Fatigue Consideration Design

Machine Design II Prof. K.Gopinath & Prof. M.M.
Mayuram
FATIGUE CONSIDERATION IN DESIGN
OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
In this module we will be discussing on design aspects related to
fatigue failure, an important mode of failure in engineering components. Fatigue
failure results mainly due to variable loading or more precisely due to cyclic
variations in the applied loading or induced stresses So starting from the basic
concepts of variable (non-static) loading, we will be discussing in detail how it
leads to fatigue failure in components, what factors influence them, how to
account them and finally how to design parts or components to resist failure by
fatigue
WHAT IS FATIGUE?
Fatigue is a phenomenon associated with variable loading or more
precisely to cyclic stressing or straining of a material. Just as we human beings
get fatigue when a specific task is repeatedly performed, in a similar manner
metallic components subjected to variable loading get fatigue, which leads to
their premature failure under specific conditions.
WHAT IS FATIGUE LOADING?
Fatigue loading is primarily the type of loading which causes cyclic variations in
the applied stress or strain on a component. Thus any variable loading is
basically a fatigue loading.
Indian Institute of Technology Madras

Machine Design II Prof. K.Gopinath & Prof. M.M.Mayuram
Variable Loading
Variable loading results when the applied load or the induced stress on a
component is not constant but changes with time i.e load or stress varies with
time in some pattern. Most mechanical systems and devices consists moving or
rotating components. When they are subjected to external loadings, the induced
stresses are not constant even if the magnitude of the applied load remains
invariant.
In reality most mechanical components experience variable loading due to
-Change in the magnitude of applied load Example: punching or shearing
operations-
-Change in direction of load application Example: a connecting rod
-Change in point of load application Example: a rotating shaft
There are different types of fatigue/variable loading. The worst case of fatigue
loading is the case known as fully-reversible load. One cycle of this type of
loading occurs when a tensile stress of some value is applied to an unloaded part
and then released, then a compressive stress of the same value is applied and
released.

A rotating shaft with a bending load applied to it is a good example of fully
reversible load. In order to visualize the fully-reversing nature of the load, picture
the shaft in a fixed position (not rotating) but subjected to an applied bending
load (as shown here). The outermost fibers on the shaft surface lying on the
convex side of the deflection (upper surface in the picture) will be loaded in
tension (upper green arrows), and the fibers on the opposite side will be loaded
in compression (lower green arrows). Now, rotate the shaft 180° in its bearings,
with the loads remaining the same. The shaft stress level is the same, but now
the fibers which were loaded in compression before you rotated it are now loaded
in tension, and vice-versa. Thus if the shaft is rotated let us say at 900
revolutions per minute then the shaft is cyclically stressed 900 times a minute.
To illustrate how damaging such type load is, take a paper clip, bend it out
straight, then pick a spot in the middle, and bend the clip 90° back and forth at
that spot (from straight to "L" shaped and back). When you bend it the other way,
you reverse the stresses (fully reversing fatigue). You can notice that the clip will
break in a few to about a maximum of 10 cycles.
When you are bending it you are plastically-deforming the metal, you are, by
definition, exceeding its yield stress. When you bend it in one direction, you are
applying a high tensile stress to the fibers on one side of the OD, and a high
compressive stress on the fibers on the opposite side. In the next cycle the
phenomena is repeated, the tensile stress fibers are now compressed and vice
versa, thus the material is cyclically strained which ultimately results in their
premature failure.

Fatigue Failure
Often machine members subjected to such repeated or cyclic stressing
are found to have failed even when the actual maximum stresses were below the
ultimate strength of the material, and quite frequently at stress values even below
the yield strength. The most distinguishing characteristics is that the failure had
occurred only after the stresses have been repeated a very large number of
times. Hence the failure is called fatigue failure.
ASTM Definition of fatigue
• The process of progressive localized permanent structural changes
occurring in a material subjected to conditions that produce fluctuating
stresses at some point or points and that may culminate in cracks or
complete fracture after a sufficient number of fluctuations.
Let us first make an attempt to understand the basic mechanism of fatigue failure
Fatigue Failure- Mechanism
A fatigue failure begins with a small crack; the initial crack may be so
minute and can not be detected. The crack usually develops at a point of
localized stress concentration like discontinuity in the material, such as a change
in cross section, a keyway or a hole. Once a crack is initiated, the stress
concentration effect become greater and the crack propagates. Consequently the
stressed area decreases in size, the stress increase in magnitude and the crack
propagates more rapidly. Until finally, the remaining area is unable to sustain the
load and the component fails suddenly. Thus fatigue loading results in sudden,
unwarned failure.

Fatigue Failure Stages
Thus three stages are involved in fatigue failure namely
-Crack initiation
-Crack propagation
-Fracture
The macro mechanism of fatigue failure is briefly presented now.
Crack initiation
• Areas of localized stress concentrations such as fillets, notches, key ways,
bolt holes and even scratches or tool marks are potential zones for crack
initiation.
• Crack also generally originate from a geometrical discontinuity or
metallurgical stress raiser like sites of inclusions
• As a result of the local stress concentrations at these locations, the
induced stress goes above the yield strength (in normal ductile materials)
and cyclic plastic straining results due to cyclic variations in the stresses.
On a macro scale the average value of the induced stress might still be
below the yield strength of the material.
• During plastic straining slip occurs and (dislocation movements) results in
gliding of planes one over the other. During the cyclic stressing, slip
saturation results which makes further plastic deformation difficult.

• As a consequence, intrusion and extrusion occurs creating a notch like
discontinuity in the material.
Crack propagation
• This further increases the stress levels and the process continues,
propagating the cracks across the grains or along the grain boundaries,
slowly increasing the crack size.
• As the size of the crack increases the cross sectional area resisting the
applied stress decreases and reaches a thresh hold level at which it is
insufficient to resist the applied stress.
Final fracture
• As the area becomes too insufficient to resist the induced stresses any
further a sudden fracture results in the component.

The micro mechanism of fatigue fracture
Cause Material body Cyclic stress
Effect Atomic Microscopic Macroscopic

Crack propagation
1.Dislocation movements 1. Slip formation 1.Stable stages

2.Dislocation multiplication 2. Slip saturation 2.Unstable stages
3.Defect interaction 3. Structure deterioration 3.Critical length
4.Cross slip 4. Extrusion intrusion 4.Final fracture
5. Engergy changes
6. Crack nucleation and growth
Crystallographically

Variable stress in shaft under rotation
Extrusion
Intrusion
Dislocation Slip saturation Structural Intrusion and

movement and slip deterioration Extrusion
Crack Nucleation
Effect of cyclic stressing
Animate
Basic features of failure appearance
• A fatigue failure, therefore, is characterized by two distinct regions. The
first of these is due to progressive development of the crack, while the
second is due to the sudden fracture. The zone of sudden fracture is very
similar in appearance to the fracture of a brittle material, such as cast iron,
that has failed in tension. The crack propagation zone could be
distinguished from a polished appearance. A careful examination (by an
experienced person) of the failed cross section could also reveal the site
of crack origin


How to tackle fatigue failures
The number of cycles that a metal can endure before it breaks is a complex function of the
static and cyclic stress values, the alloy, heat-treatment and surface condition of the
material, the hardness profile of the material, impurities in the material, the type of load
applied, the operating temperature, and several other factors.
Stress Life Relations
To understand the phenomena of fatigue failure a systematic study has been
conducted by a German railway engineer A.Wohler by testing axles to failure in the
laboratory under fully reversed loading. His work lead to the existence of a relation between
applied stress and the number of cycles to failure. This relation or the S-N diagram became
the standard way to characterize the behavior of materials under cyclic stressing, and
evaluate the fatigue strength of materials.
How is the fatigue strength of a metal determined?
The fatigue behavior of a specific material, heat-treated to a specific strength level, is
determined by a series of laboratory tests on a large number of apparently identical
samples of that specific material.
This picture shows a laboratory fatigue
specimen. These laboratory samples
are optimized for fatigue life. These
laboratory samples are now
standardized in geometry and
configuration such that no extraneous
factors other than the applied stress
influence the fatigue life. They are Figure 1.2

machined with shape characteristics
which maximize the fatigue life of a
metal, and are highly polished to
provide the surface characteristics
which enable the best fatigue life.
A single test consists of applying a known, constant bending stress to a round sample of
the material, and rotating the sample around the bending stress axis until it fails. As the
sample rotates, the stress applied to any fiber on the outside surface of the sample varies
from maximum-tensile to zero to maximum-compressive and back. The test mechanism
counts the number of rotations (cycles) until the specimen fails. A large number of tests is
run at each stress level of interest, and the results are statistically massaged to determine
the expected number of cycles to failure at that stress level.
The most widely used fatigue-testing device is the R.R Moore high-speed rotating beam
machine. This machine subjects the specimen to pure bending (no transverse shear).
Standard Testing
A rotating bending machine (RBM) is mostly suitable to test the fatigue properties
at zero mean stress. A schematic sketch of the test device is illustrated in the figure below.
A standard test specimen is clamped in bearings at the ends and loaded at two points as
shown. With this type of device the region of rotating beam between built-in ends is
subjected to pure bending with a constant bending moment all along its length. While under
the influence of this constant moment, the specimen is rotated by the drive spindles around
the longitudinal axis; any point on the specimen is thus subjected to completely reversed
stress pattern.
RBM-Fatigue Testing

Main Bearing Main Bearing

Flexible coupling Load Bearing
Motor
Test piece
w w
2 2
Loading on the Test Specimen
w/2 w w/2
w/2 w/2
Bending Moment
M M
The S-N Diagram
Tests on several specimens are conducted under identical conditions with varying levels of
stress amplitude. The cyclic stress level of the first set of tests is some large percentage of
the Ultimate Tensile Stress (UTS), which produces failure in a relatively small number of
cycles. Subsequent tests are run at lower cyclic stress values until a level is found at which
the samples will survive 10 million cycles without failure.

The results are plotted as an S-N diagram (see the figure) usually on semi-log or on log-log
paper, depicting the life in number of cycles tested as a function of the stress amplitude. A
typical plot is shown in the figure below for two class of materials.
Low Cycle High Cycle
Finite Life
Infinite Life
140 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sut120 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MPa100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
90
80 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
70 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
60 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
50 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
40 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
100 10 10 10 10 10 10
10 10
Number of stress cycle, N
Endurance or Fatigue Limit
In the case of the steels, a knee (flattening or saturation) occurs in the graph, and beyond
this knee failure will not occur, no matter how large the numbers of cycles are. The strength
(stress amplitude value) corresponding to the knee is called the endurance limit (Se) or the
fatigue limit. However the graph never does become horizontal for non-ferrous metals and
alloys, hence these materials do not have an endurance limit.
Endurance Limit
Endurance or Fatigue limit - definition
Endurance or fatigue limit can be defined as the magnitude of stress amplitude
value at or below which no fatigue failure will occur, no matter how large the number of

stress reversals are, in other words leading to an infinite life to the component or part being
stressed. For most ferrous materials Endurance limit (Se) is set as the cyclic stress level
that the material can sustain for 10 million cycles.
In general, steel alloys which are subjected to a cyclic stress level below the EL (properly
adjusted for the specifics of the application) will not fail in fatigue. That property is
commonly known as "infinite life". Most steel alloys exhibit the infinite life property, but it is
interesting to note that most aluminum alloys as well as steels which have been case-
hardened by carburizing, do not exhibit an infinite-life cyclic stress level (Endurance Limit).
Endurance or Fatigue Strength
For such materials, which do not have an endurance limit, to use in design
applications it is customary to define a fatigue or endurance strength (SN) as the value of
the stress amplitude at a specified life (in terms of stress reversals) usually 5X106 or 107
cycles. The specification of fatigue strength without specifying the corresponding life is
meaningless. The specification of a fatigue limit always implies infinite life.
Failure Line for S f
Sut
Endurance limit s e' exists

for some meterials
Se'
SN Other meteials show no
endurace limit
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Log number of cycles N

S-N Diagram-Operational Regions and Design Concepts
Low Cycle Fatigue
The body of knowledge available on fatigue failure from N=1 to N=1000 cycles is generally
classified as low-cycle fatigue.
Low Cycle Fatigue
High Cycle Fatigue
High-cycle fatigue, then, is concerned with failure corresponding to stress cycles
greater than 103 cycles.(Note that a stress cycle (N=1) constitutes a single application and
removal of a load and then another application and removal of load in the opposite direction.
Thus N= ½ means that the load is applied once and then removed, which is the case with
the simple tensile test.)
High Cycle Fatigue
Finite and Infinite Life
We also distinguish a finite-life and an infinite-life region. Finite life region covers
life in terms of number of stress reversals upto the knee point.(in case of steels) beyond
which is the infinite-life region. The boundary between these regions cannot be clearly
defined except for specific materials; but it lies somewhere between 106 and 107 cycles, for
materials exhibiting fatigue limit.
Finite Life
Infinite Life

Factors Influencing Fatigue
i) Loading
Nature and type of loading: -Axial tension, bending, torsion and combined loading-Mean
and Variable components in case of Repeated, Fluctuating and Alternating loading and
Frequency of loading and rest periods
ii) Geometry
Size effects and stress concentration
iii) Material
Composition, structure, directional properties and notch sensitivity
iv) Manufacturing
Surface finish, heat treatment, residual stresses
V) Environment
Corrosion, high temperature, radiation
Material
As noted earlier there are two class of materials as for as the fatigue behavior is concerned,
those material which exhibit well defined endurance limit and those without do not show
endurance limit. Most ferrous materials and basic steels fall under the first category and
some heat treated alloys of steel, aluminum etc. fall under the second category.
Composition and strength of the material are interrelated and detail discussion on
strength follows later. Strength is also related to micro structure and in this respect it is
interesting to note that soft structure like ferrite resist fatigue better than hard structure

like cementite. However because of the higher strength that can be achieved from the
same material by altering the micro structure, such structures are preferred in spite of
their poor resistance
IS THERE ANY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN UTS AND FATIGUE
STRENGTH?
The endurance limit of steel displays some interesting properties. These are shown, in a
general way,
Fatigue Behaviour in Steel
280 420 560 700 840 980 1120 1260 1400 1540 1680 1820 1960 2100
UTS MPa
50% Polished Notched Corroded
in this graph, and briefly discussed below. It is a simplistic rule of thumb that, for steels
having a UTS less than 1400 MPa, the endurance limit for the material will be
approximately 45 to 50% of the UTS if the surface of the test specimen is smooth and
polished.

That relationship is shown by the line titled "50%". A very small number of special case
materials can maintain that approximate 50% relationship above the 1400 MPa level.
However, the EL of most steels begins to fall away from the 50% line above a UTS of about
1400 MPa, as shown by the line titled "Polished".
For example, a specimen of SAE-4340 alloy steel, hardened to 32 Rockwell-C (HRc), will
exhibit a UTS around 1400 MPa and an EL of about 700 MPa, or 50% of the UTS. If you
change the heat treatment process to achieve a hardness of about 50 HRc, the UTS will be
about 1820 MPa, and the EL will be about 590 MPa, which is only about 32% of the UTS.
Several other alloys known as "ultra-high-strength steels" and some maraging steels have
been demonstrated to have an EL as high as 45% of UTS at strengths as high as 2100
MPa. Also note that these values are EL numbers for fully-reversing bending fatigue.
In above figure illustrated, the line titled "Notched" shows the dramatic reduction in fatigue
strength as a result of the concentration of stress which occurs at sudden changes in cross-
sectional area (sharp corners in grooves, fillets, etc.). The highest EL on that curve is about
25% of the UTS (at around 350 MPa).
The surface finish of a material has a dramatic effect on the fatigue life. That fact is clearly
illustrated by the curve titled "Corroded". It mirrors the shape of the "notched" curve, but is
much lower. That curve shows that, for a badly corroded surface (fretting, oxidation,
galvanic, etc.) the endurance limit of the material starts at around 140 MPa for materials of
280 MPa UTS (50%), increases to about 180 MPa for materials between 280 and 1400
MPa UTS, then decreases back toward 140 MPa as the material UTS increases above
1400 MPa.

WHY IS THE SURFACE SO IMPORTANT?
Fatigue failures almost always begin at the surface of a material. The reasons are that (a)
the most highly-stresses fibers are located at the surface (bending fatigue) and (b) the
intergranular flaws which precipitate tension failure are more frequently found at the surface.
Suppose that a particular specimen is being fatigue tested (as described above). Now
suppose the fatigue test is halted after 20 to 25% of the expected life of the specimen and a
small thickness of material is machined off the outer surface of the specimen, and the
surface condition is restored to its original state. Now the fatigue test is resumed at the
same stress level as before. The life of the part will be considerably longer than expected. If
that process is repeated several times, the life of the part may be extended by several
hundred percent, limited only by the available cross section of the specimen. That proves
fatigue failures originate at the surface of a component.
Frequency: υ or f in units of Hz. For rotating machinery at 3000 rpm, f = 50 Hz. In

general only influences fatigue if there are environmental effects present, such as humidity
or elevated temperatures
Waveform: Is the stress history a shine wave, square wave, or some other wave form?
As with frequency, generally only influences fatigue if there are environmental effects.
Is the endurance limit an exact number?
It is important to remember that the Endurance Limit of a material is not an absolute nor
fully repeatable number. In fact, several apparently identical samples, cut from adjacent
sections in one bar of steel, will produce different EL values (as well as different UTS and
YS) when tested, as illustrated by the S-N diagram below. Each of those three properties

(UTS, YS, EL) is determined statistically, calculated from the (varying) results of a large
number of apparently identical tests done on a population of apparently identical samples.
The plot below shows the results of a battery of fatigue tests on a specific material. The
tests at each stress level form statistical clusters, as shown. a curve is fitted through the
clusters of points, as shown below. The curve which is fitted through these clusters, known
as an "S-N Diagram" (Stress vs. Number), represents the statistical behavior of the fatigue
properties of that specific material at that specific strength level. The red points in the chart
represent the cyclic stress for each test and the number of cycles at which the specimen
broke. The blue points represent the stress levels and number of cycles applied to
specimens which did not fail. This diagram clearly demonstrates the statistical nature of
metal fatigue failure.
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
1*100 1*101 1*102 1*103 1*104 1*105 1*106 1*107 1*108
Cycles
DO REAL-WORLD COMPONENTS EXHIBIT THE "LABORATORY" EL?
Unfortunate experience has taught engineers that the value of the Endurance Limit found in
laboratory tests of polished, optimized samples does not really apply to real-world
components.

Because the EL values are statistical in nature, and determined on optimized, laboratory
samples, good design practice requires that one tries to determine what the actual EL will
be for each specific application. This is a time consuming process and at preliminary design
levels may not be feasible or desirable. As more and more knowledge is gained on the
fatigue aspects, this is now over come by applying a number of correction or modification
factors as discussed in the next lesson.

Our real concern is how to design a component so that failure by fatigue could be precluded.
We have noted earlier that
-Materials response to fatigue loading is characterized by its S-N behavior obtained through
a standard test
-The most important factors that affect the fatigue performance (strength) are also noted in
the previous lecture.
-Standard test conditions do not account for all these factors.
-Components in real use will be subjected to different or varied conditions.
In order to design for satisfactory fatigue life (prior to testing actual components), good
practice requires that the "laboratory" Endurance Limit value be reduced by several
adjustment factors. These reductions are necessary to account for:
(a) the differences between the application and the testing environments, and
(b) the known statistical variations of the material.
This procedure is to insure that both the known and the unpredictable factors in the
application (including surface condition, actual load, actual temperature, tolerances,
impurities, alloy variations, heat-treatment variations, stress concentrations, etc. etc. etc.)
will not reduce the life of a part below the required value. Please read that paragraph again,
and understand it well.
An accepted contemporary practice to estimate the maximum fatigue loading which a
specific design can survive is the Marin method, in which the laboratory test-determined EL
of the particular material (tested on optimized samples) is adjusted to estimate the
maximum cyclic stress a particular part can survive.

This adjustment of the EL is the result of six fractional factors. Each of these six factors is
calculated from known data which describe the influence of a specific condition on fatigue
life.
Those factors are:
(a) Surface Condition (ka): such as: polished, ground, machined, as-forged, corroded, etc.
Surface is perhaps the most important influence on fatigue life;
(b) Size (kb): This factor accounts for changes which occur when the actual size of the part
or the cross-section differs from that of the test specimens;
(c) Load (Kc): This factor accounts for differences in loading (bending, axial, torsional)
between the actual part and the test specimens;
(d) Temperature (kd): This factor accounts for reductions in fatigue life which occur when
the operating temperature of the part differs from room temperature (the testing
temperature);
(e) Reliability (ke): This factor accounts for the scatter of test data. For example, an 8%
standard deviation in the test data requires a ke value of 0.868 for 95% reliability, and 0.753
for 99.9% reliability.
(f) Miscellaneous (Kf): This factor accounts for reductions from all other effects, including
residual stresses, corrosion, plating, metal spraying, fretting, and others.
These six fractional factors are applied to the laboratory value of the material endurance
limit to determine the allowable cyclic stress for an actual part: Real-World Allowable
Cyclic Stress = ka * kb * Kc * kd * ke * kf * EL
Thus designers are now able to tackle this situation by applying as many modification
factors as possible so that most important deviations of the real design condition from the
standard test conditions are accounted. So the next part of the discussion will deal with the
endurance strength modification factors.

Endurance Strength Modification Factors
The most important deviations that occur in design situation compared to standard test
conditions are
• Size variations
• Surface finish differences
• load variations
• temperature differences
• Other miscellaneous-effects
Differences-load variations-temperature differences-other miscellaneous-effects To account
for these conditions a variety of modifying factors, each of which is intended to account for
a single effect, is applied to the endurance limit value of test specimen obtained under
laboratory conditions. Consequently we may write
Se = Se* ka kb kc kd keS = endurance limit of mechanical element (to be designed) Se* =
endurance limit of test specimen. ka = surface factor kb = size factor kc = load factor kd =
temperature factor ke = miscellaneous-effects factor
Modification Factors
Surface Factor ka
the surface of the rotating-beam specimen is highly polished, with final polishing in the axial
direction to smooth out any circumferential scratches. For other conditions the modification
factor depends upon the quality of the finish and upon the tensile strength. Sufficient data
is available in the literature relating the basic strength of the material and its surface finish
or surface condition to the modification factor which is nothing but the percentage of
standard endurance that could be realized under this condition. Typical charts are given
below. A more practical approach can be to use an empirical relation of the type ka = aSbut

is available in literature to account for the various surface condition values of constant a
and b are shown in the table below.
FACTOR a
SURFACE FINISH EXPONENT b
Kpsi MPa
Ground 1.34 1.58 -0.085
Meachined or cold rolled 2.70 4.51 -0.265
Hot Rolled 14.4 57.7 -0.718
As- forged 39.9 272 -0.995
100
Polished
90
Ground
80
Machined
70
60
50
Hot rolled
40
As Forge
30
corroded in
tap water
20
corroded in salt water
10
0
300 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Tensile Strength (MPa)

1.1
1.6
1.0 0.025
0.05
0.9 0.1
0.2
0.4
0.8 1.6 0.8
6.3 3.125
0.7 12.5
25.0
0.6 50.0
0.5
0.4
560 840 1120 1400 1680
280
Failute Strength Sut (MPa)
Size Factor Kb
The size factor accounts for the variations in the size of the component when
compared to the test specimen. The size factor has been evaluated using sets of data
points, from available literature. The larger the size higher the probability of internal defects,
hence lower the fatigue strength. An empirical relation for the case of bending and torsion
can be expressed as given below
⎧⎪ d / 7.62 )−0.107 = 1.24d −0.107 2.79 ≤ d ≤ 51mm ⎫⎪

k b = ⎨( ⎬
⎩⎪0.859 − 0.000837d 51 ≤ d ≤ 254mm ⎭⎪
Size Factor
For large sizes, kb further reduces to 0.60 and lower Note that for axial loading there is
no size effect, therefore use kb = +1.0 in this case
Load Factor-Axial Loading
Though there is no apparent size effect for specimens tested in axial or push–pull
fatigue, there is definite difference between the axial fatigue limit and that in reserved
bending. A very extensive collection of data has been made by R.W.Landgraf (Ford motor

company), on axial fatigue. These results were analyzed, resulting in the modification
values for axial loading as shown in the table.
Load Factor-Torsional Loading
A collection of 52 data points comparing the torsional endurance limit with the bending
endurance limit yielded a load factor for torsion of 0.565. Using a different set of data points,
Mischke obtained the result kc =0.585. Both of these are very close to the value of 0.577
shown in the table. Note that this value incidentally happen to be the relation between
torsional and tensile yield strengths according to the distortion energy theory.
Load Factor
Hence for the three basic types of loading normally encountered in most practical
applications, namely axial, bending and torsional stressing the effect could be accounted by
the load factor as shown in the table
⎧0.923 Axial Loading S<1520MPa(220Kpsi) ⎫

⎪1 S<1520MPa(220Kpsi) ⎪⎪
⎪ Axial Loading
kc = ⎨ ⎬
⎪1 Bending ⎪
⎩⎪0.577 Torsion and shear ⎭⎪
Temperature factor
The limited amount of data available show that the endurance limit for steels in creases
slightly as the temperature rises and then begins to fall off in the 400 to 700 ˚F range, not
unlike the behaviour of the tensile strength shown figure below

1.0
Sut
0.9
0.8 Sy
ST/SRT
0.7
0.6
0.5
0 RT
200 400 600
Temperature, oC
For this reason it is probably true that the endurance limit is related to tensile strength at
clevated temperatures in the same manner as at room temperature. It seems quite logical,
therefore, to employ the same relations to predict endurance limit at elevated temperatures
as are used at room temperature, at least, this practice will provide a useful standard
against which the performance of various materials can be compared.
Two types of problems arise when temperature is a consideration. If the rotating- beam
endurance limit is known at room temperature, then use
ST
kd =
SRT
Miscellaneous – Effects Factor Ke
Similarly the other factors take into account the deviations of actual condition of use
from the standard testing. Though the factor ke is intended to account for the reduction in

endurance limit due to all other effects, it is really intended as a reminder that these must
be accounted for, because actual conditions of use vary from standard test condition;
values of ke are not always available.
Endurance - Limit - Preliminary Observations
The determination of endurance limit by fatigue testing is now a routine, though a
lengthy procedure. Generally stress testing is preferred to strain testing for endurance limits.
For preliminary and prototype design and for some failure analysis as well, a quick method
of estimating endurance limit is needed. There are great quantities of data in the literature
on the results of rotating-beam tests and simple (static) tension tests of specimen taken
from the same bar or in got. By plotting the resulting tensile and endurance strength values
as in shown in Figure, it is possible to see whether there is any correlation between the sets
of results. The graph appears to suggest that the endurance limit ranges from about 40 to
60 percent of the tensile strength for steels up to about 1400 MPa (200 kpsi). Beginning at
about Sut = 1400 MPa (200 kpsi), the scatter appears to increase, but the trend seems to
level off, as suggested by the dashed horizontal line at S’e=700MPa (100 kpsi).
Hence for preliminary design purposes the standard laboratory endurance strength of can
be derived from its ultimate tensile strength values using the following relations

Stress Concentration Effect
Fatigue Stress Concentration
The existence of irregularities or discontinuities, such as holes, grooves, or
notches, in a part increase the magnitude of stresses significantly in the immediate vicinity
of the discontinuity. Fatigue failure mostly originates from such places. Hence its effect
must be accounted and normally a fatigue stress-concentration factor Kf is applied when

designing against fatigue, even if the materials behavior is ductile.
Fatigue Stress Concentration Factor
Recall that a stress concentration factor need not be used with ductile materials
when they are subjected to only static loads, because (local) yielding will relieve the stress
concentration. However under fatigue loading, the response of material may not be
adequate to nullify the effect and hence has to be accounted. The factor Kf commonly
called a fatigue stress concentration factor is used for this. Normally, this factor is used to
indicate the increase in the stress; hence this factor is defined in the following manner.
Fatigue stress concentration factor can be defined as
Fatigue strength (limit) of unnotched specimen

k =
f
Fatigue strength (limit) of notched free specimen
The other form of use, where necessary is the miscellaneous-effects factor ke applied as a
strength reduction factor on the fatigue limit value. With this approach we define
1
ke =
Kf

980 Carbon Steel 140
840
Alloy Steel 120
+ Wrought irons
700 100 Kpsi
560 80
420 60
280 40
+ +++
140 +++ 20
0 0
0 140 280 420 560 700 840 980 1120 1260 1400 1540 1680 1820 1960 2100
Tensile Strength Sut ,MPa

Stress Concentration Effect
Fatigue Stress Concentration
The existence of irregularities or discontinuities, such as holes, grooves, or
notches, in a part increase the magnitude of stresses significantly in the immediate vicinity
of the discontinuity. Fatigue failure mostly originates from such places. Hence its effect
must be accounted and normally a fatigue stress-concentration factor Kf is applied when
designing against fatigue, even if the materials behavior is ductile.
Fatigue Stress Concentration Factor
Recall that a stress concentration factor need not be used with ductile materials
when they are subjected to only static loads, because (local) yielding will relieve the stress
concentration. However under fatigue loading, the response of material may not be
adequate to nullify the effect and hence has to be accounted. The factor Kf commonly
called a fatigue stress concentration factor is used for this. Normally, this factor is used to
indicate the increase in the stress; hence this factor is defined in the following manner.
Fatigue stress concentration factor can be defined as
Fatigue strength (limit) of unnotched specimen

k =
f
Fatigue strength (limit) of notched free specimen
The other form of use, where necessary is the miscellaneous-effects factor ke applied as a
strength reduction factor on the fatigue limit value. With this approach we define
1
ke =
Kf

Geometric stress concentration factor Kt and Fatigue Stress
Concentration factor Kf
This form of definition needs that the fatigue stress concentration factor or the
endurance strength values for different notch geometries on each of the material to be used
should be evaluated. However once sufficient data was available a simple approach, useful
at preliminary design stages was evolved to determine the fatigue stress concentration
factor value from the geometrical (theoretical) stress concentration values, data charts for
which is readily available, using a notch sensitivity relation.
Notch Sensitivity
Notch sensitivity q is defined by the equation
Kf − 1
q=
Kt −1
Actual intensification of stresses over nominal stress

Theoretical intensifcation of stress over nominal stresses
The values of q are between zero and unity. It is evident that if q=0, then Kf =1, and the
material has no sensitivity to notches at all. On the other hand if q=1, then Kf = Kt, and the
material has full notch sensitivity. In analysis or design work, find Kt first, from geometry of
the part. Then select or specify the material, find q, and solve for Kf from the equation
K f = 1 + q(K t − 1)

Notch sensitivity curves

Steel
use these values with bending and axial load
use these values with torsion
} Su ksi
and Bhn
as marked
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
q 0.6
Aluminium alloy (based on 2024- T6 data)

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16
Notch radius r (in.)
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Notch radius r (mm)

Stressing other than fully reversed loadings.
Quite frequently it is necessary to determine the strength of parts corresponding to
stress situations other than complete reversals. Many times in design the stresses fluctuate
without passing through zero. Some of the stress time relationships and the components of
stresses involved with such situations and the relations among them will be discussed now.
One type is zero-to-max-to zero, where a part which is carrying no load is then subjected to
a load, and later, the load is removed, so the part goes back to the no-load condition. An
example of this type of loading is a chain used to haul logs behind a tractor.
Another type of fatigue loading is a varying load superimposed on a constant load. The
suspension wires in a railroad bridge are an example of this type. The wires have a
constant static tensile load from the weight of the bridge, and an additional tensile load
when a train is on the bridge. For such type of stressing how to proceed will be looked now.
Cyclic Stressing
As the name implies, the induced stresses vary in some pattern with time. This
can be due to variation in the applied load itself or because of the conditions of use as seen
earlier. Let us assume that the pattern of such a variation is sinusoidal. Then the following
are the basic terminology associated with variable stresses. The definitions included here
are elementary. They are introduced for clarity and convenience.
Maximum stress: σmax
The largest or highest algebraic value of a stress in a stress cycle. Positive for
tension

1.2
A B
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
C
-1.2-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Compression Sm /S uc Tension S m / S ut
Ration of the mean
Minimum stress: σmax
The smallest or lowest algebraic value of a stress in a stress cycle. Positive for
tension.
Nominal stress: σnom
As obtained or calculated from simple theory in tension, bending and torsion neglecting
geometric discontinuities
σnom = F/A or M/Z or T.r/J
Hence σmax = Fmax/ A or Mmax/Z or Tmax.r/Jp
σmin = Fmin/ A etc

Mean stress (Mid range stress) : σm The algebraic mean or average of the
maximum and minimum stress in one cycle.
σ + σmin
σm = max
2
Stress range: σr The algebraic difference between the maximum and minimum stress in
one cycle.
σr = σmax − σmin
Stress Amplitude: σa Half the value of the algebraic difference between the maximum
and minimum stress in one cycle or half the value of the stress range.
σmax − σmin σr
σa = =
2 2
Types of Variations
(a) (Completely)Reversible stressing:
Stress variation is such that the mean stress is zero; Same magnitude of
maximum and minimum stress, one in tension and the other in compression .Now for
Completely reversible loading σm = σmax= σmin; R = - 1 and A = 0

Stress
+
max
a
0 t
r
_ m=0 min
(a) Fully reversed
(b) Repeated stressing:
Stress variation is such that the minimum stress is zero. Mean and amplitude
stress have the same value for repeated loading
σmin = 0
σ = σa = σmax / 2
R = 0 and A = 1
Stress
+ max
a
------------------------------------------------------
r
t=0
0
min
m
_
(b) Repeated
(c) Fluctuating stressing:
Both minimum and maximum stresses are positive and mean stress also being positive
(tensile)

Stress
+
max
a
------------------------------------------------------
r
0 t
min
m
_
(b) Flutuating
(d) Alternating stressing:
Positive maximum stress and negative minimum stress; mean stress is generally positive
but can also be negative.
Stress
+
σmax
------------------------------------------------------
σa
σr
0 t=0
------------------------------------------------------
σmin
_
σm
General Cyclic Loading – Influencing Parameters
What are the important parameters to characterize a given cyclic loading
history such as the typical ones highlighted above?
Note that the following parameters are common to all such types of variations
Stress Range: ∆σ = σmax − σmin

1
Stress amplitude: σa = ( σmax − σmin )
2
1
Mean stress: σm = ( σmax + σmin )
2
σmin
Stress ratio: R=
σmax
Recall the following relations from the earlier discussions
σmax + σ min σ − σ min

σm = σm = max
2 2
σmin σa
R= A=
σmax σm
What is the effect of such variations on the Fatigue Strength?
Some typical types of variation in the cyclic stressing of materials have been highlighted
All such and several other types of variations can be bounded by two main parameters the
variable component of the stress or the stress amplitude and the mean component of stress
or the mean stress. The effect of stress amplitude is already noted in the S-N diagram.
Now let us note the effect of the mean stress.
By varying both the mean stress and the stress amplitude, or the alternating
component, we can learn some thing about the fatigue resistance of parts when subjected
to such situations. Three methods of plotting the results of such tests are in general use
and are shown in figures below

Su
Sy
σmax
Se
σmin
0 45
σm Sy S
u
Se Mean Stress
1.2
A B
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
C
-1.2-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Compression Sm /S uc Tension S m / S ut
Ration of the mean

4.0 2.33 1.5 A=1 0.67 0.43 0.25 0.11 0
-0.6 -0.4 -0.2 R=0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
A= S ut
R=-1.0
840
700
560
420
280
140
-840 -700 -560 -420 -280 -140 0 140 280 420 560 700 840 980 1120 1260
Minimum stress min ,MPa
It is evident from the above figures that the presence of mean stress reduces the magnitude
of variable component or the stress amplitude that can be sustained before failure. The
higher the magnitude of mean stress the lower is the magnitude of amplitude stress that
can be sustained. However note that if the nature of mean stress is compressive, then it
has no effect on the magnitude of the variable component or the stress amplitude value.
Failure Criteria
Yield line
Gerber line
Se
Goodman line
Sa
A
Soderberg line
0
0 Sm S yt S ut
Alternating stress σm

Four criteria of failure are diagrammed in figure, the Soderberg's, the modified
Goodman, the Gerber, and yielding. It is evident that only the Soderberg’s criterion guards
against yielding. The linear theories of Figure can be placed in equation form: The equation
for the Soderberg’s criteria (line) is
Sa Sm
+ =1
Se Syt

DESIGN APPROACH FOR FATIGUE LOADINGS
Design for Infinite Life
It has been noted that if a plot is made of the applied stress amplitude verses the number
of reversals to failure to (S-N curve) the following behaviour is typically observed.
σe
103 104 105 106 107
Cycle of failure, Nf
Completely Reversible Loading
If the stress is below the (the endurance limit or fatigue limit), the component
has effectively infinite life. σe ≈ 0.35σTS − 0.50σTS for the most steel and copper alloys. If
the material does not have a well defined σe , often σe , is arbitrarily defined as Stress that
gives N f = 107 For a known load (Moment ) the section area/(modulus) will be designed
such that the resulting amplitude stress will be well below the endurance limit.
Design approach can be better learnt by solving a problem.
Determine a suitable diameter for the axle of a rail carriage of tentative dimensions and
loading shown in the reference to figure below for fatigue endurance.

This design criterion in the case is that to induced stress should be less than the endurance
limit of the material used for the axle. So the giving equation is
σ ≤ se
1 2
200
F
F
100 1500
2200

w/2 w/2
w/2 w/2
Bending Moment
M M

A suitable material suggested for the application can be medium carbon material like 45 C8,
If is evident that the shaft is subject to binding bonds. By drawing to bending moment
diagram the maximum bending moment can be determined. In this case
M max = F.l
= 82*103 * 200
= 16.4*106 Nmm
The induced stress
M
τ=
Z
For circular cross section
32M 0.16705*106
= = MPa
πd3 d3
The number of stressing is going to be fully reversed because of rotating shaft with constant
load application point. Now we have to estimate the endurance limit for the material of the
shaft. The ultimate strength of this steel =670 Mpa. Based on the relation between the EL
and UTS the basic endurance limit is =0.5Sut = 335 Ma. The design endurance limit Se is
to be estimated now as noted earlier
Se = Se * k a k b k c
Ka – Surface factor. Assuming shaft surface is machined in nature
k a = aSbut = 4.45(670)−0.265
= 0.793
ks - size factor . The diameter is unknown. Instead of taking this factor to be one, assuming
the diameter can be in the range 60-140 mm, for an average value of 100mm the factor is
going to be

ks = 0.859 − 0.0008378 *100

= 0.775
Kc – load factor
This being a fully reversible bending
Kc=1.0 as the diameter is uniform stress concentration effect is neglected.
Hence the actual endurance strength is likely to be Se = 0.5Sut * k a k b k c
. = 0.5*670*0.793*0.775
Now the final design equation is
1
32.M ⎡ 32.M ⎤ 3
= 206 MPa or d = ⎢ ⎥
πd 3 ⎢ π ⎡ s ⎤ ⎥
⎣ ⎣ e⎦⎦
Assuming a factor safety (N) of 1.5 the design Endurance strength is going to be 137.31
Substituting the values
1
⎡ 3.2 *16.4 *106 ⎤ 3
d=⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ π *137.31 ⎥⎦
106.75 mm
This values can be rounded off to the nearest Preferred size of = 110mm. In the next step,
let us perform a critical analysis of the problem. Because of the step in diameter between
the bearing and wheel region (1-2) stress Concentration is going to be there and this
section may be critical where failure can Occur. Accounting for the stress concentration
effect we can write

32M
σ = Kf
πd3
K f = 1 + (k t − 1)q
D r 5
For = 1.22 and = = 0.05k t = 1.96
d d 90
For 45 C4 steel with Sut =670 and notch radius r= 5 q= 0.9
K f = 1 + (1.9 − 1)0.9 = 1.81
Now that the surface condition is not the same and correction factor for size is to be
modified. The surface factor for ground finish condition is
k a = aSbut = 1.58(670) −0.086

= 0.903
The size Correlation factor is going to be ks= 0.703
Hence the actual endurance strength now is
0.5*670*0.903*0.783*1.0 = 231.86
1.81* 32 *82 *103 *100

σ= = 207.379
π.903
The corresponding factor of safety now is
S 231.86
N= e = = 1.11
σ 207.379
The factor of safety may not be adequate and the diameter can be modified accordingly.

Design approach for other type of cyclic loadings
The proceeding approaches to design the component assumes fully reversed
fatigue load, so that the mean stress σm is zero. How do you handle the case where
σm ≠ 0?
σm1 > σm2 > σm2 > σm2

σm1
σ1
σm2
Gerber line
σm σm3 σm
σm3 Goodman line
Sa
A
Soderberg line
0
log N1 0 σa σy σTS
Alternating stress σm
The four different failure criterion and their mathematical equations have been note earlier
for such cyclic loadings having a definite mean stress
For design applications the induced stresses σa and σm can replace Sa and Sm in the
above equations and each strength is divided by a factor of safety N. The resulting equation
is
Soderberg's criteria (line) is
σa σ 1
Kf + m =
Se Sut N
Goodman relation or criteria is
σa σ 1
Kf + m =
Se Sut N

Gerber parabolic relation:
2
⎛ Nσ
Nσ a ⎞
Kf +⎜ m ⎟ =1
Se ⎜ S ⎟
⎝ ut ⎠
(Note Se is corrected endurance limit values and Kf factor accounts for stress concentration
effects.) The meaning of these equations is illustrated in Figure, using the modified
Goodman theory as an example.
From the above approach we can evolve basic design equations involving the three main
type of loadings axial tension or compression, bending and torsion.

Combination of Loading Modes
Two simple approaches can be presented for this, based on the
assumption that all stress components are always in time phase with each other.
The procedure is illustrated in the example. The resulting mathematical relations
are summarized for convenience.
Method I
σ 'a σ 'm 1
+ =
Se Sut N
1
⎡ 2⎤2
(
σ 'a = ⎢ K fb σ xa
⎣
) 2
(
+ α K fs τa ⎥
⎦
)
1
⎡ 2 2⎤
Where (
σ 'm = ⎢ σ xm + σ τm ⎥ 2
⎣ ⎦
) ( )
Method II
σeq = σm + K fb σa Sut / Se ) (
τeq = τm + K fs τa ( sSut / sSe )
and 2 + ατ2 = Sut

σeq eq N
Torsional fatigue strength under pulsating stresses
Extensive tests by Smith provide some very interesting results on
the pulsating torsional fatigue. Smith’s first results based on 72 tests, shows that

the existence of a torsional mean stress not more than the torsional yield
strength has no effect on the torsional endurance limit, provided the material is
ductile, polished, notch free, and cylindrical. However he finds that for materials
with stress concentration, notches, or surface imperfections, the torsional fatigue
limit decreases steadily with torsional mean stress. Hence modified Goodman’s
relation is recommended for pulsating torsion also, since great majority of parts
will have surface imperfections. Thus the theory could be directly applied with the
load factor kc = 0.577 for torsion.
The above approach is illustrated by solving a problem.
Recall that in the last lesson we have designed an axle taking into account the
bending load alone.
In previous solutions torque on the axle is neglected. If the torque is also
accounted the problem is going to be of combined loading involving bending
torsion.
We need to know the torque on the axle.
The torque on the axle is going to be coefficient of friction times the normal bond.
According to T= 2XfXN
Where f is the co-efficient of friction between the wheel and the rail and
N is the normal reaction at each of the wheel
i.e T = 0.25 * 82*103*2= 164 N. m

Adopting approach I
1
σm ' = ⎡σbm + 3cm ⎤ 2
2 2
⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
σbm = 0 Fully reversible bending and hence zero mean stress
167
σ'm = 0 + 3.
πd 3
16 *164 *103 1.447 *106
3* =
πd 3 d3
σm '.[(K fs .σba ) 2 + 3(k fs σa ) 2 ]
Neglecting the stress concentration effect and assuming the torque is going to be
constant
Kfs=0
As constant torque is assumed τa = 0
2 32M 32 *12 *103 * 200

∴ σa ' = σba = =
πd3 πd3
167.04 *106
=
d3
Substituting in the main equation

σm ' σ ' 1
+ a .
s ut se N
1.447 *106 167.04 *106 1

+ =
d3 .670 d3 .206 1.5
⎡1.447 *106 167.04 *106 ⎤
or d3 = 1.5 ⎢ + ⎥
⎢⎣ d3 .670 3
d .206 ⎥⎦
1.214 *106
d = 106mm
Finite Life Design
As noted earlier the finite life region covers a life ranging from 10 3 to 10 6
stress
reversals. Design or analysis in this range can be accomplished either by using
a stress life and fatigue strength based approaches, or through the strain life
relations based. At very low and moderate cycles the plastic strain induced has
a greater effect on the fatigue life rather than the stress magnitude.
Fatigue Strength Based Finite Life Design
The finite life fatigue domain extends from 103 cycles, for steels, to the
endurance-limit life se, which is about 106 cycles or only slightly more. The
purpose of this section is to develop methods of approximating the S-N diagram
to define the fatigue strength Sf corresponding to any life N between 103 and 106
cycles. An analytical approach is to approximate the S-N diagram with a line on

the log S-log N chart joining 0.9Sut at 103 cycles and Se at 106 cycles. Let the
equation of the S-N line be Sf = a Nb Then log Sf = log a + b log N. This line is to
intersect 106 cycles at Se and 103 cycles at 0.9 Sut
Substituting these values into the equation and solving for a and b we have,
( 0.9Sut )
2
1 0.9Sut
a= b = − log
Se 3 Se
Suppose a completely reversed stress σa is given, the number of cycles of life
corresponding to this stress can now be found by substituting σa for Sf, the result
is
1
⎛ σ ⎞b
N=⎜ a ⎟
⎝ a ⎠
If a component is to be designed for any finite life N ( 103< N<106) then value of
SN determined for this known life could be substituted in place of Se values in
Soderberg or Goodman’s equation presented above.
Stress –Life Approach
If a plot is prepared of log(σa ) Verses log(2N f ) (where 2Nf represents the
number of reversals to failure, one cycle is equal to two reversals) a linear
relationship is commonly observed. The following relationship between stress
amplitude and life time (Basquine, 1910) has been proposed.

Δσ b
2
(
= σa = σ 'f 2Nf )
The plot of this expression is depicted below:
εf
c
εp/2 ε p /2
b
ε p /2
2Nf
Reversal of failure 2Nf(log scale)
Stress –Life Approach
The stress-life approach just described is applicable for the
situation involving the primary elastic deformation. Under these conditions the
component expected to have a long life time.
Strain-Life Approach
For situation involving high stresses, high temperatures, or high stress
concentration such as notches, where significant plasticity can be involved, the
stress life approach is not appropriate. How do we handle these situations?

Rather than the stress amplitude σa, the loading is characterized by the plastic
Δε p
strain amplitude
2
Δε p
Under these conditions if the plot is made of log(2N f ) verses the following
2
linear behavior is generally observed
εf
c
ε
101
101 102 103

Reversal to failure, 2Nf
(log scale)
To represent this behaviour, the following relationship between the plastic strain
Δε p
amplitude and life in terms of stress reversals 2Nf has been proposed.
2
(Coffin – Manson, ca.1955)

Δε p
= ε 'f ( 2N f )c
2
Where ≈ εf , is the fatigue ductility coefficient (for the most metals it is equal to
the true strain at fracture) and c is the fatigue ductility exponent (-0.5 to -0.7 for
many metals).
To represent this behaviour, the following relationship (Coffin – Manson,).
Δε p
= ε 'f ( 2N f )c
2
Δε p
1955) has been proposed. Where is the plastic strain amplitude, ε 'f is the
2
fatigue ductility coefficient (for most metals ≈ εf is the true fracture ductility) and
c is the fatigue ductility exponent (-0.5 to -0.7 for many metals)
The above approach is more useful for analysis rather than for design.
Different amplitudes
How do we handle the situations where we have varying amplitude
loads, as depicted below?

case 1 case 2
n1 cycles n2 cycles
σ n2 cycles σ n1 cycles
σa1
σa1 σa2
σa2
t t
σa1
σa
σa2
Nf1 Nf2
cycles to failure Nf
Is Fatigue Loading Cumulative?
It is important to realize that fatigue cycles are accumulative. Suppose a part
which has been in service is removed and tested for cracks by a certified aircraft
inspection station (where it is more likely that the subtleties of Magnaflux
inspection are known). Suppose the part passes the inspection, (i.e., no cracks
are found) and the owner of the shaft puts it on the "good used parts" shelf.
Later, someone comes along looking for a bargain on such a part, and purchases
this "inspected" part. The fact that the part has passed the inspection only proves
that there are no detectable cracks RIGHT NOW. It gives no indication at all as to
how many cycles remain until a crack forms. A part which has just passed a

Magnaflux inspection could crack in the next 100 cycles of operation and fail in
the next 10000 cycles (which at 2000 RPM, isn't very long!).
CUMULATIVE FATIGUE DAMAGE
Instead of a single reversed stress σ for n cycles, suppose a part is
subjected to σ1 for n1 cycles σ1 for n2 cycles. etc. Under these conditions our
problem is to estimate the fatigue life of a part subjected to these reverse
stresses, or to estimate the factor of safety if the part has an infinite life. A search
of the literature reveals that this problem has not been solved completely.
Different Amplitudes
A very common approach is the Palmgren-Miner damage summation
rule. If we defines 2Nfi as the number of reversals to failures at σai then the
partial damage for d for each different loading applied for known number of
cycles ni is σai
2n i Reversal at σai
d= =
2Nfi Reversal to failure at σai
The component is assumed to fail when the total damage becomes equal to 1, or
n
∑ i =1
i Nfi

It is assumed that the sequence in which the loads are applied has no influence
on the lifetime of the component. In fact the sequence of load can have a larger
influence on the lifetime of the component.
Consider the sequence of the two cyclic loads σa1 and σa2 . Let σa1 > σa2
Case1: Apply then
n
In this case ∑ i can be less than 1. During the first loading ( σa1 ) numerous
i Nfi
microcracks can be initiated, which can be further propagated by second loading
n
( σa2 ) Case2: Apply σa2 then σa1 . In this case ∑ i can be greater than 1. The
i Nfi
first loading ( σa2 ) is not high enough to cause any microcracks, but it is high
enough to strain harden the material. Then in the second loading ( σa1 ), since the
material has been hardened it is more difficult to initiate any damage in the
material.
Cumulative Fatigue Damage
Thus the theory which is in greatest use at the present time to explain
cumulative fatigue damage, i.e the Palmgren-Minor cycle-ratio summation theory
also known as Minor’s rule can mathematically, stated as
n1 n 2 n
+ + ..... + i = C
N1 N 2 Ni
Where n is the number of cycles of stress σ applied to the specimen and N is the
fatigue life corresponding to σ. The constant C is determined by experiment and

is usually found in the range 0.7 ≤ C ≤2.2. Many authorities recommend C = 1
and the short form of the theory can state as:
n
∑ =1
N
Problem Solutions (Lec 6)
Determine a suitable diameter for the axle of a rail (reference to figure)
for fatigue endurance. This design criteria in the case is that to induced stress
should be less than the endurance limit of the material used for the axle. So the
giving equation is
σ ≤ se
1 2
200
F
F
100 1500
2200


w/2 w/2
w/2 w/2
Bending Moment
M M
A suitable material suggested for the application can be medium carbon material
like 45 C8, If is evident that the shaft is subject to binding bonds. By drawing to
bending moment diagram the maximum bending moment can be determined. In
this case
M max = F.l
= 82*103 * 200
= 16.4*106 Nmm
The induced stress
M
τ=
Z
32M 0.16705*106
= = MPa
πd3 d3
The number of stressing is going to be fully reversed because of rotating shaft
with constant load application point. Now we have to estimate the endurance limit
for the material of the shaft. The ultimate strength of this steel =670 Mpa.

Based on the relation between the EL and UTS the basic endurance limit is
=0.5Sut = 335 Ma. The design endurance limit Se is to be estimated now as
noted earlier
Se = Se * k a k b k c
ka – Surface factor. Assuming shaft surface is machined in nature
k a = aSbut = 4.45(670)−0.265
= 0.793
ks - size factor . The diameter is unknown. Instead of taking this factors to be
one, assuming the diameter can be in the range 60-140 mm, for an average
value of 100mm the factor is going to be
ks = 0.859 − 0.0008378 *100

= 0.775
kc – load factor K c − loading
This being a fully reversible bending
kc=1.0 as the diameter is uniform stress concentration effect is neglected.
Hence the actual endurance strength is likely to be Se = 0.5Sut * k a k b k c
. = 0.5*670*0.793*0.775

Now the final design equation is
1
⎡ ⎤
32.m 32.m ⎥ 3
= 206 Mpa or d = ⎢
πd3 ⎢ π ⎡s ⎤ ⎥
⎣ ⎣ e⎦⎦
Assuming a factor safety (N) of 1.5 the design Endurance strength is going to be
137.31
Substituting the values
1
⎡ 3.2 *16.4 *106 ⎤ 3
d=⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ π *137.31 ⎥⎦
106.75 mm
This values can be rounded off to the nearest Preferred size of = 110mm. In the
next step, let us perform a critical analysis of the problem. Because of the step in
diameter between the bearing and wheel region (1-2) stress Concentration is
going to be there and this section may be critical where failure can Occur.
Accounting for the stress concentration effect we can write
32M
σ = Kf
πd3
K f = 1 + (k t − 1)q
D r 5
For = 1.22 and = = 0.05k t = 1.96
d d 90
For 45 C4 steel with Sut =670 and notch radius r= 5 q= 0.9

K f = 1 + (1.9 − 1)0.9 = 1.81
Now that the surface condition is not the same and correction factor for size is to
be modified. The surface factor for ground finish condition is
k a = aSbut = 1.58(670) −0.086

= 0.903
The size Correlation factor is going to be ks= 0.703
Hence the actual endurance strength now is
0.5*670*0.903*0.783*1.0 = 231.86
1.81* 32 *82 *103 *100

σ= = 207.379
π.903
The corresponding factor of safety now is
S 231.86
N= e = = 1.11
σ 207.379
The factor of safety may not be adequate and the diameter can be modified
accordingly.
In previous solutions torque on the axle is neglected. If the torque is also
accumulated the problem is going to be of combined binding involving bonding
torsion. The torque on the axle is going to be coefficient of friction lesser than the
normal bond. According to T= Friction factor* 2(for the?) = 0.25 * 82*103*2= 164
N. m

Adopting approach I
1
⎡ 2 2 ⎤
σm ' = σbm + 3cm 2
⎣⎢ ⎦⎥
σbm = 0 Fully reversible binding with zero mean
167
σ'm = 0 + 3.
πd 3
16 *164 *103 1.447 *106
3* =
πd 3 d3
σm '.[(K fs .σba )2 + 3(k fs σa )2 ]
For the center radius
Kfs=0
As constant torque is assumed τa = 0
3
2 = 32M = 32 *12 *10 * 200
∴ σa ' = σba
πd3 πd3
167.04 *106
=
d3

Substituting in the four main equation
σm ' σ ' 1
+ a .
s ut se N
1.447 *106 167.04 *106 1

+ =
d3 .670 d3 .206 1.5
⎡1.447 *106 167.04 *106 ⎤
3
or d = 1.5 ⎢ + ⎥
⎢⎣ d3 .670 3
d .206 ⎥⎦
1.214 *106
d = 106mm

Fatigue Consideration Design

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Fatigue Consideration Design

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Machine Design II Prof. K.Gopinath & Prof. M.M.

FATIGUE CONSIDERATION IN DESIGN

OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE

In this module we will be discussing on design aspects related to

fatigue failure, an important mode of failure in engineering components. Fatigue

concepts of variable (non-static) loading, we will be discussing in detail how it

leads to fatigue failure in components, what factors influence them, how to

Fatigue is a phenomenon associated with variable loading or more

precisely to cyclic stressing or straining of a material. Just as we human beings

get fatigue when a specific task is repeatedly performed, in a similar manner

metallic components subjected to variable loading get fatigue, which leads to

their premature failure under specific conditions.

WHAT IS FATIGUE LOADING?

the applied stress or strain on a component. Thus any variable loading is

basically a fatigue loading.

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

In reality most mechanical components experience variable loading due to

-Change in the magnitude of applied load Example: punching or shearing

-Change in direction of load application Example: a connecting rod

-Change in point of load application Example: a rotating shaft

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

A rotating shaft with a bending load applied to it is a good example of fully

break in a few to about a maximum of 10 cycles.

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

Often machine members subjected to such repeated or cyclic stressing

times. Hence the failure is called fatigue failure.

ASTM Definition of fatigue

• The process of progressive localized permanent structural changes

occurring in a material subjected to conditions that produce fluctuating

stresses at some point or points and that may culminate in cracks or

complete fracture after a sufficient number of fluctuations.

Fatigue Failure- Mechanism

localized stress concentration like discontinuity in the material, such as a change

in cross section, a keyway or a hole. Once a crack is initiated, the stress

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

Fatigue Failure Stages

Thus three stages are involved in fatigue failure namely

The macro mechanism of fatigue failure is briefly presented now.

• Areas of localized stress concentrations such as fillets, notches, key ways,

• Crack also generally originate from a geometrical discontinuity or

metallurgical stress raiser like sites of inclusions

• As a result of the local stress concentrations at these locations, the

below the yield strength of the material.

• During plastic straining slip occurs and (dislocation movements) results in

saturation results which makes further plastic deformation difficult.

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

• As a consequence, intrusion and extrusion occurs creating a notch like

discontinuity in the material.

slowly increasing the crack size.

applied stress decreases and reaches a thresh hold level at which it is

insufficient to resist the applied stress.

further a sudden fracture results in the component.

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

The micro mechanism of fatigue fracture

Cause Material body Cyclic stress

Effect Atomic Microscopic Macroscopic

1.Dislocation movements 1. Slip formation 1.Stable stages

Indian Institute of Technology Madras

Variable stress in shaft under rotation

Dislocation Slip saturation Structural Intrusion and

Effect of cyclic stressing

Basic features of failure appearance

• A fatigue failure, therefore, is characterized by two distinct regions. The