Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Chapter 9
Fluctuating Load Analysis

Screen Titles

Fluctuating Stresses
Generic Stress-Time Behavior
Stress-Time Relations
Modified Goodman Diagram
Mean/Fluctuating Stress Diagram
Soderberg Failure Theory
Goodman Failure Theory
Gerber Failure Theory
Sample Problem – 1
Problem – 1 Solution
Torsional Fatigue
Combined Loading Modes
Sample Problem – 2
Problem – 2 Solution
Cumulative Fatigue Damage
Palmgren-Minor Theory
Sample Problem – 3
Problem – 3 Solution
Mason’s Modification
Review Exercise
Off Line Exercise

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 189 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 190 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

1. Title page 2. Page Index

Chapter 9 continues the study of the fatigue
analysis and behavior of mechanical parts.
Attention is now directed to elements subjected
to general fluctuating loads as contrasted to
complete reversed stress states treated in
Chapter 8. The presentation begins with
defining generic parameters to represent
fluctuating loads. General fatigue failure under
fluctuating normal stress loading is then
discussed and three specific failure theories are
introduced together with fatigue under
fluctuating torsional stresses. A method of
fatigue analysis for combined stress states is
also covered. The chapter concludes with two
methods of determining the effects of cumulative
fatigue damage due to multiple loads applied for
different durations of cyclic application. Several
exercise problems and extended sample
problems are included to demonstrate the
application of the subject content.
Listed on this page are all the individual pages in
Chapter 9 with the exception of the exercise
problems. Each page title is hyperlinked to its
specific page and can be accessed by clicking
on the title. It is suggested that the reader first
proceed through all pages sequentially. Clicking
on the text button at the bottom of the page
provides a pop up window with the text for that
page. The text page is closed by clicking on the
x in the top right corner of the frame. Clicking on
the index button returns the presentation to the
page index of chapter 9.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 191 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
3. Fluctuating Stresses
Chapter 8 considered the fatigue behavior of
mechanical elements subjected to complete
reversed stress states in which the stress level
varied from some specific negative value to the
same positive value and then repeated this
behavior continuously. This chapter will deal
with repeated stress states that may vary from
zero to some specific value and then back to
zero continuously or even more generally from
some minimum value to a different numeric
positive value and then back to the minimum
value repeatedly. In this instance the variation
will possess some mean value of stress that will
lie between the minimum and maximum value of
the applied stress state.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 192 -
4. Generic Stress Time Behavior
Depicted in the figure is an idealized general
fluctuating stress versus time behavior curve.
Although this is represented as a smooth
sinusoidal function the parameters that will be
used to generalize its description will be the
same irrespective of the specific shape of the
curve provided it is periodic in behavior. In other
words the shape could be saw tooth or a square
wave, it would still be characterized for fatigue
analysis in the same way. The four parameters
used to define the curves characteristics for the
fatigue discussions and analyses to follow are its
maximum value, sigma max, its minimum value,
sigma min, its mean value, sigma m and its
alternating value about the mean, sigma a.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

5. Stress –Time Relations

Of primary interest in the developments to follow

are the mean stress and the alternating stress
components. The mean stress is of course just
the average of the two extreme values or one
half the sum of the maximum and minimum
values. The alternating stress, which is
sometimes referred to as the stress amplitude, is
simply one half the difference between the
maximum and minimum values. Of occasional
value is the stress ratio, R, defined as the
minimum stress divided by the maximum stress
and the amplitude ratio, A, which is the
alternating component divided by the mean
component.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 193 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

6. Modified Goodman Diagram

Fatigue failure behavior from experiments failure increases as indicated by the third set of
conducted under different combinations of red and green dots. Thus the area enclosed by
fluctuating normal stress loading states are the red boundary in the first quadrant proposes
conveniently presented and described on a states of stress for which fatigue failure will not
“Modified Goodman Diagram”. In this occur. Experimental results have verified that
representation the mean stress is plotted on the this is a good approximation for defining fatigue
horizontal axis and all other stresses are plotted behavior under a general fluctuating state of
vertically with tension to the right and up. A 45- stress.
degree line from the origin in the first quadrant
represents the mean stress of an applied stress
state. When the mean stress is zero fatigue
failure is represented by plus and minus the
endurance stress on the vertical axis. This is
indicated by the red dot at the origin and the
green dot on the vertical axis. A green dot on
the negative vertical axis is not shown due to
space limitations. Now consider the case where
the mean stress plus the stress amplitude are
equal to the yield stress of the material. This is
illustrated by the second set of red and green
dots. Assuming that yielding is considered as
undesirable, that is equivalent to “failure”, then
lines drawn from the second set of green dots to
the positive and negative endurance limits on
the vertical axes corresponds to a proposed
criteria for defining fatigue failure for a
generalized fluctuating stress loading. The
failure boundary is completed by extending the
line from the upper green dot on the maximum
stress line to the value of the yield stress on the
mean stress line and from that point to the lower
green dot on the minimum stress line. Note that
when the mean stress is equal to the yield stress
no alternating stress is necessary to produce
yielding. However, as the mean stress
decreases the corresponding value of
alternating stress required to define fatigue
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 194 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

7. Mean/Fluctuating Stress Diagram 8. Exercise Problem 1

A second way of depicting fatigue failure under Application of the behavior depicted on the
the action of a fluctuating stress state is previous page to a design analysis process
obtained by plotting the mean stress horizontally requires a mathematical model. This exercise
and the alternating stress vertically. The yield provides an introduction to the development of
stress of the material is first plotted on both the this type of model. Following the exercise the
vertical axis and the positive and negative axes. presentation will introduce and discuss three
Then diagonal lines are used to join these three theories of fatigue failure based on this type of
points as illustrated on the graphic. Next the development. After completing the exercise
endurance limit is plotted on the vertical axis click on the solution button to check your result.
together with the ultimate tensile strength on the
horizontal axis. In the first quadrant a line is (Solution on Page 215)
drawn from the endurance limit to the tensile
strength. Any combination of alternating stress
and mean stress that falls on the lower of the
fatigue line or yield line, indicated by the heavy
red boundary, defines a condition of failure
either by fatigue or yielding. It has been
determined experimentally that compressive
mean stresses have virtually no effect on
reducing the fatigue strength of a mechanical
element. Hence in the second quadrant a
horizontal line is extended from the endurance
limit until it intersects with the yield line. Any
combination of alternating stress and
compressive mean stress that falls on the lower
of this fatigue line or the yield line again
indicated by the heavy red boundary defines a
condition of failure either by fatigue or yielding.
Since this is just another way of presenting the
proposed behavior depicted by the modified
Goodman diagram experimental test results
indicates that it is a reasonable approximation of
fatigue behavior under application of a general
fluctuating stress state.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 195 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
9. Soderberg Failure Theory
Three distinct proposed failure theories for
fatigue design application will now be presented
and discussed. The first is the Soderberg
Theory. Using the graphic on the previous page
this theory proposes that designs for fluctuating
normal stress states should be based on a
limiting condition defined by a straight line drawn
from the endurance limit on the vertical axis to
the yield point on the horizontal axis in the first
quadrant. This is defined analytically by the
equation that the ratio of the alternating stress,
sigma a, to the endurance limit, sigma e, plus
the ratio of the mean stress, sigma m, to the
yield stress, sigma y, is equal to 1. A factor of
safety, n, can be introduced into this equation by
dividing the right side of the equation by n. This
can be seen to be a fairly conservative design
approach.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 196 -
10. Goodman Failure Theory
The second proposed failure theory for fatigue
design application under a general fluctuating
normal stress loading is the Goodman Theory.
It proposes a failure line that extends from the
endurance limit on the vertical axis to the tensile
strength on the horizontal axis. In effect it
discounts yielding as a failure condition and is
less conservative than the Soderberg theory
particularly for mean stress values in excess of
the yield strength. Analytically it is defined by
the equation that the ratio of the alternating
stress, sigma a, to the endurance limit, sigma e,
plus the ratio of the mean stress, sigma m, to
the tensile stress, sigma u, is equal to one.
Again a factor of safety, n, can be introduced by
dividing the right side of the equation by n.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

11. Gerber Failure Theory.) 12. Exercise Problem - 2

The Gerber Failure Theory differs from the In this exercise you are asked to determine
Soderberg and the Goodman theories in that it numerically the magnitude of the difference
represents the failure line as a quadratic curve between the Goodman and Gerber theories of
that passes through the endurance limit and the failure over the range of sigma m over sigma u
tensile stress. Of the three theories it is the from zero to one. Since both theories pass
least conservative and is considered by many to through the endurance limit and the tensile
be the more accurate of the true behavior and strength there of course is no difference
impact of fluctuating loads on fatigue strength. between them at these two points. When you
Analytically it is represented by the equation the have completed your analysis click on the
ratio of the alternate stress, sigma a, to the solution button to check your answer.
endurance limit, sigma e, plus the square of the
ratio of the mean stress, sigma m, to the tensile (Solution on Pages 215 and 216)
strength, sigma u, is equal to one. To introduce
a factor of safety into this express n is added to
the numerator of the two stress ratios on the left
side of the equation. Of the three theories
presented preference for design applications
and analysis is generally accorded to the
Goodman theory. As such it will be used
throughout the remainder of this chapter.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 197 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
13. Sample Problem 1
A sample problem will now be solved to illustrate
a typical application of the Goodman theory of
failure analysis. In this instance a flat
cantilevered spring is subjected to a fluctuating
end load. The dimensions of the element are
obtained by clicking on the hot word in red at the
beginning of the problem statement. The tensile
strength of the spring material is specified as
well as a stress concentration at the end where
it is clamped. With these specifications and the
load variation it is desired to determine the factor
of safety for three specific conditions. The first
requires that the mean stress be held constant,
the second requires that the alternating stress
be held constant and the third specifies that the
amplitude ratio of the alternating to the mean
stress be held constant.
(Linked Figure on Page 219)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 198 -
14. Prob. – 1 Solution – Page 1
Since only the tensile strength of the material is
given the first task is to obtain an estimate for
the endurance limit of the steel. A value for the
uncorrected or test specimen endurance limit is
obtained by multiplying the tensile strength,
sigma u, by 0.504 to give a value of 42.8 kpsi.
Next the correction factors need to be
determined to reduce the uncorrected
endurance limit to what it will be for the
mechanical element. Using the appropriate
constants for a ground surface finish the surface
factor, ka, is calculated to be 0.918.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
15. Prob. – 1 Solution – Page 2
The size factor is determined by first substituting
the cross section dimensions of the spring into
the expression for the effective diameter. This
gives a value of 0.1429 inches. This effective
diameter is then substituted into the size factor
equation for shafts less than 2 inches in
diameter. The result of the calculation is a value
for kb of 1.08. Since size factors are normally
considered to be less than one kb will be taken
as one to be conservative. With the spring
subjected to a bending load the load factor, kc ,
will also be one as will the temperature factor,
kd, since the spring will operate at room
temperature. Finally the factor ke due to the
stress concentration at the clamp, where the
stress loading will be the greatest is one over
1.2 giving a value of 0.835.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 199 -
16. Prob. – 1 Solution – Page 3
The part endurance limit is now obtained by
multiplying sigma e by the product of all the
correction factors. This results in a value of
32.73 kpsi for the corrected endurance limit
sigma e prime. Next the loads and stresses
need to be calculated. The mean load of the
variation from 6 to 14 lbs is just 10 lbs while the
alternating load component is 4 lbs. The
bending stresses due to these loads will be a
maximum at the clamp and will be given by the
expression Mc over I. I is determined from the
cross sectional dimensions and the expression
bh cubed over twelve as 1.02 times ten to the
minus fifth power. Substituting the loads, beam
length, I and c as 1 /32 inch into the stress
formula gives a mean stress of 30.7 kpsi and an
alternating stress of 12.3 kpsi.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
17. Prob. – 1 Solution – Page 4
Now consider the construction of a Goodman
theory diagram with the numerical values
calculated so far. Sigma e prime equal to 32.73
kpsi is plotted on the vertical axis while the
tensile strength sigma u equal to 85 kpsi is
plotted on the horizontal axis. A straight line is
then drawn between these two points depicting
the Goodman theory of failure line. Next the
coordinates sigma m of 30.7 kpsi and sigma a of
12.3 kpsi define the point marked by the light
gray dot. The solution to the first part of the
problem is obtained by holding sigma m
constant and allowing sigma a to increase to the
value of sigma a super a at the red dot and then
dividing sigma a super a by sigma a to obtain a
factor of safety. A similar procedure is used to
solve the second part of the problem with the
exception that sigma a is held constant and
sigma m is permitted to increase to sigma m
super b at the green dot. For the third part the
ratio of sigma a to sigma m is held constant and
both values are permitted to increase along the
diagonal to the blue dot at point c.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 200 -
18. Prob. – 1 Solution – Page 5
The ratios of the sides of similar triangles will
now be used to determine the unknown mean
and alternating stress values for failure in the
three scenarios described on the previous page.
For part a the two triangles to be used are
shown on the Goodman diagram by clicking on
the graphic button. An equation to solve for
sigma a super a is obtained by equating the
vertical to the base on the green triangle to the
vertical to the base on the red triangle. Now
close the popup window. By substituting the
appropriate numbers for all the known quantities
sigma a super a can be determined to be 20.91
kpsi. Dividing this value by sigma a from the
original loading gives a factor of safety of 1.70.
Another way of interpreting this result is that the
alternating value of the load can be increased by
70 % while keeping the mean load constant
before failure due to fatigue will take place. For
part b click on the graphic button to see that the
ration of the vertical side of the green triangle to
its base is similar to the vertical side of the red
triangle to its base. This results in an equation
in which the only unknown is sigma m super b.
Now close the pop up window. Substituting the
known parameters into the equation of side
ratios permits sigma m super b to be determined
as 53.06 kpsi. Dividing this value by sigma m
equal to 30.7 gives a factor of safety of 1.73 if
sigma a is held constant.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
19. Prob. –1 Solution – Page 6
For part b the figure shows that the ratio of the
vertical side of the green triangle to its base is
similar to the vertical side of the red triangle to
its base. This results in an equation in which the
only unknown is sigma m super b. Substituting
the known parameters into the equation of side
ratios permits sigma m super b to be determined
as 53.06 kpsi. Dividing this value by sigma m
equal to 30.7 gives a factor of safety of 1.73 if
sigma a is held constant.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 201 -
20. Prob. –1 Solution – Page 7
In part c the equation involving the unknown
stress parameters that will bring on fatigue
failure is obtained using the similar triangles in
the figure obtained by again clicking on the
graphic button. Once more the equation
becomes the ratio of the vertical side of the
green triangle to its base equated to the ratio of
the vertical side to the base of the red triangle.
Now go back to the presentation by closing the
pop up window. It is observed that the equation
involves two unknowns, sigma a super c and
sigma m super c. However, the ratio of sigma a
to sigma m is to be held constant in this part of
the solution so sigma a super c can be replaced
by 0.401 times sigma m super c. Solving for
sigma m super c gives a value of 41.64 kpsi.
The factor of safety is again determined by
dividing sigma m super c by sigma m to give
value of 1.36. Why is this factor of safety
significantly less than that calculated for parts a
and b?
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
21.Exercise -3
This exercise will give you practice with solving
a problem similar to the sample just concluded.
Note that the applied tensile load consists of two
components, one that is constant and a second
component that is fluctuating. Also note that the
ratio of the endurance stress to the tensile
strength is not 0.504. When you obtain your
result click on the solution button to check your
answer before going on to the rest of the
presentation.
(Linked Sketch on Page 219)
(Solution on Pages 216, 217 and 218)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 202 -
22. Fluctuating Torsional Fatigue
All the subject material covered to this point in
Chapter 9 has dealt with fatigue due to a
fluctuating normal stress loading condition. The
question is now raised as to how to treat this
type of problem when the applied stress is due
to a torsional loading. A Goodman diagram is
again employed with the endurance limit
replaced by a corrected torsional endurance limit
and the tensile strength is replaced by an
ultimate shear strength. The process of analysis
remains the same after the alternating and mean
shear stress components are determined from
the torsional loading. In determining the
corrected shear endurance limit from the
endurance limit the load factor kc is always
taken to be 0.577 for torsion. The ultimate
strength in shear is estimated as 0.67 times the
tensile strength after the work of Joerres at
Associated Spring.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
23. Combined Loading Mode
The next problem of interest is how to perform a
fatigue analysis when the loading system results
in both normal and shear fluctuating stress in a
combined mode of application. On this and the
following page are the series of steps generally
accepted as appropriate to analyze this type of
problem. The first step is to determine the mean
and alternating stress components for all applied
loads. The second step is to apply stress
concentration factors to the alternating
components of all resultant stresses. The third
step is to multiply any alternating axial stress
components by 1.083. With all stress
components known, modified and combined
appropriately use Mohr’s circle to determine the
principal mean stresses from the mean stress
component system and the principal alternating
stresses from the alternating stress component
system.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 203 -
24. Combined Loading Mode (continued)
With the mean and alternating principal stresses
determined effective values of mean stress and
alternating stress are calculated using the
equation in step 5. This effective stress is called
the von Misses stress and is a consequence of a
distortion energy consideration. Step 6 specifies
that the material properties to be used are the
endurance limit in bending and the tensile
strength. However, the endurance limit should
not be corrected for stress concentration effects,
as these were included in step 2. Finally apply
the Goodman fatigue analysis using the effective
alternating stress, sigma a super e, and the
effective mean stress, sigma m super e.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
25. Sample Problem - 2
A sample problem involving combined loading
will now be solved using the process outlined on
the last two pages. A rotating shaft transmits a
constant torque that generates a shear stress of
8 kpsi. The shaft is also subjected to an axial
load that produces a tension of 10 kpsi. In
addition the shaft carries a bending load that
results in a maximum alternating bending stress
of +/- 23 kpsi. Determine the factor of safety for
this shaft it its material has a tensile strength of
75 kpsi and its corrected endurance limit is 37
kpsi.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 204 -
26. Prob. 2 Solution Page 1
All corrections for axial load and stress
concentrations are neglected in this problem for
simplicity. Begin by considering the stressed
element on the upper left of the page. It is
subjected to a fluctuating bending stress and
constant axial stress as well as a constant
shear. The alternating normal stress component
is one half the difference between the maximum
and minimum normal stresses combing the
components from bending and axial tension.
This gives a value for sigma a equal to 23 kpsi.
The mean normal stress is the average of the
maximum and minimum normal stress which
gives a value of 10 kpsi. These results could
have been seen by inspection since the axial
tension is constant and the bending contribution
is completely reversed. The mean shear stress,
tau m is 8 kpsi since there is no alternating
component which in turn means that tau a is
zero. The principal mean and alternating
components are now calculated by substituting
the mean and alternating stress components
into the equations that define principal stress.
This gives values of 14.43 kpsi for sigma one
super m and –4.43 for sigma 2 super m.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
27. Prob. 2 Solution Page 2
The principal alternating stresses are simple to
calculate since there is no alternating shear
stress component. Hence sigma one super a is
just 23 kpsi and sigma two super a is zero. Next
the effective mean and alternating von Mises
stresses are calculated using the formula that
comes from distortion energy considerations.
Substituting the values of sigma one super m
and sigma two super m into the equation gives a
value of 17.7 kpsi for the effective mean stress,
sigma e super m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 205 -
28. Prob. 2 Solution Page 3
The effective alternating stresses are again easy
to calculate since there is no alternating shear
stress component. Consequently sigma e super
a is just 23 kpsi. The Goodman diagram with all
the appropriate stress parameters is depicted on
the lower portion of the page. Again the ratios of
the sides of similar triangles are used to
establish an equation relating sigma e super m
prime to sigma e super a prime that designates
a failure point on the Goodman diagram
assuming the ratio of sigma e super a to sigma e
super m remains constant.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
29. Prob. 2 Solution Page 4
The final step in the solution is to solve the
equation for the failure condition from the
previous slide for one of the unknown primed
effective stresses. This is accomplished by first
recognizing that holding constant the ratio of the
applied fluctuating effective stress to the applied
effective mean stress permits sigma e super a
prime to be replaced by 1.35 times sigma e
super m prime. The resulting equation is then
solved for sigma e super m prime to give a value
of 20.1 kpsi. The factor of safety is then given
by the ratio of sigma e super m prime divided by
sigma e super m. The final factor of safety is
1.17. Although this sample was somewhat
simplified to shorten the required calculations
the fatigue analysis process used to include the
effect of a combined stress state has been
demonstrated.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 206 -
30. Cumulative Fatigue Damage
If a reversed stress in excess of the endurance
limit is applied for a finite number of cycles less
than the fatigue life associated with that stress
level the material will undergo fatigue damage.
That is, the endurance limit for the material will
be lowered as a consequence of the damage so
that further application of another level of
reversed stress will reduce its fatigue life from
what it could be if applied initially. A method of
analytically treating this problem called the
Palmgren-Minor Summation Theory will now be
discussed. Basically this theory is expressed
analytically by the equation that the sum of the
ratios of the number of cycles of applied load to
the original fatigue life at that stress level is
equal to a constant. That is n1 over cap N1 plus
n2 over cap N2 plus additional like terms is
equal to a constant C. Experimentally the value
of this constant appears to vary from 0.7 to 2.2.
For simplicity and since it will in general be
conservative the constant is taken to be unity for
fatigue design analysis purposes. The theory is
then expressed as the sum of the ratios is
simply equal to one.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

31. Palmgren-Minor Theory Application

The application of the Palmgren-Minor theory sustained from the application of sigma one for n
can be demonstrated graphically on the S-N 1 cycles is designated sigma e super 1.
diagram shown on this page. Both of the axes Although it won’t be shown here the dotted red
are log scales so that the fatigue life versus line can be used to derive the generic Palmgren-
cycles of reversed load application can be Minor summation equation equal to 1. Note that
represented as a straight line over the range of n 2 on the graph which is the reduced life at the
103 to 106 cycles starting at 0.9 of the tensile original endurance limit due to the damage can
strength, sigma u, and decreasing to the be solved for directly with the equation that n 2
endurance limit of the original material, sigma e is equal to the 1 minus the ratio of n 1 to cap N 1
super 0, before it becomes a horizontal line. with the entire quantity multiplied by cap N 2.
Now consider the application of a reversed This will all be demonstrated in a numerical
stress of magnitude sigma 1 applied for n1 answer that follows immediately.
cycles as indicated. At this stress level the
normal fatigue life would be cap N 1cycles as
designated by the point sigma f super 0. The
difference between cap N 1and n 1 is plotted as
a point at the sigma 1 stress level as shown by
the point sigma f super 1. To apply the
Palmgren-Minor theory a straight line parallel to
the original fatigue life line is drawn through the
(cap N 1 –n 1) point to 106 cycles before it
becomes horizontal. This is indicated by the
dotted red curve. It is observed that the
intersection of this line with a vertical from the
106 cycle point on the horizontal line is at a
stress level less than the original endurance
limit, sigma e super 0. The reduced endurance
limit due to the fatigue damage of the material

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 207 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
32. Sample Problem 3
To demonstrate the numerical application of the
Palmgren-Minor theory consider the following
example problem. A part with a tensile strength
of 90 kpsi and an endurance limit of 40 kpsi is
subjected to a reversed normal stress of 65 kpsi
for 3000 cycles. For these conditions find: a. the
remaining life of the part if the stress is
maintained at 65 kpsi., b. the remaining life if the
stress is reduced to 40 kpsi from 65 kpsi. and c.
the endurance limit after being subjected to 65
kpsi for 3000 cycles.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 208 -
33. Prob. – 3 Solution – page 1
To determine the remaining fatigue life at 65
kpsi it is first necessary to find the total fatigue
life at this stress level. Again the ratio of the
sides of similar triangles on the figure on the
previous page will be used for this purpose.
Click on the graphic button to pop up a figure
illustrating these similar triangles. The first
equation on this page in which cap N 1 is the
only unknown is developed using the green and
red triangles depicted. Keep in mind that the
equation is written in terms of the logs of the
parameters since the axes on the figure are to a
log scale both horizontally and vertically.
Substituting the parameters values into the
equation and taking logs as indicated leads to a
numerical value for the log of cap N 1. Taking
the anti log of this number gives the fatigue life
at 65 kpsi as 8729 cycles. Hence the remaining
life after 3000 cycles at 65 kpsi is 5729 cycles.
This is the solution to part a of the problem.
(Graphic on Page 220)
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
34. Prob. – 3 Solution – page 2
For part b the Palmgren-Minor summation
equation can be used to solve for n 2 the
number of cycles the damaged material will
under go after the stress level is reduced to 40
kpsi which was the endurance limit of the
undamaged material. This is simply a matter of
substituting the appropriate values into the
equation for n 2 given by one minus the ratio of
n 1 to cap N1 with the entire quantity multiplied
by cap N 2 which would be 106 cycles at the
original endurance limit. Carrying out this
calculation indicates that the fatigue life is
reduced to a finite value of 656 thousand cycles
from an initial fatigue life of 1 million cycles or
more.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 209 -
35. Prob. – 3 Solution – page 3
To determine the reduced endurance limit of the
damaged material as requested in part c again
the ratio of the sides of similar triangles will be
used to obtain an equation in which sigma e
super 1 is the only unknown. Click on the
graphic button to uncover a pop up window that
shows the triangles used to obtain this equation.
Again note that both the vertical and horizontals
axes are prescribed in log scale divisions. The
green triangle is used for the left side of the
equation and the red triangle for the right side.
Once again the known parameters are inserted
in the equation log are taken as required and the
log of sigma e super 1 is determined to be
4.582. Taking the anti log gives a value of 38.2
kpsi for the endurance limit of the damaged
material. Note that his represents a 4.5
%decrease from the original value of 40 kpsi.
(Graphic on Page 221)
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
36. Mason’s Modification.
It should be recognized that the Palmgren-Minor
theory in proposing a parallel line to the original
fatigue life line to represent the reduced fatigue
life of the damaged material introduces an error
at 103 cycles since it also reduces the value of
the ultimate strength used to establish the
starting point of the fatigue life line. Mason has
proposed a modification to correct this error. In
this modification the reduced fatigue life line of
the damaged material still passes through the
point sigma f super 1 at cap N 1minus n 1 cycles
as already calculated but the line starts at 0.9
sigma u as on the original fatigue life line. This
is illustrated by the graphic on this page. The
consequence of this is that the finite life n 2 at
the original endurance limit stress will be shorter
than that predicted by Palmgren-Minor and the
endurance limit of the damaged material, sigma
e super 1, will be smaller than that calculated on
the previous slide.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 210 -
37. Prob. – 3 Solution – page 4
The reduction in n 2 and sigma e super 1 will
now be recalculated incorporating the Mason
modification. An equation for n 2m is again
developed using the ratio of the sides of two
similar triangles. Click on the graphic button to
see these triangles on the Mason modified
diagram. The green triangle is used for the left
side of the equation and the red triangle for the
right side. The only unknown in this equation is
n 2m the finite life at the original endurance limit.
Substituting the known parameters and carrying
out the indicated numerical manipulations gives
a result for the log of n 2m equal to 5.42. This
converts to a finite life of 263 thousand cycles or
a reduction of almost 60 % from that predicted
by the Palmgren-Minor theory. This large
reduction is a consequence of the effect of the
log scale.
(Graphic on Page 221)
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

38. Prob. – 3 Solution – page 5 39. Review Exercise

To determine the reduced endurance limit as In this review exercise the items in the list on the
affected by the Mason modification the ratio of left are to be matched with the mathematical
the sides of similar triangles are again used from relationships on the right. Place the cursor over
the damaged S-N diagram. Click on the graphic an item on the left and hold down the left button.
button to bring up a diagram showing these A pencil will appear that can be dragged to one
triangles. The green triangle is used for the left of the green dots on the right. If the right choice
side of the equation and the red triangle is used is made the arrow will remain. If the selection is
for the right side. The only unknown in this incorrect the arrow will disappear. After the
equation is the reduced endurance limit, sigma e exercise is completed proceed to the next page.
super 1. Substituting the appropriate parameter
values into the equation and solving for the log
of sigma e super 1 gives a value of 4.53. Hence
the value of the reduced endurance limit is
33,880 psi. This represents an 11 percent
reduction in the value as predicted by the
Palmgren-Minor method. The use of the Mason
modification is considered to be a more accurate
method of analyzing cumulative damage and is
generally recommended and used in fatigue
design considerations where appropriate.

(Graphic on Page 222)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 211 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

40. Off Line Exercise

A vertical power screw used to raise and lower a

load is supported by a single bearing as shown
in the linked drawing. Below the bearing the
shaft has a reduced diameter with a fillet radius
at the transition. The applied axial load varies
between 12,000 and 8,000 lbs in phase with a
driving torque that fluctuates between 1000 in
lbs and –500 in lbs. The material has a tensile
strength of 150 kpsi. At the fillet the stress
concentration for the axial load is 1.23 and for
the torsional load is 1.35. Estimate the factor of
safety for this design. When you have finished
with this problem statement click on the exit
button or main menu button to leave the chapter.

(Linked Drawing on Page 220)

(Solution in Appendix)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 212 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Chapter 9
Fluctuating Load Analysis
Problem Solutions

Screen Titles

Problem 1 Solution
Problem 2 Solution
Problem 2 Solution (cont.)
Problem 3 Solution
Problem 3 Solution (cont.)
Problem 3 Solution (cont.)
Problem 3 Solution (cont.)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 213 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 214 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
1. Problem 1 - Solution
The equation of a straight line can be expressed
as x over a constant "a" plus y over a constant
"b" is equal to one. In this case the variable x is
sigma m and y is sigma a. To determine the
constants "a" and "b" use the two conditions that
x or sigma m is equal to sigma u, the tensile
strength, when y or sigma a is zero and y or
sigma a is equal to sigma e, the endurance limit,
when x or sigma m is zero. This gives "a" equal
to sigma u and "b" equal to sigma e. The final
equation becomes the ratio of sigma m to sigma
u plus the ratio of sigma a to sigma e equal to
one.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 215 -
2. Problem 2 - Solution
Begin with the Goodman equation for failure and
the Gerber equation including a factor of safety.
Since n as a function of the ratio of sigma m, the
mean stress, to sigma u, the tensile strength, is
desired it is necessary to eliminate sigma a over
sigma e between the two equations. This is
done by solving the Goodman equation for
sigma a over sigma e and substituting into the
Gerber equation which contains the factor of
safety.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
3. Problem 2- Solution (cont.)
The substitution discussed on the previous page
results in a quadratic equation in n with
coefficients that are dependent on the ratio of
sigma m to sigma u. The table gives values of n
for values of sigma m over sigma u from zero to
one at increments of 0.2. It is observed that
using the Gerber equation provides at most a
factor of safety of 20 % over the failure
prediction by the Goodman diagram.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 216 -
4. Problem 3 – Solution
At the transition point the maximum axial force is
1300 lbs while the minimum axial force is -300
lbs due to the two axial components. Thus the
mean value of fluctuating force is the average of
these two values or 800 lbs. and the alternating
component is 500 lbs. The area of the cross
section acted on by the forces is calculated
using the larger diameter of 3/16 inch. This
gives an area of .026 square inches. Then the
mean and alternating normal stress are
calculated to be 30,769 psi and 19,230 psi
respectively.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9
5. Problem 3 – Solution (cont.)
The correction factors for the part endurance
limit are now determined. With a ground finish
ka is calculated to be .902. The size factor Kb
for a 3/16-diameter rod is given by 1.05 and is
taken to be 1 to be conservative. The load
factor kc for an axial load is 0.923 since sigma u
is less than 220 kpsi. The temperature factor kd
is unity and the ke factor due to the stress
concentration factor of 1.15 is .87. Multiplying
these factors together times the uncorrected
endurance limit gives a part endurance limit of
47.1 kpsi.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 217 -
6. Problem 3 – Solution (cont.)
Shown on this page is the Goodman diagram for
this problem with the relevant parameters
already calculated. To determine the largest
possible alternating component of stress, sigma
a prime, with sigma m held constant an equation
can be developed from the geometry of the
diagram making use of the vertical and
horizontal sides of similar triangles. Thus the
left side of the equation involving sigma a prime
is obtained from the small green triangle. The
left side of the equation comes from the large
red triangle. This equation can then be solved
for sigma a prime since all the other parameters
are known.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

7. Problem 3 – Solution (cont.)

By substituting the known values from the

diagram into the equation for sigma a prime
gives a result for this unknown quantity of 33.33
kpsi. This value of sigma a prime, which is the
maximum value the alternating stress can
achieve, is 1.73 times the actual value of the
alternating stress. Then F a prime becomes 865
lbs. resulting in an F max of 1665 lbs and an F
min of – 65 lbs. Finally, with F1 held constant at
500 lbs. F 2 prime can vary from +1165 lbs. to –
565 lbs. before failure will occur.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 218 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Figure for Screen 13

Figure for Screen 21

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 219 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Figure for Screen 40

Graphic for Screen 33

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 220 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Graphic for Screen 35

Graphic for Screen 37

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 221 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 9

Graphic for Screen 38

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Fluctuating Load Analysis - 222 - C.F. Zorowski  2002