Abstract
Materials can be classified as shear or tensile sensitive, depending on the main fatigue microcrack initiation process under multiaxial loadings. The nature of the initiating microcrack can be evaluated from a stress scale factor (SSF), which usually multiplies the hydrostatic or the normal stress term from the adopted multiaxial fatigue damage parameter. Low SSF values are associated with a shear-sensitive material, while a large SSF indicates that a tensile-based multiaxial fatigue damage model should be used instead. For tension-torsion histories, a recent published approach combines the shear and normal stress amplitudes using a SSF polynomial function that depends on the stress amplitude ratio (SAR) between the shear and the normal components. Alternatively, critical-plane models calculate damage on the plane where damage is maximized, adopting a SSF value that is assumed constant for a given material, sometimes varying with the fatigue life (in cycles), but not with the SAR, the stress amplitude level, or the loading path shape. In this work, in-phase proportional tension-torsion tests in 42CrMo4 steel specimens for several values of the SAR are presented. The SSF approach is then compared with critical-plane models, based on their predicted fatigue lives and the observed values for these tension-torsion histories. KEYWORDS. Multiaxial fatigue life prediction; Critical-plane approach; Polynomial stress scale factor approach.
Highlights
I nitiating microcracks under multiaxial fatigue loadings can be sub-divided into shear or tensile types [1]
Low stress scale factor (SSF) values are associated with a shear-sensitive material, while a large SSF indicates that a tensile-based multiaxial fatigue damage model should be used instead
For tension-torsion histories, a recent published approach combines the shear and normal stress amplitudes using a SSF polynomial function that depends on the stress amplitude ratio (SAR) between the shear and the normal components
Summary
I nitiating microcracks under multiaxial fatigue loadings can be sub-divided into shear or tensile types [1]. Other materials may initiate fatigue cracks on planes of maximum tensile strain or stress ranges, e.g. 304 stainless steel under certain load histories and cast irons [2]. In this case, even if the microcrack nucleates in shear, its so-called initiation life (which always includes some microcrack propagation) is controlled by its growth in a direction perpendicular to the maximum principal stress or strain. Models based on the critical-plane approach calculate multiaxial fatigue damage on the plane where it is maximized (not on the plane where the load is applied), while adopting a SSF value that is assumed constant for a given material, sometimes varying with the fatigue life (in cycles), but not with the SAR, stress amplitude level, or loading path shape. The SSF and two critical-plane approaches are compared, based on their predicted fatigue lives and the experimentally measured ones
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
