Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DOI 10.1007/s00170-017-0069-8
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Received: 1 August 2016 / Accepted: 16 January 2017 / Published online: 3 February 2017
# Springer-Verlag London 2017
where
1
γ¼ ð4Þ
2a
1þ
D
The fretting contact between pin and lug can generate a Fig. 2 Finite element mesh of the cracked lug
crack initiation, followed by crack propagation. Through the
complexity of this phenomenon, a correction factor [28] was
proposed to describe the interaction effect between pin and lug where σres and m(x, a) are the residual stress in the vicinity of
on the stress intensity factor calculation. crack tip and the weight function expression [35], respectively.
x 3 =
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2 x 1 = x 1
mðx; aÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1 þ M 1 1− þ M 2 1− þ M 3 1−
2 2
1 w D
G1 ¼ þ ð5Þ 2πða−xÞ a a a
2 πðD þ aÞ D þ 2a
ð7Þ
Moreover, the extended finite element method (XFEM) The coefficients M1 , M2 , and M3 are dependent on the
embedded in ABAQUS is performed for extracting stress in- cracked component geometry. More details concerning these
tensity factor of the attachment lug using a Python script code. parameter values are given elsewhere [36, 37]. In order to take
into account the residual stress effect in FCG rate, the Paris
model coupled with the residual stress intensity is implement-
ed in the present work. It was assumed that for a positive stress
3 Numerical procedure for FCG life estimation ratio, only the maximum stress intensity factor is affected by
the crack tip residual stress distribution, without significant
In fatigue fracture analysis, empirical FCG models exam- changes in the minimum stress intensity factor [38, 42].
ine the fatigue crack propagation based on linear elastic Hence, the maximum and minimum total SIFs are computed,
fracture mechanic (LEFM). However, a crack tip plastic respectively, as follows:
zone can be almost developed when a growing crack oc-
curs in ductile materials. The size of this plastic zone de- K max;t ¼ K max þ K res ð8Þ
pends on many parameters, such as the specimen thick- K min;t ¼ K min ð9Þ
ness, the temperature, the crack size, the applied load,
and the yielding stress. A residual stress distribution in- where Kmax and Kmin are the maximum elastic stress intensity
duced by reversed plastic deformations will result in this factor and minimum elastic stress intensity factor, respective-
zone during unloading. This residual stress distribution ly. Therefore, the residual-corrected stress intensity factor
surrounding the crack tip zone has an important effect for (RC-SIF) can be written as:
predicting fatigue life under cyclic loading. Since stress
ΔK rc ¼ ΔK el þ K res ð10Þ
intensity factor is defined as a driving force parameter for
predicting crack growth [27, 31], it is necessary to quantify The modified Paris model [26] describing the effect of the
the residual stress impact in terms of SIF. Using the weight crack tip residual stress distributions can be described as fol-
function method [34], this residual stress can be converted lows:
to residual stress intensity factor Kres as follows:
da
x¼a
K res ¼ ∫x¼0 σres mðx; aÞdx ð6Þ ¼ C ðΔK rc Þm ð11Þ
dN
4012 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2017) 91:4009–4017
Table 1 Cyclic fatigue properties for AL 7075-T6 is shown in Fig. 1, having L = 200 mm, D = 38.1 mm,
C(1)
(MPa) C(2)
(MPa) γ(1)
γ (2)
Q (MPa) b t = 12.7 mm, and two different widths (w = 2.25D and
w = 3D). During its service life, the stress concentration is
175,000 9000 3500 180 140 40 localized near the lug hole, in which a crack may occur.
Therefore, to properly simulate what is really happening, a
crack is positioned near the hole edge with an initial size
The fatigue life of an attachment lugs with single crack is a = 0.635 mm as illustrated in Fig. 1.
evaluated using the residual-corrected stress intensity factor All fatigue tests for the attachment lug have been carried
(RC-SIF) range in which the final number of loading cycles out using MTS servo-hydraulic machine for an initial crack
can be estimated by integrating (Eq. 11). size a = 0,635 mm and constant amplitude loading σ0max
af equals to 41.38 MPa.
1
N¼ ∫ m da ð12Þ In order to compute the stress distribution in the vicinity of
a0 C ðΔK rc Þ
the crack, a structurally refined mesh has been modeled
where a 0 and a f are the initial and final crack length, around the crack region with 0.05-mm element size. The mod-
respectively. el is analyzed with “CPE4R” element type (i.e., standard 4
node isoparametric, plane strain elements with reduced inte-
gration). The FE mesh of the cracked lug is illustrated in
Fig. 2.
4 FE modeling
Moreover, a damage zone, in which plasticity occurs, will
be generated in the vicinity of the crack tip during crack
A 2D FE analysis using ABAQUS commercial software was
growth. This fracture damage zone tends to change continu-
implemented. The attachment lug was considered to estimate
ously according to the applied load type (static or cyclic
the residual fatigue life under cyclic axial loading. Two load
ratios (R = 0.1 and R = 0.5) are used. The geometry of the lug
Specimen dimensions, stress rao, inial
crack size, failure crack size , mesh,… as
Aachment lug + input parameters input parameters
(actual crack length , detailed
geometry, stress rao...)
Calculang
using the weight Read from history output
funcon
No
= +∆ if >
No
Increase the If <
crack length
Yes
Yes
Fig. 3 Proposed procedure for fatigue life estimation Fig. 4 Python code for evaluating SIF using XFEM
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2017) 91:4009–4017 4013
loading) [23], and it is much smaller than the size of the plastic where K, σ, and εp are respectively the stiffness tensor,
zone, which is defined by Irwin [25] along the crack line as Cauchy stress tensor, and plastic strain tensor, which is de-
follows: fined as follows:
max 2
1 K el ̇ ∂F
rp ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi ð13Þ p
ε̇ ¼ λ ð16Þ
4 2π σy ∂σ
where K max
el is the elastic stress intensity factor at maximum where λ is a scalar multiplier and F represents the yield func-
applied load and σy is the yielding stress of the material. tion which is described by the following expression:
Actually, there is no longer a clear criterion that can accurately rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
estimate the damage zone size. Thus, the effect of damage 3
F¼ ðS−X Þ : ðS−X Þ−Y ð17Þ
zone is not implemented during finite element simulation. 2
In the present study, the nonlinear isotropic/kinematic
where S is the deviatoric part of the stress tensor, X is the
hardening model, developed upon ABAQUS code, is
deviatoric part of the back stress tensor, and Y represents the
used. This plasticity model is capable to characterize the
radius of the yield surface, which are expressed by the follow-
material behavior during cyclic loading considering the
ing equations:
Baushinger effect, mean stress relaxation, ratcheting, and
cyclic hardening. Their basic equations are described as 2 ̇p
Ẋ ¼ Cε −γX ṗ ð18Þ
follows [33]: 3
Y ¼ σy þ Q 1−e−bp ð19Þ
̇ ̇e ̇p
ε ¼ε þε ð14Þ
having C, γ, Q, and b as material parameters evaluated
experimentally. The accumulated plastic strain p is defined
σ ¼ K : εe ð15Þ by the following equation:
4014 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2017) 91:4009–4017
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
̇ 2 ̇p ̇p
p¼ ε :ε ð20Þ
3
significant difference betweenΔK and ΔKrc for small crack observed that the ratio ΔK rc=ΔK decreases as the crack
lengths (in this study, an initial crack length equals to length increases. The difference between ΔKrcandΔK
0.635 mm is considered). However, when crack grows, the can reach 25 and 20%, respectively, for the standard
plastic zone ahead the crack tip increases, and as a conse- SENT specimen and for the attachment lug as illustrated
quence, the compressive residual stress increases as shown in Fig. 8. This result can be explained by the fact that
in Fig. 7a. the plastic zone surrounding the crack tip depends on
In order to highlight the influence of residual stress the crack size. This plastic zone increases with a grow-
distribution around the crack tip on the stress intensity ing crack size in which a compressive residual stress
factor (SIF) range, a numerical analysis of a standard occurs and reduces the effect of the tensile stress during
Single Edge Notch Tension (SENT) specimen [10] and crack propagation.
of cracked lug is carried out. Figure 8 shows the evo- For short cracks, the effect of residual stress can be
lution of ΔK rc=ΔK versus crack length for a standard neglected as is often admitted for the mechanical parts de-
SENT specimen and for the attachment lug. Two differ- signed to be in service until the fatigue crack initiation such
ent stress ratios are considered (R = 0.1 and R = 0.5). It as automotive components. However, for long crack sizes, the
Fig. 9 Crack length versus number of loading cycle: a for R = 0.5 and W/D = 3, b for R = 0.5 and W/D = 2.25, c for R = 0.1 and W/D = 3, and d for
R = 0.1 and W/D = 2.25
consideration of this residual stress distribution becomes very compressive residual stress distribution ahead the crack
significant and its effect may exceed 25% (Fig. 8). This situ- tip, Paris’ model, and the relevant experimental data for
ation is frequently encountered in mechanical parts designed various loading conditions (R = 0.1 and R = 0.5) and
for the aircraft industry. In spite of the high significant effect of different lug configurations (W/D = 2.25 and W/D = 3).
the crack tip residual stress, this additional stress is generally It appears that the proposed model provides a reason-
not taken into account in classical engineering assessment able accuracy to the experimental results for predicting
especially for long cracks. residual fatigue life. It takes into account the influence
of residual stresses around the crack tip for describing
5.4 Model validation with experimental results fatigue strength under cyclic loading. Having regard to
all of the foregoing, it can be deduced that the residual-
To validate the proposed model, fatigue life estimation corrected stress intensity factor is an important parame-
of cracked lug is carried out. The following material ter for describing FCG rate by taking into account the
parameters are assumed for predicting the remaining fa- change in the SIF due to the residual stress effect.
tigue life of attachment lug made of 7075-T6 Aluminum
alloy: For R = 0.1, C = 2.1E-08 and m = 3.86, and for
R = 0.5, C = 11.3E-08 and m = 3.7. During crack 6 Conclusions
propagation, both elastic and residual stress intensity
factor are computed by applying the XFEM and the In this work, an improved mechanical driving force pa-
weight function method, respectively. Then, the remain- rameter has been used to evaluate fatigue crack growth.
ing life is predicted using Eq. 12. Both elastic SIF and residual SIF were computed using
The present model investigates fatigue life by intro- the XFEM and the weight function expression, respec-
ducing a corrected stress intensity factor that takes into tively. The residual fatigue life of an attachment lug
account the effect of residual stress distribution near the with single through-thickness is estimated for two dif-
crack tip during FCG. Figure 9a–d shows a comparison ferent load ratios within the framework of EPFM.
between the proposed model considering the effect of Therefore, the following conclusions can be drawn:
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2017) 91:4009–4017 4017
& Comparing with the analytical solution, the XFEM shows 17. Mikheevskiy S, Glinka G, Algera D (2012) Analysis of fatigue
crack growth in an attachment lug based on the weight function
fair correlation for evaluating stress intensity factor.
technique and the UniGrow fatigue crack growth model. Int J
& The weight function method is found as a practical tech- Fatigue 42:88–94
nique and a powerful mechanical parameter capable of 18. Boljanovic S, Maksimovic S (2014) Fatigue crack growth modeling
converting residual stress distribution to residual stress of attachment lugs. Int J Fatigue 58:66–74
19. Naderi M, Iyyer N (2015) Fatigue life prediction of cracked attach-
intensity factor.
ment lugs using XFEM. Int J Fatigue 77:186–193
& The proposed model allows having a better accuracy for 20. Newman Jr JC, Raju IS (1986). Stress intensity factor equations for
predicting fatigue life when compared with experimental cracks in three-dimensional finite bodies subjected to tension and
data. Since lug type joint is a very sensitive component in bending loading. In: NASA technical memorandum 85793
21. Belytschko T, Black T (1999) Elastic crack growth in finite ele-
the aeronautical industry, this method allows engineers to
ments with minimal remeshing. Int J Numer Methods Eng 45(5):
be engaged in practical problems for predicting the re- 601–620
maining fatigue life of these structures in a reliable way. 22. Sukumar N, Moës N, Moran B, Belytschko T (2000) Extended
& In engineering applications, the methodology proposed in finite element method for three-dimensional crack modelling. Int J
Numer Methods Eng 48:1549–1570
this paper can effectively be used to evaluate the fatigue
23. Shlyannikov VN (1996) Modelling of crack growth by fracture
life of other cracked structures. damage zone. Theor Appl Fract Mech 25:187–201
24. Newman JC (1973) Fracture analysis of surface-and through-
cracked sheets and plates. Eng Fract Mech 5:667–689
References 25. Irwin GR (1960). Plastic zone near a crack and fracture toughness.
In: Proceedings of 7th Sagamore Conference. Vol. IV, p. 63
26. Paris PC (1962). The growth of fatigue cracks due to variations in
1. Paris P, Erdogan F (1963) A critical analysis of crack propagation load, PhD thesis, Lehigh University
laws. J Basic Eng 85(4):528–533 27. Dai P, Yang J, Li H, Li Z (2014) The plasticity-corrected stress
2. Bahloul A, Bouraoui Ch (2015). Effects and sensitivity analysis of intensity factor for plane stress mode I and mode II cracks. Eng
cracking parameters on the fatigue crack propagation. Design and Fract Mech 128:231–235
Modeling of Mechanical Systems-II., pp 321–330 28. Newman JC (1976).Predicting failure of specimens with either
3. Elber W (1971) The significance of fatigue crack closure. ASTM Surface cracks or corner at holes.NASA-TN-D-8244
STP 486:230–242 29. Bowie OL (1956) Analysis of an infinite plate containing radial
4. Erdogan F, Roberts R (1966) A comparative study of crack propa- cracks originating at the boundary of an internal circular hole. J
gation in plates under extension and bending. Proc Int Conf on Math Phys 35(1):60–71
Fracture. Sendai, Japan, In 30. Newman Jr JC, Wu XR, Venneri SL, Li GG (1994). Small-crack
5. Walker EK (1970). The effect of stress ratio during crack propagation effects in high-strength aluminium alloys .NASA-RP-1309.
and fatigue for 2024-T3 and 7076-T6 aluminium. In: Effect of envi- 31. Dai P, Li Z (2013) A plasticity-corrected stress intensity factor for
ronment and complex load history on fatigue life. ASTM STR 462, fatigue crack growth in ductile materials. Acta Mater 61:5988–5995
Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials. p. 1–4 32. Kathiresan K, Hsu TM (1984). Advanced life analysis methods-
6. Boljanovic S, Maksimovic S (2014) Mixed mode crack growth crack growth, analysis methods for attachment lugs.AFWAL-TR-
simulation with/without overloads. Int J Fatigue 67:183–190 84-3080, vol. II
7. Forman RG (1972) Study of fatigue crack initiation from flaws 33. Lemaitre J, Desmorat R (2005). Engineering Damage Mechanics:
using fracture mechanics theory. Eng Fract Mech 4:333–345 ductile, creep, fatigue and brittle failures. Berlin, ISBN 3–540–
8. Toyosada M, Gotoh K, Niwa T (2004) Fatigue crack propagation 21503-4
for a through thickness crack: a crack propagation law considering 34. Bueckner HF (1970) A novel principle for the computation of stress
cyclic plasticity near crack tip. Int J Fatigue 26:983–992 intensity factors. Zeitschrift fuer Angewandte Mathematik
Mechanik 50:529–546
9. AFGROW (2008), Fracture mechanics and fatigue crack growth
35. Glinka G, Shen G (1991) Universal features of weight functions for
analysis software tool. Ver 4.12.15.0, LexTech Inc
cracks in mode I. Eng Fract Mech 40(6):1135–1146
10. Ayatollahi MR, Razavi SMJ, Chamani HR (2014) A numerical
36. Shen G, Glinka G (1991) Determination of weight functions from
study on the effect of symmetric crack flank holes on fatigue life
reference stress intensity factors. Theor Appl Fract Mech 15:237–245
extension of a SENT specimen. Fatigue & Fracture Engineering
37. Wang X, Lambert SB, Glinka G (1998) Approximate weight func-
Materials & Structures 37:1153–1164
tions for embedded elliptical cracks. Eng Fract Mech 59:381–392
11. MR Ayatollahi, SMJ Razavi, MY Yahya (2015). Mixed mode fa- 38. Noroozi AH, Glinka G, Lambert S (2007) A study of the stress ratio
tigue crack initiation and growth in a CT specimen repaired by stop effects on fatigue crack growth using the unified two-parameter
hole technique. 0145:115–127. fatigue crack growth driving force. Int J Fatigue 29:1616–1633
12. Li Z, Duan J (2002) The effect of a plastically deformed zone near 39. Naderi M, Hoseini SH, Khonsari MM (2013) Probabilistic simula-
crack tip on the stress intensity factors. Int J Fract 117:29–34 tion of fatigue damage and life scatter of metallic components. Int J
13. Zhou R, Zhu P, Li Z (2011) The shielding effect of the plastic zone Plast 43:101–115
at mode-II crack tip. Int J Fract 171:195–200 40. Correia JAFO, Jesus AMP, Fernandez-Canteli A, Calçada RAB
14. Zhu P, Yang L, Li Z, Sun J (2010) The shielding effects of the crack- (2015) Modelling probabilistic fatigue crack propagation rates for
tip plastic zone. Int J Fract 161:131–139 a mild structural steel. Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale 31:80–96
15. Zhu P, Yang L, Li Z, Sun J (2011). Erratum to: the shielding effects of 41. Zhang J, He XD, Sha Y, Du SY (2010) The compressive stress
the crack-tip plastic zone. International Journal of Fracture. 170–177 effect on fatigue crack growth under tension–compression loading.
16. Kim JH, Lee SB, Hong SG (2003) Fatigue crack growth behavior Int J Fatigue 32:361–367
of Al7050-T7451 attachment lugs under flight spectrum variation. 42. Noroozi AH, Glinka G, Lambert S (2005) A two parameter driving
Theor Appl Fract Mech 40:135–144 force for fatigue crack growth analysis. Int J Fatigue 27:1277–1296