FATIGUE AND FRACTURE MECHANICS

S.G.Ghalme
1
, S.G.Thorat
2
, R.N.Zaware
3
1
Asstt.Prof. Dept.of Mechanical En.P.D.!.!.P.Collee of Enineerin" A#Naar.
$"%
&ect'rer" Dept.of Mechanical En.P.D.!.!.P.Collee of Enineerin" A#Naar.
E()ail*sachinhal)e+hot)ail.co)
Abstract
Application of methods of fracture mechanics to the prediction of fatigue life assumes
the existence of a single flaw of critical size the slow propagation of which under repeated
cyclic loading, represents the relevant mechanism that governs fatigue until the flaw has grown
to unstable size.
This paper discusses the different aspects of the fatigue process in relation to the basic
concepts of fracture mechanism. The paper covers the fatigue damage mechanism like
initiation of crack, crack propagation and final fracture. n order to evaluate the damage of
component the cumulative fatigue damage model with nonlinear and linear damage is
expressed. !odels are proposed to predict the fatigue crack growth "#$%& process using crack
initiation properties and critical damage concept. The crack is modeled as a sharp notch with a
very small but finite tip radius, using a strain concentration rule. n this way, the damage caused
by each load cycle and the effects of residual stresses can be calculated at each element
ahead of crack tip.
Keywords: fati'e" fract're )echanis)" fati'e ,a)ae" fati'e crac- ro.th.
1. Introduction
In many application the components are subjected the forces which are not static but vary
in magnitude with respect to time. The stresses induced due to such forces are called as
fluctuating stresses. It is observed that 80 of failures of mechanical components are due to
fatigue from fluctuating stresses. It has been observed that materials fail under fluctuating
stresses at a stress magnitude which is lower than the ultimate tensile strength of the material.
!ometimes the magnitude is even lower than the yield strength. It has been found that the
magnitude of the stress causing fatigue failure decreases as the number of stress cycle increases.
This phenomenon of decreased resistance of the materials to fluctuating stresses is called fatigue.
!everal models have been proposed to correlate the fatigue crac" initiation process#
controlled by the strain range # with fatigue crac" propagation rates# controlled by the stress
intensity range K. !ome of so called critical damage models consider the width of the volume
element in the crac" propagation direction as being the distance that the fatigue crac" propagates
on each cycle da. $ther consider the fatigue crac" propagation rate as being the element width
divided by the number of cycles that the crac" would need to cross it.
The models consider that the damage %one ahead of the crac" tip is composed by a
se&uence of very small volume elements# each one under a different strain range# which are being
bro"en se&uentially as the crac" propagates. 'ny given volume element suffers damage in each
load cycle# caused by the amplitude of the loop acting in that cycle# which in turn depends on the
distance ri# between the i(th volume element and fatigue crac" tip. )racturing of the volume
element at the crac" tip *which causes fatigue crac" growth+ occurs when its accumulated
damage reaches a critical value# due to the sum of the damage suffered in each cycle# &uantified
by damage accumulation rule# see fig.,.,

instant j#
load - "j#
crac" si%e aj
start of
damage
frontier
- e*ri#- .j+
volume element /0
*or tiny e1 specimens+
crac" tip
- - constant23 da4d1 constant23 da,23da23rj2i.da
e
ey
(eyc
cyclic plastic %one
reaches the /0
monotonic plastic %one
reaches the /0
inceasing strain hystory which loads each /0
as the crac" tip approaches it
t
due to damage
accumulation when
the crac" tip reaches
it and /n01N021
fig.1.1: Schematic of the FCG assumed to be caused by the seuentia! fracture of the
"o!ume e!ements at e"ery !oad cyc!e
5owever# there are many mechanisms that can retard or accelerate the growth of a fatigue crac"
after significant load amplitude variations. 6oreover# these mechanisms generally can act
simultaneously# with their relative importance in any problem depending on several factors such
as crac" and piece si%e# dominant stress state at the crac" tip# microstructure of the material#
mean load# and environment. These load interaction mechanisms can act behind# at or ahead of
the crac" tip.
#. Fatigue damage theories
7redicting fatigue damage for structural components subjected to variable loading
conditions is a comple8 issue. The first simplest# and most widely used damage model is the
linear damage. This rule is often referred to as 6iners rule. In linear damage rule if it is assumed
that the probability of survival at 8 cycles of a give stress(amplitude is of the form*$2e8p *($%&i++
where &i is the e8pected number of cycles to failure at the stress amplitude 9i# then the
probability of survival at &2 'i:$i cycles of various stress amplitude (i# where $i 2 )i:& and )i
denotes the relative fre&uency of amplitude 9i# is e&ual to
; *1+ 2 <i :=e8p *(7i:14 1i+># or
ln ; *1+ 2 ?i *(7i:14 1i+ 2 const.
@hich the e8pression of linear superposition of damage =,>.
The results from this approach do not ta"e into account the effect of load se&uence on the
accumulation of damage due to cyclic loading.
#.1 Fatigue damage mechanism
)atigue is a locali%ed damage process of a component produced by cyclic loading. It is
the result of cumulative process consisting of crac" initiation# propagation# and final fracture of
component =A>. Buring cyclic loading locali%ed plastic deformation may occur at the highest
stress site. This plastic deformation induces permanent damage to the component and crac"
develops. 's the component e8periences an increasing number of loading cycles# the length of
the crac" *damage+ increases. 'fter certain number of cycles# the crac" will cause the component
to fail *separate+.
In general the fatigue process involves the following stages: *,+ crac" nucleation# *A+
short crac" growth# *C+ long crac" growth# *D+ final fracture. In engineering application the
amount of component life spent on crac" nucleation and short crac" growth is usually called the
crac" initiation period whereas the component life spent during long crac" growth is called the
crac" propagation period. )or steels the si%e of a crac" at the end of the initiation stage ao# is of
the order of a couple of grains of the material. This crac" typically ranges from about 0., to ,.0
mm. the crac" initiation si%e can be estimated using the linear elastic fracture mechanics
approach for smooth specimen by Bowling =C>.
ao 2,4<:*E.th4E!e+
A
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *A.,.,+
$r by twice the 7eterson empirical material constant for steel =D>.
ao 2A:0.0AFD: *A0GH4!u*6pa++
,.8
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *A.,.A+
@here Su is the ultimate tensile strength of a material# Se is the stress range at the fatigue limit#
Kth is the range of the threshold intensity factor.

#.# Cumu!ati"e damage mode! *the damage cur"e a++roach,
The components damage can be e8pressed in terms of an accumulation of the crac"
length towards a ma8imum acceptable crac" length. ' smooth specimen with a crac" length at
fracture of af is subjected to cyclic loading that results in crac" length of a. the amount of
damage# - at a give stress level S, # would be the ratio of a to af. To illustrate the cumulative
damage concept# a crac" growth e&uation developed by 6anson and 5alford =F> is adopted:

a2 ao I *af ( ao+ : *n41f+
Jf
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *A.A..,+
@here n is the number of loading cycles applied to achieve a crac" length of a# and ao is the
initial crac" length. The value of 1f represents the number of cycles applied to achieve the crac"
length af at final fracture. The e8ponent .f is empirically determined and has the following form:

Jf 2 A4C : 1f
0.D
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *A.A.A+
Kumulative damage *B+ is the ratio of instantaneous to final crac" length and can be e8pressed as
follow:
B 2 a4af 2 ,4af =ao I *af L ao+ : **n41f+
Jf
+> (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *A.A.C+
This damage e&uation implies that fatigue occurs when B is e&ual to unity *i.e. a 2 af+.
/. -amage mode!
The above e8plained models predict the final failure of component based on the
"nowledge of initial crac" length# final crac" length# and number of cycles applied to final crac"
length. 1ow the 6odels are proposed to predict the fatigue crac" growth *)KM+ process using
crac" initiation properties and critical damage concept.
The damage ahead of a crac" tip can be estimated using simple but sound hypotheses
and standard fatigue calculation# supposing that fatigue crac"s grow by se&uentially brea"ing
small volume element */0+ ahead of their tips# which fracture when the crac" tip reaches them
because they accumulated all the damage the material can support. Thus & procedure can be
combined with fracture mechanics concepts to predict )KM# using the cyclic properties of the
material and the strain distribution ahead of the crac" tip. These models can consider the /0
width in the )KM direction as being the distance that the crac" grows on each cycle# or the )KM
rate as being the /0 width divide by the number of cycles would need to cross it =N>.;eal crac"s
must have finite strains at their tip under load# or they would be unstable. To avoid this problem#
the actual finite strains at the crac" tip tip can be estimated using the stress concentration factor
Kt for the blunt crac" =G> and strain concentration rule. The strain field ahead of crac" tip can
then be upper bounded by tip.
!ome models supposes that all fatigue damage occurs inside this region ne8t to the tip#
and use the number of cycles &: associated with Etip. to calculate the )KM rate can be as the
length of this region divided by &:. Out# such models have two shortcomings. )irst# neglecting
the fatigue damage elsewhere concentrates it in the very last &: cycles. !econd# assuming
intermittent and not a cycle(by(cycle fatigue induced increments in the crac" length.
)orm fig.,., the /0 closest to the tip brea"s due to the sum of damage induced y all
previous load cycles# and not only by the damage induced in the very last load cycle. In this way
the fatigue crac" growth rate under constant K can be modeled by the se&uential failure of the
identical /0 ahead of crac" tip.

/.1 Constant am+!itude !oading
In every load cycle# each /0 ahead of the crac" tip suffers strains loops of increasing
range as the tip approaches it# and a damage increment that depends on the strain range in that
cycle# thus on ri# the distance from the i(th /0 to the tip and on the load Kj at that event. The
fracture of the /0 at the crac" tip occurs because it accumulated its critical damage e.g. by 6iner
when 'nj4&j2,# where nj is the number of cycles of the j(th load event and &j is the number of
cycles that the piece would last if loaded solely by that event. If under constant K the fatigue
crac" advances a fi8ed distance 0a in every load cycle# and if # for simplification the damage
outside the cyclic plastic %one 1+c is neglected# there are 1+c 40a /0 ahead of the crac" tip at any
instant. !ince the plastic %one advances with the crac"# each new load cycle brea"s the /0
adjacent to the crac" tip# induces an increased strain range in all other unbro"en /0# and adds a
new element to the damage %one# thus nj 2,. !ince the /0 are considered as small P1 specimens
the brea" when:
1+c 40a 1+c
' 2 ,4 *1 *1+c L i .0a++ 2 ' ,4 *1 *ri++ 2 , ((((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.,+
i20 ri20
@here 1 *ri+ 2 1 *1+c ( i .0a+# the fatigue life corresponding to the plastic range p*ri+
acting at a distance ri from the crac" tip# can be calculated using the plastic part of Koffin(
6anson rule =G>:
1 *ri+ 2 Q . *p*ri+ 4 *A. Pc++
,4c
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.A+
p*ri+ in its turn can be described by !cwalbes =8> :

p*ri+ 2 *A.Syc 4 3, . *1+c 4 ri +
,4 *,Ihc+
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((
*C.,.C+
@here Syc is the cyclic yield strength# hc the ;amberg($sgood cyclic hardening
e8ponent# and 1+c is the plastic %one si%e in plane strain# which can be estimated by R *7oissons
coefficient.+
1+c 2 **, L A. R+
A
4 *D.S. *,I hc+++. *E.4 Syc+
A
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.D+

In reasonably strain distribution model as shown in fig.C.,., =G>
*r+ 2 tip# 0T r T 8,I8A *region I+ (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.F+
*r+ 2 *A.Syc 4 3,. *1+c 4 r 4 $# +
,4 *,Ihc+
# 8,I8AU r T 1+c I 8A *region II+ (((((((( *C.,.N+
*r+ V *A.Syc 4 3,.5 **1+c I $#+4 r,.

*,I *R.**r 4 1+c+4 *1+c ( 1+++++# 1+c I 8A U r U 1+ *region III+
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.G+
*r+ 2 W*E.. *,IR++4 *X.0. Y *AS. *r 4 1+4A++Z# r [ %p *region I/+ ((((((((((((((((((((( *C.,.8+
@here X2 , for plane stress and X2 ,4 *,I A.R+ for plane strain# and
8,I8A
reg.I
region
II
region III
region I/
r
constant strain
- e
- etip
crac"
tip
fig./.1.1: )ro+osed strain range distribution6 di"ided in 7 regions to consider both the
e!astic and +!astic contribution ahead of the crac8 ti+
1p 2 *,4 S. X
A
+.* .ma84 Syc +
A
and 1+c2 *,4 D.S.X
A
.*,Ihc++. *E.4 Syc+ (((((((((((((((( *C.,.H+
Ooth constant *K'+ and variable amplitude */'+ )KM can be calculated using e&uations
*C.,.F( C.,.N+# which all consider damage ahead of the crac" tip and provide a more realistic
model of the )KM process.
Conc!usion
The different aspects of fatigue in connection with fracture mechanism are discussed.
)atigue damage mechanism is discussed and cumulative fatigue damage model is developed for
nonlinear fatigue damage and linear fatigue damage. 6odels are proposed to predict the fatigue
crac" growth *)KM+ process using crac" initiation properties and critical damage concept. The
damage ahead of a crac" tip can be estimated using standard fatigue calculation# supposing that
fatigue crac"s grow by se&uentially brea"ing small volume element */0+ ahead of their tips#
which fracture when the crac" tip reaches them because they accumulated all the damage the
material can support. Thus P1 procedure can be combined with fracture mechanics concepts to
predict )KM# using the cyclic properties of the material and the strain distribution ahead of the
crac" tip. 's an early wor" in the field of fatigue the models are developed with reference to the
given references so which needs to be validated e8perimentally.
9eferences:
=,> 'lfred 6. )reudenthal# )atigue and fracture mechanics# \ournal of 0ngineering fracture
mechanics# ,HGC# /ol.F# pp D0C(D,D.
=A> ]ung ^i ^ee# \wo 7an# ;ichard O. 5athaway# 6ar" 0. Oar"ey# )atigue testing and analysis
*theory and practice+# 0lsevier 7ub.# A000# pp.FG(GN.
=C> Bowling 1.0.# 6echanical Oehavior of materials: 0ngineering method of deformation#
fracture and fatigue# A
nd
ed.# 7rentice 5all# 1ew ]or"# ,HH8.
=D> 7eterson ;.0.# 'nalytical approach to stress concentration effects in aircraft materials#
Technical ;eport FH(F0G# _.!. 'ir force( @'BK !ymposium on fatigue 6etals# Bayton# $hio#
,HFH.
=F> 6anson !.!. and 5alford M.;.# 'pplication of a double linear damage rule to cumulative
fatigue# fracture crac" propagation# '!T6 !T7 D,F# ,HNG# pp.C8D(D,A.
=N> \.T.7. Kastro# 6.'. 6eggiolaro and '.K.$. 6iranda# ' note on fatigue crac" growth
prediction based on damage accumulation ahead of the crac" tip# 6echanics of solids in Ora%il
A00G# Ora%ilian society of mechanical science and engineering# pp.,CC(,DN.
=G> Kreager 6. and 7aris 7.K. # 0lastic field e&uation for blunt crac"s with reference to stress
corrosion crac"ing# Int. \ournal of fatigue# ,HNG#vol.C# pp.ADG(AFA.
=8> !chwalbe ..5.# Komparison of several fatigue crac" propagation laws with e8perimental
results# 0ng. )racture 6echanics# ,HGD# pp.CAF(CD,.