Benchmarking Newer Multiaxial Fatigue Strength Criteria on Data Sets of Various Sizes

Jan Papuga,Martin Nesládek,Alexander Hasse,Eva Cízová,Lukáš Suchý

doi:10.3390/met12020289

Jan Papuga, Martin Nesládek + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/met12020289

Copy DOI

Abstract

The paper presents a comparison of six recently introduced multiaxial fatigue strength estimation criteria to four methods, the large-scope validation of which has already been published. The results obtained for each newer method are analyzed and discussed. From the newer methods, only the criterion by Böhme reaches an estimation quality similar to the best performing criteria. The validation was performed on the FatLim data sets, but the primary focus of the paper is set to analyzing the validation on a smaller AMSD25 data set derived from it. The comparison shows that the application of AMSD25 for validation practice allows users to reduce the number of evaluated test cases, while generally preserving the worst cases showing the weaknesses of various estimation methods.

Highlights

One of the most famous early multiaxial fatigue strength solutions was proposed by Gough and Pollard on the basis of their extensive experimental effort [1,2,3]
This paper focuses on benchmarking several recently developed multiaxial fatigue strength criteria
It has already been mentioned that the key to the selection of items for the AMSD25 benchmark set was the level of divergence of predictions produced by many different criteria from perfect ones

Summary

Introduction

One of the most famous early multiaxial fatigue strength solutions was proposed by Gough and Pollard on the basis of their extensive experimental effort [1,2,3] It was derived in [1] for the input of nominal shear stress τxya and axial stress σxa amplitudes, which corresponded to the experimental combination the authors were able to impose on the tested samples. In the discussion of their findings in [1], the idea of the critical plane, which could be responsible for the damage level of the whole sample, was raised by Stanfield. Findley focused in his experiments [5] on load combinations of bending and torsion without any phase shift between them (this time at least significant mean stresses were induced), but the concept of the critical plane allowed the criterion to process more complicated stress states

Methods

Results

Conclusion