• Failure resulting from fluctuating

load

Chapter 6
Fluctuating load?
What is special about it?
33
M S Dasgupta BITS Pilani
 Fluctuating / Variable load

• Variable loading results when the applied

load or the induced stress on a component is
not constant but changes with time
• In reality most mechanical components
experience variable loading due to
-Change in the magnitude of applied load
-Change in direction of load application
-Change in point of load application

34
 Stress variation: Sinusoidal

 min  minimum stress

 max  maximum stress
 r  range of stress   max   min
 max   min
 m  midrange or mean stress 
2
 max   min
 a  amplitude or variabl e stress 
2
 Idealized types of cyclic loading:

Completely Reversed
Sinosoidal: mean stress is zero;
equal reversals on both sides; useful
in conducting experiments

Repeated stress: minimum stress

is zero; mean stress equal to half of
the range stress

Fluctuating stress: maximum,

minimum and mean stress are all
non-zero and arbitrary
Result of Fluctuating stress
 Fatigue
• Fatigue is a phenomenon associated with
variable loading or more precisely to cyclic
stressing or straining of a material
• 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 result in cracks or complete
fracture after a sufficient number of
fluctuations. M S Dasgupta BITS Pilani 38
 Fatigue failure in Metals
Crack initiation, propagation and rupture in a shaft subjected to repeated bending

Final rupture occurs

over a limited area,
characterizing a very
small load required
to cause it

Beach marks
showing the nature
of crack propagation

Crack initiation at
the outer surface 39
 Fatigue Life Prediction
predict the failure in number of cycles N to failure for a specific type of
loading
Low cyclefatigue(LCF): 1  N  103 ; High cyclefatigue(HCF): N  103
• Stress life methods
– Based on stress levels only
– Least accurate of the three, particularly for LCF
– It is the most traditional because easiest to implement for a wide range of
applications
– Has ample supporting data
– Represents high cycle fatigue adequately
• Strain life methods
– Involves more detailed analysis of plastic deformation at localized regions
– Good for LCF
– Some uncertainties may exist in results because several idealizations get
compounded
– Hence normally not used in regular (special occasions)
• Linear elastic fracture mechanics methods (LEFM)
– Assumes that crack is already present and detected
– The crack location is then employed to predict crack growth and sudden rupture with
respect to the stress nature and intensity
40
 S-N Diagram

The S-N Diagram for steel (UNS G41300), normalized, Sut=812 MPa.

R. R. Moore high-
speed rotating
beam machine.

S’e

Endurance Limit,
It is the stress at which the
component can sustain
Non-Ferrous materials tested up to 5*108 cycles infinite number of cycles
41
Sut – S’e relation

 0 .5 S ut for S ut  1460 MPa

S e'  
 700 MPa for S ut  1460 MPa
S e'  Endurance limit obtained in reverse bending
S e  Endurance limit in the actual loading conditions

42
Se S’e relation

S e  k a kb k c k d k e S '
e

k a  surface condition modificati on factor

kb  size modificati on factor
kc  load modificati on factor
k d  temperature modificati on factor
ke  reliability factor
k f  miscellaneous effects modificati on factor

43
 Surface cond. Mod. factor (ka)
The surface modification factor depends on the quality of the
finish of the actual part surface and on the tensile strength of
the part material.
k a  aSut b

Table 6.2
 Size modification factor, kb

For rotating circular bars in bending and torsion only :

d / 7.620.107  1.24d 0.107 if 2.79  d  51 mm
kb  
 0.859  0.000837d if 51  d  254 mm

For axial loading no size effect, kb  1.

What happens when bars are not rotating but

say under bending.
Or non-circular bars like square, or I section?
Concept of Equivalent Diameter de
Kb for non-rotating shapes

Effective dimension “de”

obtained by equating the
volume of material stressed
at and above 95 percent of
the maximum stress to the
same volume in the
rotating-beam specimen
 Load modification factor, kc

 1, bending

k c   0 . 85 , axial
 0 . 59 , torsion


Actually the kc is sensitive

to Sut of the material. Tables
6-11 to 6-14 (page no. 333)
in Text Book give the
details. The above values
are representative.
 Temperature modifying factor, kd

Brittle fracture is a strong possibility when

operating temp is below RT
At temp. higher than RT, yielding should be
investigated first because the yield strength drops
off rapidly with temperature.
 Creep at elevated temperature
 Temperature modifying factor, kd

For carbon and alloy steels experimental result

expressed as a fourth-order polynomial curve fit
to the data underlying
k d  0.975  0.432103 TF  0.115105 TF2  0.104108 TF3  0.5951012 TF4
where
70  TF  1000o F

Or interpolate from a chart / table of

operating temp. vs tensile
Reliability factor, ke

ke  1 0.08 z a
Based on standard
deviation of Endurance
strength data
Miscellaneous effects factor, kf

Accounts for
– Residual stress
– Coating failure
– Frettage corrosion material of mating part.
– Synergic effect of corrosion and temperature
where is Se is function of frequency of loading.
 Actual / Fatigue stress concentration factor, Kf

Kf is a reduced value of Kt and it is also called fatigue

strength reduction factor
maximum stress in notched specimen
Kf 
stress in notch - free specimen

Kf 1 qKt 1 or Kfs 1 qshearKts 1

q  notch sensitivity value(from Fig. 6 - 20 & 6 - 21)
Kt  Theoretical stress concentration factor (geometricfactor)

Stress-concentration factors for a variety of geometries under

different loading conditions can be found in appendix, Table A–15
52
Notch Sensitivity

53
 Estimation of Kf

Kf = 1+q(Kt -1).
•When q=0, the material has no sensitivity to notches, Kf=1.
•When q=1, or when notch radius is large for which q is
almost equal to 1, the material has full notch sensitivity, and
Kf = Kt.
•For all grades of cast iron, use q=0.20.
•Use the different graphs to obtain q for bending/axial and
torsional loading.
•Whenever the graphs do not give values of q for certain
combinations of data, use either Neuber equation or
Heywood equation.
54
 Estimation of Kf
Use the Neuber equation when the notch is circular/cylindrical.
1
q and K f  1  q K t  1
a
1
r

100 psi = 0.689 MPa

where a is Neuber constant and is a material constant
a  f ( S ut ), i.e function of ultimate strength.
r  notch radius
For steel, with Sut in kpsi, the Neuber constant can be
approximated by a third-order polynomial fit of data as

Bending or axial : a  0.246  3.08(10 3 ) Sut  1.51(10 5 ) Sut2  2.67(10 8 ) Sut3

Torsion : a  0.19  2.51(10 3 ) Sut  1.35(10 5 ) Sut2  2.67(10 8 ) Sut3
55
 Estimation of Kf

Use Heywood equation when the notch is NOT circular/cylindrical but is a

tranverse hole or shoulder or groove.
Kt
K 
2 K t  1 
f
a
1
Kt r
where
a values are given in the Table 6 - 15; page 335
r= hole/ shoulder/groove size

56
Static + dynamic load present simultaneously

57
 Goodman Method
Predictor of failure in ductile materials
experiencing fluctuating stress
a
Sn’ = endurance strength
a = alternating stress Yield Line (Langer line)
m = mean stress Sy
FATIGUE
Sn’
FAILURE REGION

Goodman Line
NO FATIGUE a m
 1
FAILURE REGION Sn S u

m
-Sy 0 Sy Su 58
 Goodman Diagram
Safe Stress Line a Sn’ =endurance strength
a = alternating stress
a m 1 m = mean stress
  Yield Line
S n S u N Sy
FATIGUE
Sn’
FAILURE REGION

Goodman Line
Sn’/N a m
 1
Sn S u
SAFE ZONE
m
-Sy 0 Su/N Sy Su
Safe Stress Line 59
Design under cyclic loading

2
a  Sm 
    1
Se  Sut 
a m 1
 
Se S yt nf

Sa Sm
 1
Sa Sm Se Sut
 1
Se S yt
2 2
 Sa   Sm 
      1
 
 Se   S yt 

60
 Different fatigue failure models
a m 1
   Soderberg line
Se S yt nf
a m 1
   Modified Goodman line
Se S ut nf
2
a   1
 n f  m    Gerber line
Se  S ut  nf
2 2 2
a  m   1 
         ASME Elliptic line
   
 S e   S yt   n f 
a m 1
   Langer line (only for checking
S yt S yt n y
for static yielding)
61
Important Intersections in First Quadrant

Modified Goodman and

Langer Failure Criteria

M S Dasgupta BITS Pilani 62

Important Intersections in First Quadrant

Gerber and Langer

Failure Criteria

63
Important Intersections in First Quadrant

ASME-Elliptic and Langer

Failure Criteria

64
 Variable loading
Determine SF 1.5 mm Radius

42 mm DIA 30 mm
DIA
Titanium alloy

F varies from 20 to 30.3 kN

+
MAX = 30.3
30.3  20
alt   5.15 kN
FORCE

2
30.3  20
MIN = 20 mean   25.15 kN
2
- TIME 65
 Example: continued.
• Find the mean stress:
25,150 N
m   35.6 MPa

(30 mm )2
4
• Find the alternating stress:
5,150 N
a   7.3 MPa

(30 mm )2
4
• Stress concentration from Chart: Table:A-15 Pg. 1028

D 42 mm r 1.5 mm
  1.4;   .05  K t  2.3
d 30 mm d 30 mm
66
 Example: continued.
• Se data not available for titanium so we will guess!
Assume Se = 0.5Su
• TRY Ti-0.2 Pd, Su = 340 MPa, Se = 170 MPa
Table A-24 pg 1047
a m 1
 
Kt S e S u N
2.3(7.3 MPa) 35.6 MPa 1
   .228
1.(.8)(170 MPa) 340 MPa N
kc Axial 1
kb =1
Reliability 50% N  4.386
.248
4.386 is good, need further information on Se for titanium. 67
 Find a suitable steel for N = 3 & 90% reliable.

3 mm Radius

50 mm DIA
30 mm
DIA

T varies from 848 N-m to 1272 N-m

+
MAX = 1272 N-m
1272  848
TORQUE

alt   212 N  m
2
1272  848
MIN = 848 N-m mean   1060 N  m
2
- TIME 68
T = 1060 ± 212 N-m
 Example: continued.
• Stress concentration from pg. 1028 Fig A-15-8
D 50 mm r 3 mm
  1.667;   .1  K t  1.38
d 30 mm d 30 mm

• Find the mean shear stress:

Tm 1060 N  m(1000 mm )
m   m
 200 MPa
Zp 
(30 mm )3
16

• Find the alternating shear stress:

Ta 212000 N  mm
a   3
 40 MPa
Zp 5301 mm 69
 Example: continued.

• So,  = 200 ± 40 MPa. Guess a material.

TRY: AISI 1040 Q&T 205°C Pg1041 Table A-21

Su = 779 MPa, Sy = 593 MPa, %E = 19%

Ductile

• Verify that max  Sys: Pure shear loading

max = 200 + 40 = 240 MPa  Sys  600/2 = 300MPa
So this variety is a possibility

• Find the ultimate shear stress:

Sus = .75Su = .75(779 MPa)  584 MPa

70
 Example: continued.
• Sse  295 MPa
• Assume machined surface (Fig. 5-8)

• Find actual endurance strength:

S’se = kakbkckdkekfSe
= (0.77)(.86)(.59)(.897) 295MPa = 103.4MPa
ka

kb Size {1.24d-0.107
90% Reliability
Average kc

71
Example: continued.
a m 1
• Goodman:   (Eqn. 5-28)
S sn S su N
1.38(40 MPa) 200 MPa 1
   .876
103.4 MPa 584 MPa N
1
N  1.14
No Good!!! We wanted N  3
. 876
Need a material with Su about 3 times bigger than this
guess or/and a better surface finish on the part, better
notch sensitivity etc.
72