On the difference of fatigue strengths from rotating bending, four-point bending, and cantilever bending tests

Abstract

Comparisons of piping fatigue data demonstrate that the fatigue strength from rotating bending tests is lower than that from cantilever and four-point bending tests, especially in the low-cycle fatigue life range. The lower strength from the rotating bending test is generally believed to result from the fact that in this test all the points on the piping surface are subjected to the maximum stress range. Consequently, the weakest point in the specimen always initiates and causes failure. On the contrary, in cantilever and four-point bending tests, the maximum stress range occurs only at the top and bottom extreme fibers, which may not contain the weakest point in the specimen. Hence, the pipes in rotating bending tests usually fail earlier in comparison with the other two tests. Finite element analyses for the three tests revealed another and more compelling reason for the lower fatigue strength from the rotating bending test. The results demonstrated that, for the same prescribed bending moment range, the inelastic strain range in rotating bending is higher than the ranges in four-point and cantilever bending tests. Experimental data also demonstrate a similar trend. The new observation suggests that fatigue data from these three tests should be analyzed or compared in terms of strain range, instead of nominal stress range.