Fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by high-frequency mechanical impact: proposed fatigue assessment guidelines

Abstract

In the past decade, high-frequency mechanical impact (HFMI) has significantly developed as a reliable, effective, and user-friendly method for post-weld fatigue strength improvement technique for welded structures. During this time, period 46 documents on HFMI technology or fatigue improvements have been presented within Commission XIII of the International Institute of Welding. This paper presents one possible approach to fatigue assessment for HFMI-improved joints. Stress analysis methods based on nominal stress, structural hot spot stress, and effective notch stress are all discussed. The document considered the observed extra benefit that has been experimentally observed for HFMI-treated high-strength steels. Some observations and proposals on the effect of loading conditions like high mean stress fatigue cycles, variable amplitude loading, and large amplitude/low cycle fatigue cycles are given. Special considerations for low stress concentration details are also given. Several fatigue assessment examples are provided in an appendix. A companion paper has also been prepared concerning HFMI equipment, proper procedures, safety, training, quality control measures, and documentation has also been prepared. It is hoped that these guidelines will provide stimulus to researchers working in the field to test and constructively criticize the proposals made with the goal of developing international guidelines relevant to a variety of HFMI technologies and applicable to many industrial sectors. The proposal can also be used as a means of verifying the effectiveness of new equipment as it comes to the market.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Abbreviations

D :

Damage sum for variable amplitude loading

f y :

Yield strength

FAT:

IIW fatigue class, i.e., the nominal stress range in megapascals corresponding to 95 % survival probability at 2 × 106 cycles to failure (a discrete variable with 10–15 % increase in stress between steps)

f(t):

IIW thickness correction factor

k R :

Strength reduction factor for stress ratio, 1 ≥ k R  > 0

K :

Stress concentration

m :

Slope of the S–N line 1 × 104 ≤ N < 1 × 107 cycles

m’:

Slope of the S–N line 1 × 107 cycles ≤ N

L :

Characteristic length used to compute f(t)

N :

Fatigue cycles

R :

Stress ratio

t :

Plate thickness

X N :

Improvement factor in life for HFMI treated welds at Δσ equal to the FAT class of the as-welded joint: N f = X N  × 2 × 106

\( \rho \) :

Weld toe radius

σ :

Stress

Δ\( \sigma \) :

Stress range

eff :

Effective (length)

eq :

Equivalent (stress range)

f :

Failure (cycles) or fictitious (weld toe radius)

k :

Corresponding to the knee point of the S–N curve

S :

Structural hot spot stress

max :

Maximum value: during one cycle for constant amplitude loading or during one repetition of the spectrum for variable amplitude loading

min :

Minimum allowable

nom :

Nominal

w :

Value computed using the effective notch method

References

  1. 1.

    Hobbacher A (2009) IIW recommendations for fatigue design of welded joints and components. WRC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Niemi E, Fricke W, Maddox S (2006) Fatigue analysis of welded joints—designer’s guide to the structural hot-spot stress approach. Woodhead, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Fricke W (2012) IIW recommendations for the fatigue assessment of welded structures by notch stress analysis. Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Haagensen PJ, Maddox SJ (2013) IIW recommendations on post weld fatigue life improvement of steel and aluminium structures. Woodhead Publishing Ltd., Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Statnikov ES, Shevtsov UM, Kulikov VF (1977) Ultrasonic impact tool for welds strengthening and reduction of residual stresses, Publications Scientific Works: Metallurgy, SEVMASH, USSR, No. 92, p. 27–29, (in Russian)

  6. 6.

    Kudryavtsev YF, Trufyakov VI, Mikheev PP, Statnikov EF, Burenko AG, Dobykina EK (1994) Increasing the fatigue strength of welded joints in cyclic compression. International Institute of Welding, Paris, Document XIII-1596-94

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Pedersen M, Mouritsen OØ, Hansen M, Andersen JG, Wenderby J (2009) Comparison of post weld treatment of high strength steel welded joints in medium cycle fatigue. Weld World 54:208–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Applied ultrasonics. In: http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/

  9. 9.

    Integrity Testing Laboratory Inc. In: http://itlinc.com/

  10. 10.

    Lets global. In: http://www.lets-global.com/

  11. 11.

    Zhao X, Wang D, Huo L (2011) Analysis of the S–N curves of welded joints enhanced by ultrasonic peening treatment. Mater Des 32:88–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Pfeifer. In: http://www.pfeifer.de/

  13. 13.

    Pitec. In: http://www.pitec-gmbh.com/

  14. 14.

    Sonats. In: http://www.sonats-et.com/

  15. 15.

    Bousseau M, Millot T (2006) Fatigue life improvement of welded structures by UNP compared to TIG dressing. International Institute of Welding, Paris, Document XIII-2125-06

    Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Marquis GB, Barsoum Z (2013) Fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by HFMI: proposed procedures and quality assurance guidelines, welding in the world. doi:10.1007/s40194-013-0077-8

  17. 17.

    Roy S, Fisher JW (2006) Modified AASHTO design SN curves for post-weld treated welded details. Bridg Struct 2:207–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Roy S (2006) Experimental and analytical evaluation of enhancement in fatigue resistance of welded details subjected to post-weld ultrasonic impact treatment. Lehigh University, Doctoral dissertations

  19. 19.

    American Bureau of Shipping: Commentary on the guide for the fatigue assessment of offshore structures. (January 2004–updated 2010)

  20. 20.

    Yildirim H, Marquis G (2012) Overview of fatigue data for high frequency treated welded joints, Welding in the World, Issue 7/8

  21. 21.

    Sonsino CM (2007) Course of SN-curves especially in the high-cycle fatigue regime with regard to component design and safety. Int J Fatigue 29(12):2246–2258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Leitner M, Stoschka M, Schörghuber M, Eichlseder W (2012) Contribution to the fatigue enhancement of thin-walled, high-strength steel joints by high frequency mechanical impact treatment. International Institute of Welding, Paris, IIW Document XIII-2416-12

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Maddox SJ (2003) IIW Portvin lecture: key developments in the fatigue design of welded constructions., IIW Annual Assembly, (2003)

  24. 24.

    Bignonnet A (1987) Improving the fatigue strength of welded steel structures. Steel in marine structures. In: Noordhoek C, de Back J (eds) Developments in marine technology, Proc. 3rd Intl ECSC Offshore Conference. Elsevier Science Publishers, Delft, pp 99–118

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Haagensen P (2007) State of the art and guidelines for improved high strength steel welds, Proc. Intl Symp. on Integrated Design and Manufacturing of Welded Structures, 13–14 March , Eskilstuna, Sweden

  26. 26.

    Weich I (2008) Fatigue behaviour of mechanical post weld treated welds depending on the edge layer condition (Ermüdungsverhalten mechanisch nachbehandelter Schweißverbindungen in Abhängigkeit des Randschichtzustands). Technischen Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina, Doctorate Thesis

  27. 27.

    Yildirim HC, Marquis GB (2012) Fatigue strength improvement factors for high strength steel welded joints treated by high frequency mechanical impact. Int J Fatigue 44:168–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sperle O (2008) Influence of parent metal strength on the fatigue strength of parent material with machined and thermally cut edges. Weld World Issue 7(8):79–92

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Weich I, Ummenhofer T, Nitschke-Pagel Th, Dilger K, Eslami H(2009) Fatigue behaviour of welded high strength steels after high frequency mechanical postweld treatments, Welding World 53(11/12):R322-R332

  30. 30.

    REFRESH-Extension of the fatigue life of existing and new welded steel structures, FOSTA-Research Association for Steel Applications, Research Projects P 702, Verlag und Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH Dusseldorf, 2011

  31. 31.

    Weidner P, Weich I, Ummenhofer T, High frequency hammer peening of LCF-stressed ultra-high strength steels, International Institute of Welding, Paris, IIW Document XIII-2341-10

  32. 32.

    Niemi E (1997) Random loading behavior of welded components, in Proc. of the IIW International Conference on Performance of Dynamically Loaded Welded Structures. SJ Maddox and M. Prager (eds), July 14–15, San Francisco, Welding Research Council, New York

  33. 33.

    Yildirim H, Marquis G (2013) A round robin study of high frequency mechanical impact treated welded joints subjected to variable amplitude loading. Weld World 57(3):437–447

    Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Marquis G (1996) Long-life spectrum fatigue of carbon and stainless steel welds. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 19:739–753

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Sonsino CM (2009) Effect of residual stresses on the fatigue behavior of welded joints depending on loading conditions and weld geometry. Int J Fatigue 31:88–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Sonsino CM (2007) Fatigue testing under variable amplitude loading. Int J Fatigue 29:1080–1089

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Marquis G (2011) Chapter 8: variable amplitude loading. In: Fracture and fatigue of welded joints and structures. K. A. MacDonald (ed.), Woodhead Publishing Ltd, Cambridge, 31 p

  38. 38.

    Marquis G (2010) Failure modes and fatigue strength of improved HSS welds. Eng Fract Mech 77(11):2051–2062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Yildirim HC, Marquis GB, Barsoum Z (2013) Fatigue assessment of high frequency mechanical impact (HFMI) improved fillet welds by local approaches. Int J Fatigue 52:57–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Haibach E (1970) Modified linear damage accumulation hypothesis considering the decline of the fatigue limit due to progressive damage, Laboratorium fur Betriebsfestigkeit, TM 50/70. Darmstadt, Germany (in German)

    Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Roy S, Fisher W, Yen T (2003) Fatigue resistance of welded details enhanced by ultrasonic impact treatment (UIT). Int J Fatigue 25:1239–1247

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Mori T, Shimanuki H, Tanaka M (2012) Effect of UIT on fatigue strength of web-gusset welded joints considering service condition of steel structures. Weld World 56(9/10):141–149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Maddox SJ, Dore MJ, Smith SD (2010) Investigation of ultrasonic peening for upgrading a welded steel structure. International Institute of Welding, Paris, IIW Doc. XII-2326-10

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Support for this work has been partially provided by the LIGHT research program of the Finnish Metals and Engineering Competence Cluster (FIMECC), the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (TEKES), and the European Union’s Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) Research Program under grant agreement n° RFSR-CT-2010-00032: "Improving the fatigue life of high-strength steel welded structures by post-weld treatments and specific filler material."

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary B. Marquis.

Additional information

Doc. IIW-2393, recommended for publication by Commission XIII “Fatigue of Welded Components and Structures.”

Appendices

Appendix I: Characteristic nominal stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels

Fig. I-1
figure13

Characteristic nominal stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels, 355 MPa < f y ≤ 550 MPa for R ≤ 0.15. The value in parenthesis represents the FAT class of the joint in the as-welded state according to Hobbacher [1]

Fig. I-2
figure14

Characteristic nominal stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels, 550 MPa < f y ≤ 750 MPa for R ≤ 0.15. The value in parenthesis represents the FAT class of the joint in the as-welded state according to Hobbacher [1]

Fig. I-3
figure15

Characteristic nominal stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels, 950 MPa < f y for R ≤ 0.15. The value in parenthesis represents the FAT class of the joint in the as-welded state according to Hobbacher [1]

Appendix II: Examples

Example 1: Nominal stress design for a detail subjected to high R ratio

Example

Consider the case of a welded detail which in the as-welded condition corresponds to FAT 63. The joint is fabricated from f y = 960 MPa steel and will be subjected to R = 0.5 loading.

Question

What is the suitable characteristic line for design?

Solution

Based on Fig. 7, an increase of eight fatigue classes can be claimed for R ≤ 0.15. The resulting S–N curve FAT 160 (63) is shown in Appendix I as Fig. I-3. Based on Table 3, the S–N curve for R = 0.5 is reduced by three fatigue classes with respect to R ≤ 0.15 loading so the characteristic curve is considered to represent five FAT class improvement, i.e., FAT 112 (63). This is shown in Fig. II-1. With respect to Fig. 9, the limitation on the maximum stress range that can be applied to a weld in order to claim benefit from HFMI treatment in this example is Δσ = 384 MPa. This value would correspond to N ≈ 4,220 cycles. The characteristic line shown in Fig. II-1 is therefore considered to be valid over the entire life range shown.

Fig. II-1
figure16

Example of the characteristic nominal stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels f y = 960 MPa for R ≤ 0.5. The as-welded joint is FAT 63; for the material strength, there are +8 classes while for the stated R ratio there are −3 classes resulting in a net increase of five classes, i.e., FAT 112

Example 2: Nominal stress design for a detail subjected to variable amplitude loading

Example

Consider the case of a longitudinal welded attachment from steel with f y = 700 MPa, subject to variable amplitude loading. The target fatigue life is 1 × 107 cycles. Each load cycle has R = 0 and Δσ eq = 0.20 × Δσ max based on Eq. 3.

Question

Will HFMI be an effective improvement technology for this design case?

Solution

In the as-welded condition, a typical longitudinal attachment is FAT 71. According to Fig. 7, a detail fabricated from f y = 700 MPa shows six fatigue class improvement due to HFMI. The resulting characteristic S–N curve is FAT 140 (71); see Appendix I Fig. I-2.

This characteristic curve intersects 1 × 107 cycles at Δσ eq = 102 MPa. Based on the design load spectrum, the maximum stress which occurs is 102/0.20 = 510 MPa. According to Fig. 9, the maximum allowable stress range for f y = 700 MPa at R = 0 is 560 MPa. Thus, HFMI is expected to be fully effective for this component.

For comparison purposes, the characteristic fatigue life for a FAT 71 welded joint subjected to Δσ eq = 102 MPa would have a characteristic fatigue life of N f = 675,000 cycles. Therefore, for this design case, HFMI is computed to result in a fatigue life increase of 14.8×. See Fig. II-2.

Example 3: structural hot spot based assessment for a detail subjected to variable amplitude loading

Example

Consider an HFMI-treated non-load-carrying structural detail which is subjected to variable amplitude loading for which the cycle range distribution is approximately log-linear. Assume that Δσ eq = 0.387 × Δσ max when computed according to Eq. 3 with D = 0.5. Each cycle has R = −1. The structure is fabricated from S960 steel. The computed structural stress concentration is K s  = 1.21.

Task

Construct the characteristic line and compare it to experimental results.

Table II-1 Experimental data for a S960 steel weld treated by HFMI

Solution

As shown in Fig. 10 or Tables 4 and 6, a non-load-carrying detail fabricated from S960 (f y = 960 MPa) steel treated by HFMI has a resulting structural hot spot S–N characteristic curve of FAT 250 with the requirement that K s,min = 1.4. Because the computed K s  < K s,min, K s,min is used to compute Δσ s,eq. The loading is R = −1 so Δσ s,eq = (0.387 × 2) × K s,min × σ max. Results are shown in Fig. II-2. From the data table, it can be seen that the maximum nominal stress range for the first two experimental points exceed the limiting curves in Fig. 9. Therefore, the FAT 250 line is not necessarily expected to be conservative with these two points since the beneficial residual stresses may relax out. A conservative approach would be to assume that joints with such high nominal stresses behave according to the as-welded line. Alternatively, the effective notch method with a FAT 225 S–N curve could be using ρ f  = ρ + 1 mm with ρ as the actual HFMI groove radius. As mentioned in “Section 4,” this is a topic requiring further study. For comparison purposes, Fig. II-2 also shows the experimental data with Δσ s,eq computed using K s (rather than K s,min) and D = 1.0 in Eq. 3 instead of the recommended D = 0.5.

Fig. II-2
figure17

Example of the characteristic effective notch stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high strength steels f y = 960 MPa for R ≤ 0.15

Example 4: effective notch stress-based assessment for a detail subjected to variable amplitude loading

Example

Consider an HFMI-treated structural detail which is subjected to variable amplitude loading for which the cycle range distribution is approximately Gaussian. Assume that Δσ eq = 0.504 × Δσ max when computed according to Eq. 3 with D = 0.5. Each cycle has R = −1. The structure is fabricated from S700 steel.

Question

Construct the characteristic line and compare with experimental results.

Table II-2 Experimental data for a S700 steel weld treated by HFMI

Solution

As shown in Fig. 12 or Table 5, a detail fabricated from S700 (f y = 700 MPa) steel treated by HFMI has a resulting effective notch method characteristic S–N curve of FAT 400. Because the loading is R = −1, Δσ w, eq = (0.504 × 2) × σ w, max. If it is assumed that K s  = 1.22 and K w  = 2.08, the maximum nominal stress range for all of the experimental points would be below the limiting curves in Fig. 9. Therefore, the FAT 400 is expected to be conservative with respect to 95 % of all of the experimental data. Results are shown in Fig. II-3. It is clear that the experimental data are conservative with respect to the characteristic line. For comparison purposes, Fig. II-3 also shows the experimental data with Δσ w,eq computed using D = 1.0 in Eq. 3 instead of the recommended D = 0.5.

Fig. II-3
figure18

Example of the characteristic effective notch stress S–N curves for HFMI-improved welded joints for high-strength steels f y = 700 MPa for R ≤ 0.15

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marquis, G.B., Mikkola, E., Yildirim, H.C. et al. Fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by high-frequency mechanical impact: proposed fatigue assessment guidelines. Weld World 57, 803–822 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-013-0075-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • High-frequency mechanical impact (HFMI)
  • Weld toe improvement
  • Fatigue improvement
  • High-strength steels
  • Fatigue design
  • Hot spot stress
  • Effective notch stress