled region.

7. CONCLUSION Based on the above observations it can be stated that under multi axial fatigue loading equivalent strain on the critical plane based on Lohr-Ellipson approach yielded a closer match of the predicted life with experimentally observed life.

NOMENCLATURE b = Fatigue Strength exponent c = Fatigue Ductility exponent K = Constant N f = Number of cycles to failure eq = Equivalent stress = Torisnal shear stress n = Normal stress b = Bending stress = Total strain

e p

1 3
f f

= Elastic strain = Plastic strain = Normal strain = Maximum shear stain = Maximum principal strain = Minimum principal strain = Fatigue Strength coefficient = Fatigue Ductility coefficient

REFERENCES 1. Garud Y.S., Multiaxial fatigue: A Survey of the State of the Art, The American Society for Testing and Materials,5, 165 -178, 1981 2. McDiarmid. D.L., A Shear stress Based Critical-Plane Criterion of Multiaxial Fatigue for -Design and Life prediction, Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures, 17, 1475-1485,1994 3. Socie D.F., A Critical Plane Approach for Multiaxial Fatigue Damage assessment. Advances in Multiaxial fatigue, ASTM STP 1191, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 7-36,1993 4. Morrow. J Cyclic Plastic strain Energy and Fatigue of Metals, International Friction, Damping and Cyclic Plasticity, ASTM STP 378, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 45-87,1965 5. Garud Y.S., A New Approach to the Evaluation of Fatigue Under Multiaxial Loadings, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technolozy,103, 118-126,1981 6. Ellyin .F., and Golos. K., Multiaxial fatigue damage criterion, J. of Engineering Materials and Technology, 110, 63-68,1998 7. Brown. M.W., and Miller. K.J, A Theory for Fatigue Under Multiaxial StressStrain Conditions, Proc. of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, 187, 754756,1973

Fig. 2 vonMises Stress Vonmises Ansys corresponding From Strain 0.004 loading coVonmises Strain to particular nditions
Strain amplitude Fatigue Strength coefficent 0.003 1000 0.0025 950 0.002 0.0015 900 0.001 850 0.0005 800 0
0.00E+00 1.00E+00

Predicted Life

y = -6E-05x + 949.08 y = -5E-10x + 0.0026

0.003 y = 5E-08x + 0.2569 0.0025 0.002 0.0015 0.001 0.0005 0

7.50E+05 5.00E+06 1.50E+06 1.00E+07

y = -4E-11x + 0.0017

2Nf Number of cycles to failure 2Nf Fig 6. Fatigue Stren2Nfh coefficient Vs 2 N f Fig 7. Comparison of Life Prediction based gt Fig 4. Strain amplitude Vs 2 N f Fig 5. Fatigue and Ellison TheoryEllison model2 N f *Lohr and on the Lohr Ductility coefficient Vs

7.50E+06 7.50E+05



1.00E+00 1.00E+00

Equivalent strain*

Equivalent total strain (MansonCoffins type Eqn.) Linear (Vonmises Strain)

Fatigue Ductility coefficient VonMisesStress in Mpa

1050 0.0035

Fig. 3. vonMises Strain From Ansys c0.40 orresponding to Particular Loading conditions 0.0045 20
180 0.35 160 0.3 140 0.25 120 0.2 100 80 0.15 60 0.1 40 0.05 20 0 0
Experimental Life

0.004 0.0035