Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering

, Volume 27, Issue 6, pp 1178–1185 | Cite as

Fatigue life prediction under service load considering strengthening effect of loads below fatigue limit

Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Lightweight design requires an accurate life prediction for structures and components under service loading histories. However, predicted life with the existing methods seems too conservative in some cases, leading to a heavy structure. Because these methods are established on the basis that load cycles would only cause fatigue damage, ignore the strengthening effect of loads. Based on Palmgren-Miner Rule (PMR), this paper introduces a new method for fatigue life prediction under service loadings by taking into account the strengthening effect of loads below the fatigue limit. In this method, the service loadings are classified into three categories: damaging load, strengthening load and none-effect load, and the process for fatigue life prediction is divided into two stages: stage I and stage II, according to the best strengthening number of cycles. During stage I, fatigue damage is calculated considering both the strengthening and damaging effect of load cycles. While during stage II, only the damaging effect is considered. To validate this method, fatigue lives of automobile half shaft and torsion beam rear axle are calculated based on the new method and traditional methods, such as PMR and Modified Miner Rule (MMR), and fatigue tests of the two components are conducted under service loading histories. The tests results show that the percentage errors of the predicted life with the new method to mean life of tests for the two components are −3.78% and −1.76% separately, much lesser than that with PMR and MMR. By considering the strengthening effect of loads below the fatigue limit, the new method can significantly improve the accuracy for fatigue life prediction. Thus lightweight design can be fully realized in the design stage.

Keywords

fatigue life fatigue damage service loading strengthening effect load below the fatigue limit 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    LEE Y L, PAN J, HATHAWAY R, et al. Fatigue testing and analysis: theory and practice[M]. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    SCHUTZ W. A history of fatigue[J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 1996, 54(2): 263–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    WIRSCHING P H, PAEZ T L, ORTIZ K. Random vibrations: theory and practice[M]. New York: Courier Dover Publications, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    LEE Y L, LU M W, SEGAR R C, et al. Reliability-based cumulative fatigue damage assessment in crack initiation[J]. International Journal of Materials and Product Technology, 1999, 14(1): 1–16.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    FRICKE W. Fatigue analysis of welded joints: state of development[J]. Marine Structures, 2003, 16(3): 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    SCHIJVE J. Fatigue of structures and materials[M]. New York: Springer, 2008.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    HAIBACH E. Modified linear damage accumulation hypothesis accounting for a decreasing fatigue strength during increasing fatigue damage[R]. Fraunhofer Institute for Structural Durability-LBF, Darmstadt, 1970.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    SCHUTZ W. The prediction of fatigue life in the crack initiation and propagation stages-a state of the art survey[J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 1979, 11(2): 405–421.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    HOBBACHER A. Recommendations for fatigue design of welded joints and components[M]. New York: Welding Research Council, 2009.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    STANZL S E, TSCHEGG E K, MAYER H. Lifetime measurements for random loading in the very high cycle fatigue range[J]. International Journal of Fatigue, 1986, 8(4): 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    SONSINO C M, FRICKE W, DE BRUYNE F, et al. Notch stress concepts for the fatigue assessment of welded joints-background and applications[J]. International Journal of Fatigue, 2012, 34(1): 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    LIN K Y, HWANG J R, CHANG J M. Accelerated durability assessment of motorcycle components in real-time simulation testing[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 2010, 224(2): 245–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    FRICKE W, KAHL A. Comparison of different structural stress approaches for fatigue assessment of welded ship structures[J]. Marine Structures, 2005, 18(7): 473–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    XU Gang, ZHOU Hong, CHEN Donghua. Virtual test rig-based study on fatigue life prediction[J]. Journal of Tong Ji University (Natural Science), 2009, 37(1): 97–100. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    SINCLAIR G M. An investigation of the coaxing effect in fatigue of metals[R]. Urbana: Illinois University, 1952.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    LAWNICKI J J, CUTLER V C. Effect of under stressing and coaxing on the fatigue limit of a transverse butt-welded joint[J]. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 1981, 9(1): 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    KAWAMOTO M, NAKAGAWA T, FUJIWARA M. Fatigue strength and hardness of mild steel subjected to the repeated pre-understressing[J]. Journal of the Japan Society for Testing Materials, 1961, 10(91): 294–303. (in Japanese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    IKAI Y, NAKAJIMA M, NAKAGAWA T. Strain aging and fatigue limit on high purity iron[J]. Journal of the Japan Society for Testing Materials, 1982, 31(346): 644–649. (in Japanese)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    WANG Z, CHEN Z W. Influence of small load cycle omission on fatigue damage accumulation[C]//Proceedings of the 7th International Fatigue Congress (Fatigue’ 99), Beijing, China, June 8–12, 1999. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 1999, 2: 1113–1118.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    ZHENG Songlin. Studying the effect of low amplitude loading on fatigue life of truck front axle[J]. Journal of Mechanical Strength, 2002, 24(4): 547–549. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    LU Xi, ZHENG Songlin. Strengthening and damaging under low-amplitude loads below the fatigue limit[J]. International Journal of Fatigue, 2009, 31: 341–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    ZHENG Songlin, YUAN Feng, FENG Jinzhi, et al. Dual-effect experiment study on strengthening and damaging under low amplitude load[J]. Journal of Mechanical Strength, 2009, 31(6): 1007–1011. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    ZHENG Songlin, LU Xi. Microscopic mechanism of strengthening under low-amplitude loads below the fatigue limit[J]. Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, 2012, 21(7): 1526–1533.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    DOWNING S D, SOCIE D F. Simple rainflow counting algorithms[J]. International Journal of Fatigue, 1982, 4(1): 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    SONSINO C M. Fatigue testing under variable amplitude loading[J]. International Journal of Fatigue, 2007, 29(6): 1080–1089.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Chinese Mechanical Engineering Society and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina
  2. 2.College of Automobile EngineeringShanghai University of Engineering ScienceShanghaiChina
  3. 3.Machinery Industry Key Laboratory for Mechanical Strength & Reliability Evaluation of Auto Chassis ComponentsUniversity of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations