Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Processing Residual Stresses on Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior of Structural Materials: Experimental Approaches and Microstructural Mechanisms

  • Published:
Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fatigue crack growth mechanisms of long cracks through fields with low and high residual stresses were investigated for a common structural aluminum alloy, 6061-T61. Bulk processing residual stresses were introduced in the material by quenching during heat treatment. Compact tension (CT) specimens were fatigue crack growth (FCG) tested at varying stress ratios to capture the closure and K max effects. The changes in fatigue crack growth mechanisms at the microstructural scale are correlated to closure, stress ratio, and plasticity, which are all dependent on residual stress. A dual-parameter ΔK–K max approach, which includes corrections for crack closure and residual stresses, is used uniquely to connect fatigue crack growth mechanisms at the microstructural scale with changes in crack growth rates at various stress ratios for low- and high-residual-stress conditions. The methods and tools proposed in this study can be used to optimize existing materials and processes as well as to develop new materials and processes for FCG limited structural applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

a :

crack length (measured from the center of specimen loading holes in the case of the compact tension (CT) specimen geometry)

B, W :

compact tension (CT) specimen thickness and width

C, m :

Paris regime fit parameters

C 0 :

compliance in the absence of closure, above the opening load of a crack

C i :

(initial) compliance prior to the initiation of a crack

C s :

(secant) compliance of one compliance load-displacement record, including crack closure

K :

nominal stress intensity

K app :

applied stress intensity considering the effects of residual stresses

K max :

nominal maximum stress intensity

K min :

nominal minimum stress intensity

K res :

stress intensity caused by residual stress

ΔK :

nominal stress intensity range

ΔK app :

applied stress intensity considering the effects of residual stresses

ΔK cl :

stress intensity range under which the crack is partially to fully closed

ΔK eff :

effective stress intensity range considering the effects of closure

n :

degree of plane stress

N :

number of cycles

r plastic :

radius of the plastic zone ahead of the crack tip

R :

nominal stress ratio

R app :

applied stress ratio considering the effects of residual stresses

R eff :

effective stress ratio considering the effects of closure

δ :

displacement

σ Y :

yield strength determined by 0.2 pct offset technique

References

  1. G. Glinka: Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics, vol. 677, C.W. Smith, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1979, pp. 198–214.

  2. A.P. Parker: Residual Stress Effects in Fatigue, vol. 776, H.S. Reemsnyder and J.F. Throop, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1982, pp. 13–31.

  3. D.V. Nelson: Residual Stress Effects in Fatigue, vol. 776, H.S. Reemsnyder and J.F. Throop, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1982, pp. 172–94.

  4. Y.C. Lam and K.S. Liam: Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., 1989, vol. 12, pp. 59-66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. M. Beghini and L. Bertini: Eng. Fract. Mech., 1990, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 379-87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. S.R. Daniewicz, J.A., Collins, and D.R. Houser: Int. J. Fatigue, 1994, vol. 16, pp. 123-33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. R.J. Bucci: Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics, vol. 743, R. Roberts, ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1981, pp. 28–47.

  8. D.L Chen, B. Weiss, and R. Stickler: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 1996, vol. 208A, pp. 181-87.

    Google Scholar 

  9. F. Bergner, G. Zouhar, and G. Tempus: Int. J. Fatigue, 2001, vol. 23, pp. 383-94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. L.P. Borrego, J.M. Costa, and F.V. Antunes: Eng. Fail. Anal., 2010, vol. 17, pp. 11-18.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. L.P. Borrego, J.M. Costa, and S. Silva: Int. J. Fatigue, 2004, vol. 26, pp. 1321-31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. D.H. Lee, J.H. Park, and S.W. Nam: Mater. Sci. Technol., 1999, vol. 15, pp. 450-55.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. R. Scheffel and K. Detert: Fracture Control of Engineering Structures, H.C. Van Elst and A. Bakker, eds., EMAS Publications, Warrington, UK, 1986, pp. 1511–21.

  14. R.H. Christensen: Appl. Mater. Res., 1963, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 207-10.

    Google Scholar 

  15. W. Elber: Eng. Fract. Mech., 1970, vol. 2, pp. 37-45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. J.C. Newman Jr.: J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 1995, vol. 117, pp. 433-39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. S. Suresh and R.O. Ritchie: Fatigue Crack Growth Threshold Concepts, D.L. Davidson and S. Suresh, eds., TMS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, 1984, pp. 227–61.

  18. J.K. Donald, G.H. Bray, and R.W. Bush: Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics, vol. 1332, T.L. Panontin and S.D. Sheppard, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1998, pp. 674–95.

  19. P.C. Paris, H. Tada, and J.K. Donald: Int. J. Fatigue, 1999, vol. 21, pp. S47-S57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. D.A. Lados, D. Apelian, and J.K. Donald: Int. J. Fatigue, 2007, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 687-94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. A.K. Vasudevan and K. Sadananda: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 1995, vol. 26A, pp. 1221-34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. ASTM Standard E647, 2005, “Standard Test Method for Measurement of Fatigue Crack Growth Rates,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005. DOI:10.1520/E0647-05, www.astm.org.

  23. D.A. Lados and D. Apelian: Eng. Fract. Mech., 2006, 73, vol. 4, pp. 435–55.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the consortium members of the Integrative Materials Design Center at Worcester Polytechnic Institute for their support and insightful contributions to this work. Special thanks are given to Dr. Paul Crepeau of General Motors and Dr. Weizhou Li of Caterpillar.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332, USA

    Christopher J. Lammi (Graduate Research Assistant)

  2. Department of Material Science and Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, 01609, USA

    Diana A. Lados (Assistant Professor)

Authors
  1. Christopher J. Lammi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diana A. Lados
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. Lammi.

Additional information

Manuscript Submitted November 21, 2010.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lammi, C.J., Lados, D.A. Effects of Processing Residual Stresses on Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior of Structural Materials: Experimental Approaches and Microstructural Mechanisms. Metall Mater Trans A 43, 87–107 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-011-0879-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-011-0879-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation