Abaqus Analysis User's Guide

6.2.7 Low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic approach

Products: Abaqus/Standard Abaqus/CAE

References

• “Defining an analysis,” Section 6.1.2

• “Static stress analysis procedures: overview,” Section 6.2.1
• “Direct cyclic analysis,” Section 6.2.6
• “Crack propagation analysis,” Section 11.4.3
• “Damage and failure for ductile materials in low-cycle fatigue analysis,” Section 24.4
• “Modeling discontinuities as an enriched feature using the extended finite element
method,” Section 10.7.1
• *DAMAGE EVOLUTION
• *DAMAGE INITIATION
• *DEBOND
• *DIRECT CYCLIC
• *FRACTURE CRITERION
• *CONTROLS
• “Configuring a direct cyclic procedure” in “Configuring general analysis
procedures,” Section 14.11.1 of the Abaqus/CAE User's Guide

Overview

A low-cycle fatigue analysis:

• is characterized by states of stress high enough for inelastic deformation to occur in

most cases;
• is a quasi-static analysis on a structure subjected to sub-critical cyclic loading;
• can be associated with thermal as well as mechanical loading;
• uses the direct cyclic approach to obtain the stabilized cyclic response of the structure
directly;
• models progressive damage and failure in bulk ductile material based on a continuum
damage mechanics approach, in which case damage initiation and evolution are

1
 characterized by the accumulated inelastic hysteresis strain energy per stabilized
cycle;
• models propagation of a discrete crack along an arbitrary, solution-dependent path
without remeshing in the bulk material based on the principles of linear elastic fracture
mechanics (LEFM) with the extended finite element method, in which case the onset
and growth of fatigue crack are characterized by the relative fracture energy release
rate;
• models progressive delamination growth along a predefined path at the interfaces in
laminated composites, in which case the onset and growth of fatigue delamination at
the interfaces are characterized by the relative fracture energy release rate;
• uses the damage extrapolation technique to accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis;
and
• assumes geometrically linear behavior and fixed contact conditions within each
loading cycle.

Approaches to low-cycle fatigue analysis

The traditional approach for determining the fatigue limit for a structure is to establish
the curves (load versus number of cycles to failure) for the materials in the structure.
Such an approach is still used as a design tool in many cases to predict fatigue resistance of
engineering structures. However, this technique is generally conservative, and it does not
define a relationship between the cycle number and the degree of damage or crack length.

One alternative approach is to predict the fatigue life by using a crack/damage evolution law
based on the inelastic strain/energy when the structure's response is stabilized after many
cycles. Because the computational cost to simulate the slow progressive damage in a material
over many load cycles is prohibitively expensive for all but the simplest models, numerical
fatigue life studies usually involve modeling the response of the structure subjected to a
small fraction of the actual loading history. This response is then extrapolated over many
load cycles using empirical formulae such as the Coffin-Manson relationship (see Coffin,
1954, and Manson, 1953) to predict the likelihood of crack initiation and propagation. Since
this approach is based on a constant crack/damage growth rate, it may not realistically
predict the evolution of the crack or damage.

Low-cycle fatigue analysis in Abaqus/Standard

The direct cyclic analysis capability in Abaqus/Standard provides a computationally

effective modeling technique to obtain the stabilized response of a structure subjected to
periodic loading and is ideally suited to perform low-cycle fatigue calculations on a large

2
structure. The capability uses a combination of Fourier series and time integration of the
nonlinear material behavior to obtain the stabilized response of the structure directly. The
theory and algorithm to obtain a stabilized response using the direct cyclic approach are
described in detail in “Direct cyclic algorithm,”Section 2.2.3 of the Abaqus Theory Guide.

The direct cyclic low-cycle fatigue procedure models the progressive damage and failure
both in bulk materials (such as in solder joints in an electronic chip packaging or intra-
laminar crack growth in laminated composites) and at material interfaces (such as
delamination in laminated composites). The former can be based on either a continuum
damage mechanics approach or the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the
extended finite element method. The response is obtained by evaluating the behavior of the
structure at discrete points along the loading history (see Figure 6.2.7–1). The solution at
each of these points is used to predict the degradation and evolution of material properties
that will take place during the next increment, which spans a number of load cycles, .
The degraded material properties are then used to compute the solution at the next increment
in the load history. Therefore, the crack/damage growth rate is updated continually
throughout the analysis.

Figure 6.2.7–1 Elastic stiffness degradation as a function of the cycle number.

The elastic material stiffness at a material point remains constant and contact conditions
remain unchanged when the stabilized solution is computed at a given point in the loading
history. Each of the solutions along the loading history represents the stabilized response of
the structure subjected to the applied period loads, with a level of material damage at each
point in the structure computed from the previous solution. This process is repeated up to a
point in the loading history at which a fatigue life assessment can be made.

In bulk material, there are two approaches to modeling the progressive damage and failure.
One approach is based on continuum damage mechanics. This approach is more appropriate
for ductile material, in which the cyclic loading leads to stress reversals and the
accumulation of plastic strains, which in turn cause the initiation and propagation of cracks.
The damage initiation and evolution are characterized by the stabilized accumulated inelastic
hysteresis strain energy per cycle as illustrated in Figure 6.2.7–2. The other approach is
3
based on the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the extended finite element
method. This approach is more appropriate for brittle material or material with small scale
yielding, in which the cyclic loading leads to material strength degradation causing fatigue
crack growth along an arbitrary path. The onset and growth of the crack are characterized by
the relative fracture energy release rate at the crack tip based on the Paris law (Paris, 1961).

Figure 6.2.7–2 Plastic shakedown in a direct cyclic analysis.

At interfaces of laminated composites the cyclic loading leads to interface strength

degradation causing fatigue delamination growth. The onset and growth of delamination are
also characterized by the relative fracture energy release rate at the crack tip based on the
Paris law (Paris, 1961).

Both the progressive damage mechanism in the bulk material and the progressive
delamination growth mechanism at interfaces can be considered simultaneously, with the
failure occurring first at the weakest link in a model.

Defining a low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic approach is similar to defining a
direct cyclic analysis. See “Direct cyclic analysis,”Section 6.2.6, for details on how to
specify the number of Fourier terms, number of iterations, and the increment sizes. You
specify the maximum numbers of cycles, , when you define the low-cycle fatigue
analysis step.

Input File Usage: *DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE

first data line
,,

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Step module: Create Step: General: Direct

cyclic; Fatigue: Include low-cycle fatigue analysis, Maximum
number of cycles: Value:
4
Determining whether to use the Fourier coefficients from the previous step

A low-cycle fatigue step using the direct cyclic approach can be the only step in an analysis,
can follow a general or linear perturbation step, or can be followed by a general or linear
perturbation step. Multiple low-cycle fatigue analysis steps can be included in a single
analysis. In such a case the Fourier series coefficients obtained in the previous step can be
used as starting values in the current step. By default, the Fourier coefficients are reset to
zero, thus allowing application of cyclic loading conditions that are very different from those
defined in the previous low-cycle fatigue step.

As in a direct cyclic analysis, you can specify that a low-cycle fatigue step in a restart
analysis should use the Fourier coefficients from the previous step, thus allowing
continuation of an analysis to simulate more loading cycles. In a low-cycle fatigue analysis a
restart file is written at the end of the stabilized cycle. Consequently, a restart analysis that is
a continuation of a previous low-cycle fatigue analysis will start with a new loading cycle
at (see “Restarting an analysis,” Section 9.1.1).

Input File Usage: Use the following option to specify that the current step is a
continuation of the previous low-cycle fatigue step using the direct
cyclic approach:
*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE, CONTINUE=YES

Use the following option to reset the Fourier series coefficients to

zero:

*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE, CONTINUE=NO (default)

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Use the following option to specify that the current step is a
continuation of the previous low-cycle fatigue step using the direct
cyclic approach:
Step module: Create Step: General: Direct cyclic; Basic: Use
displacement Fourier coefficients from previous direct cyclic
step; Fatigue: Include low-cycle fatigue analysis

Use the following option to reset the Fourier series coefficients to

zero:

Step module: Create Step: General: Direct

cyclic; Fatigue: Include low-cycle fatigue analysis
5
Progressive damage and damage extrapolation in bulk ductile material based on
continuum damage mechanics approach

Low-cycle fatigue analysis in Abaqus/Standard allows modeling of progressive damage and

failure for ductile materials in any elements whose response is defined in terms of a
continuum-based constitutive model (“Material library: overview,” Section 21.1.1). This
includes cohesive elements modeled using a continuum approach (“Modeling of an adhesive
layer of finite thickness” in “Defining the constitutive response of cohesive elements using a
continuum approach,” Section 32.5.5). The inelastic definition in a material point must be
used in conjunction with the linear elastic material model (“Linear elastic behavior,” Section
22.2.1), the porous elastic material model (“Elastic behavior of porous materials,”Section
22.3.1), or the hypoelastic material model (“Hypoelastic behavior,” Section 22.4.1).

After damage initiation the elastic material stiffness is degraded progressively in each cycle
(as shown in Figure 6.2.7–1) based on the accumulated stabilized inelastic hysteresis energy.
It is impractical and computationally expensive to perform a cycle-by-cycle simulation for a
low-cycle fatigue analysis; Instead, to accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis, each
increment extrapolates the current damaged state in the bulk material forward over many
cycles to a new damaged state after the current loading cycle is stabilized.

Damage initiation and evolution

Damage initiation refers to the beginning of degradation of the response of a material point.
In a low-cycle fatigue analysis the damage initiation criterion is characterized by the
accumulated inelastic hysteresis energy per cycle, . and material constants are used
to determine the number of the cycle in which damage is initiated, . At the end of a
stabilized loading cycle, , Abaqus/Standard checks to see if the damage initiation
criterion is satisfied in any material point; material stiffness at a material point will
not be degraded unless this criterion is satisfied. The calculations and output associated with
damage initiation are discussed in detail in “Damage initiation for ductile materials in low-
cycle fatigue,” Section 24.4.2.

Once the damage initiation criterion is satisfied at a material point, the damage state is
calculated and updated based on the inelastic hysteresis energy for the stabilized cycle.
Abaqus/Standard assumes that the degradation of the elastic stiffness can be modeled using
the scalar damage variable, . The rate of the damage in a material point per cycle, , is
calculated based on the accumulated inelastic hysteresis energy, the characteristic length
6
associated with an integration point, and material constants. For details, see “Damage
evolution for ductile materials in low-cycle fatigue,” Section 24.4.3.

Typically, a material has completely lost its load carrying capacity when . You can
remove an element from the mesh if all of the section points at all integration locations of the
element have lost their load carrying capability.

Damage extrapolation technique in the bulk material

If the damage initiation criterion is satisfied in any material point at the end of a stabilized
cycle, , Abaqus/Standard extrapolates the damage variable from the current cycle
forward to the next increment over a number of cycles, . The new damage state,
, is given by

where is the characteristic length associated with an integration point, and and are
material constants (see “Damage evolution for ductile materials in low-cycle
fatigue,” Section 24.4.3, for more information).

You specify the minimum ( ) and maximum ( ) number of cycles over which
the damage is extrapolated forward in any given increment. The default values are 100 and
1000, respectively.

Input File Usage: *DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE

first data line
,

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Step module: Create Step: General: Direct

cyclic; Fatigue: Include low-cycle fatigue analysis, Cycle
increment size:Minimum: , Maximum:

Discrete crack propagation along an arbitrary path based on the principles of linear
elastic fracture mechanics with the extended finite element method

Low-cycle fatigue analysis in Abaqus/Standard allows the modeling of discrete crack growth
along an arbitrary path based on the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the
extended finite element method. You complete the definition of the crack propagation
7
capability by defining a fracture-based surface behavior and specifying the fracture criterion
in enriched elements. The fracture energy release rates at the crack tips in enriched elements
are calculated based on the modified virtual crack closure technique (VCCT). VCCT uses the
principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics. Therefore, VCCT is appropriate for problems
in which brittle fatigue crack growth occurs, although nonlinear material deformations can
occur somewhere else in the bulk materials. For more information about defining fracture
criteria and VCCT in enriched elements, see “Modeling discontinuities as an enriched
feature using the extended finite element method,” Section 10.7.1.

To accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis, the damage extrapolation technique is used,
which advances the crack by at least one element length after each stabilized cycle.

Onset and growth of fatigue crack

The onset and growth of fatigue crack at an enriched element are characterized by using the
Paris law, which relates the relative fracture energy release rate, , to crack growth rates.
Two criteria must be met to initiate fatigue crack growth: one criterion is based on material
constants, , and the current cycle number, ; the other criterion is based on the
maximum fracture energy release rate, , which corresponds to the cyclic energy release
rate when the structure is loaded up to its maximum value. Once the onset of fatigue crack
growth criterion is satisfied at the enriched elements, the crack growth rate, , is a
piecewise function based on material constants and (the Paris law). The criteria for
fatigue crack onset and growth are discussed in detail in “Modeling discontinuities as an
enriched feature using the extended finite element method,”Section 10.7.1.

Damage extrapolation technique

If the onset of crack growth criterion is satisfied at any crack tip in the enriched element at
the end of a stabilized cycle, , Abaqus/Standard extends the crack length, , from the
current cycle forward over a number of cycles, , to by fracturing at least one
enriched element ahead of the crack tips. Given the material constants and (as defined
in “Modeling discontinuities as an enriched feature using the extended finite element
method,” Section 10.7.1), combined with the known element length and likely propagation
direction at the enriched elements ahead of the crack tips, the number
of cycles necessary to fail each enriched element ahead of the crack tip can be calculated
as , where represents the enriched element ahead of the th crack tip. The analysis is
set up to advance the crack by at least one enriched element per increment after the loading
cycle is stabilized. The element with the fewest cycles is identified to be fractured, and
its is represented as the number of cycles to grow the crack equal to its
element length, . The most critical element is completely fractured
8
with a zero constraint and a zero stiffness at the cracked surfaces at the end of the stabilized
cycle. As the enriched element is fractured, the load is redistributed, and a new relative
fracture energy release rate must be calculated for the enriched elements ahead of the crack
tips for the next cycle. This capability allows at least one enriched element ahead of the
crack tips to be fractured after each stabilized cycle and precisely accounts for the number of
cycles needed to cause fatigue crack growth over that length.

Progressive delamination growth along a pre-defined path at interfaces

Low-cycle fatigue analysis in Abaqus/Standard also allows the modeling of progressive

delamination growth at the interfaces in laminated composites. The interface along which the
delamination (or crack) propagates must be indicated in the model using a fracture criterion
definition. The fracture energy release rates at the crack tips in the interface elements are
calculated based on the virtual crack closure technique (VCCT). VCCT uses the principles of
linear elastic fracture mechanics. Therefore, VCCT is appropriate for problems in which
brittle fatigue delamination growth occurs along predefined surfaces, although nonlinear
material deformations can occur in the bulk materials. For more information about defining
fracture criteria and VCCT, see “Crack propagation analysis,” Section 11.4.3.

To accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis, the damage extrapolation technique is used,
which releases at least one element length at the crack tip along the interface after each
stabilized cycle. When both brittle fatigue delamination at interfaces and ductile damage or
discrete crack growth in bulk materials are considered in an analysis, failure occurs first at
the weakest link.

Onset and growth of fatigue delamination

The onset and growth of fatigue delamination at a defined crack interface are characterized
by using the Paris law, which relates the relative fracture energy release rate, , to crack
growth rates. Two criteria must be met to initiate fatigue delamination growth: one criterion
is based on material constants, , and the current cycle number, ; the other criterion is
based on the maximum fracture energy release rate, , which corresponds to the cyclic
energy release rate when the structure is loaded up to its maximum value. Once the onset of
delamination growth criterion is satisfied at the interface, the delamination growth rate, ,
is a piecewise function based on material constants and (the Paris law). The criteria for
fatigue delamination onset and growth are discussed in detail in “Low-cycle fatigue
criterion” in “Crack propagation analysis,”Section 11.4.3.

Damage extrapolation technique at the interface elements

9
If the onset of delamination growth criterion is satisfied at any crack tip in the interface at the
end of a stabilized cycle, , Abaqus/Standard extends the crack length, , from the current
cycle forward over a number of cycles, , to by releasing at least one element at
the interface. Given the material constants and (as defined in “Low-cycle fatigue
criterion” in “Crack propagation analysis,” Section 11.4.3), combined with the known node
spacing at the interface elements at the crack tips, the number of
cycles necessary to fail each interface element at the crack tip can be calculated as ,
where j represents the node at the jth crack tip. The analysis is set up to release at least one
interface element per increment after the loading cycle is stabilized. The element with the
fewest cycles is identified to be released, and its is represented as the
number of cycles to grow the crack equal to its element length, . The
most critical element is completely released with a zero constraint and a zero stiffness at the
end of the stabilized cycle. As the interface element is released, the load is redistributed, and
a new relative fracture energy release rate must be calculated for the interface elements at the
crack tips for the next cycle. This capability allows at least one interface element at the crack
tips to be released after each stabilized cycle and precisely accounts for the number of cycles
needed to cause fatigue crack growth over that length.

Controlling the solution accuracy

Low-cycle fatigue analysis utilizes the direct cyclic approach to obtain the stabilized cyclic
solution iteratively by combining a Fourier series approximation with time integration of the
nonlinear material behavior using a modified Newton method. The accuracy of the algorithm
depends on the number of Fourier terms used, the number of iterations taken to obtain the
stabilized solution, and the number of time points within the load period at which the
material response and residual vector are evaluated. Some methods for controlling the
solution accuracy in a direct cyclic analysis are described in detail in “Direct cyclic
analysis,” Section 6.2.6. They all remain valid in a low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct
cyclic approach. In addition, the accuracy of a low-cycle fatigue analysis depends on the
number of cycles over which the damage is extrapolated forward, as described below.

Controlling the accuracy of damage extrapolation in the bulk material when using
continuum damage mechanics approach

To accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis, the damage extrapolation technique is used at
the end of a stabilized cycle. In addition to specifying the minimum and maximum number
of cycles over which the damage is extrapolated (see “Damage extrapolation technique in the
bulk material” above), you can specify the damage extrapolation tolerance, , to control
the accuracy of damage extrapolation in the bulk material. The default is .
10
Input File Usage: Use the following option to specify the damage extrapolation
tolerance:
*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE
first data line
,,,

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Step module: Create Step: General: Direct

cyclic; Fatigue: Include low-cycle fatigue analysis, Damage
extrapolation tolerance:

Determining the increment over which damage is extrapolated forward

Abaqus/Standard uses an adaptive algorithm to determine the number of cycles over which
the damage is extrapolated forward in each increment. By default, Abaqus/Standard starts
with 500 cycles (half of the default value of maximum increment in number of cycles) and
determines the maximum damage increment at any material points based on

If the maximum damage increment, , is greater than the damage extrapolation tolerance
that you specify, the number of cycles over which the damage is extrapolated forward is
reduced accordingly to ensure the maximum damage increment is less than the damage
extrapolation tolerance. On the other hand, if the maximum damage increment at all material
points is less than half of the damage extrapolation tolerance that you specify, the number of
cycles is increased accordingly to ensure the maximum damage increment is equal to the
damage extrapolation tolerance.
Controlling the accuracy of damage extrapolation at the interface elements and at the
enriched elements

To accelerate the low-cycle fatigue analysis and to provide a smooth solution for the crack
front, you can specify a nonzero tolerance, , for the least number of cycles to fracture
an interface element or an enriched element:

In addition to the interface element or the enriched element that takes the fewest
cycles, , to be fractured, all the other interface or enriched elements that are satisfied
by the above condition will be fractured completely.

11
Input File Usage: Use the following option to specify the tolerance for the least
number of cycles to fracture an element:
*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE
first data line
,,,,

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Specifying a tolerance for the least number of cycles to fracture an
element is not supported in Abaqus/CAE.

Initial conditions

Initial values of stresses, temperatures, field variables, solution-dependent state variables,

etc. can be specified (see “Initial conditions in Abaqus/Standard and
Abaqus/Explicit,” Section 34.2.1).

Boundary conditions

Boundary conditions can be applied to any of the displacement or rotation degrees of

freedom. During the analysis, prescribed boundary conditions must have an amplitude
definition that is cyclic over the step: the start value must be equal to the end value
(see “Amplitude curves,”Section 34.1.2). If the analysis consists of several steps, the usual
rules apply (see “Boundary conditions in Abaqus/Standard and Abaqus/Explicit,” Section
34.3.1). At each new step the boundary condition can either be modified or completely
defined. All boundary conditions defined in previous steps remain unchanged unless they are
redefined.

Loads

The following loads can be prescribed in a low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic
approach:

• Concentrated nodal forces can be applied to the displacement degrees of freedom (1–
6); see “Concentrated loads,” Section 34.4.2.
• Distributed pressure forces or body forces can be applied; see “Distributed
loads,” Section 34.4.3. The distributed load types available with particular elements
are described in Part VI, “Elements.”
12
During the analysis each load must have an amplitude definition that is cyclic over the step
where the start value must be equal to the end value (see “Amplitude curves,” Section
34.1.2). If the analysis consists of several steps, the usual rules apply (see “Applying loads:
overview,” Section 34.4.1). At each new step the loading can either be modified or
completely defined. All loads defined in previous steps remain unchanged unless they are
redefined.

Predefined fields

The following predefined fields can be specified in a low-cycle fatigue analysis using the
direct cyclic approach, as described in “Predefined fields,” Section 34.6.1:

• Temperature is not a degree of freedom in a low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct
cyclic approach, but nodal temperatures can be specified as a predefined field. The
temperature values specified must be cyclic over the step: the start value must be equal
to the end value (see “Amplitude curves,” Section 34.1.2). If the temperatures are read
from the results file, you should specify initial temperature conditions equal to the
temperature values at the end of the step (see “Initial conditions in Abaqus/Standard
and Abaqus/Explicit,” Section 34.2.1). Alternatively, you can ramp the temperatures
back to their initial condition values, as described in “Predefined fields,” Section
34.6.1. Any difference between the applied and initial temperatures will cause thermal
strain if a thermal expansion coefficient is given for the material (“Thermal
expansion,” Section 26.1.2). The specified temperature also affects temperature-
dependent material properties, if any.
• The values of user-defined field variables can be specified. These values affect only
field-variable-dependent material properties, if any. The field variable values specified
must be cyclic over the step.

Material options

Most ductile material models that describe mechanical behavior are available for use in a
low-cycle fatigue analysis. The inelastic definition in a material point must be used in
conjunction with the linear elastic material model (“Linear elastic behavior,” Section 22.2.1),
the porous elastic material model (“Elastic behavior of porous materials,” Section 22.3.1), or
the hypoelastic material model (“Hypoelastic behavior,” Section 22.4.1).

The following material properties are not active during a low-cycle fatigue analysis: acoustic
properties, thermal properties (except for thermal expansion), mass diffusion properties,
electrical conductivity properties, piezoeletric properties, and pore fluid flow properties.
13
Rate-dependent yield (“Rate-dependent yield,” Section 23.2.3), rate-dependent creep (“Rate-
dependent plasticity: creep and swelling,” Section 23.2.4), and two-layer viscoplasticity
(“Two-layer viscoplasticity,” Section 23.2.11) can also be used during a low-cycle fatigue
analysis.

Elements

Any of the stress/displacement elements in Abaqus/Standard can be used in a low-cycle

fatigue analysis (see “Choosing the appropriate element for an analysis type,” Section
27.1.3). This includes cohesive elements with finite thickness (“Modeling of an adhesive
layer of finite thickness” in “Defining the constitutive response of cohesive elements using a
continuum approach,” Section 32.5.5). However, when modeling fatigue crack growth based
on the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the extended finite element
method, only first-order continuum stress/displacement elements and second-order
stress/displacement tetrahedron elements can be associated with an enriched feature
(see “Modeling discontinuities as an enriched feature using the extended finite element
method,” Section 10.7.1).

Output

Different types of output are available for postprocessing and for monitoring a low-cycle
fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic approach.

Message file information

As in a direct cyclic analysis, low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic approach in
Abaqus/Standard prints the residual force, time average force, and a flag to indicate if
equilibrium was satisfied in the message (.msg) file at different time increments for each
iteration in each loading cycle. You can control the frequency in increments at which
information is printed to the message file, and you can suppress the output; the default is to
print output every 10 increments (see “The Abaqus/Standard message file” in
“Output,” Section 4.1.1, for more information).

Abaqus/Standard also prints the number of Fourier terms used, the maximum residual
coefficient, the maximum correction to displacement coefficients, and the maximum
displacement coefficient in the Fourier series in the message file at the end of each iteration
in each cycle. An example of the output is shown below:

14
 CYCLE 5
STARTS

ITERATION 26 STARTS
INC TIME STEP LARG. RESI. TIME AVG. FORCE
INC TIME FORCE FORCE EQUV.
10 0.250 2.50 1.008E+01 50.9 N
20 0.250 5.00 1.622E+01 76.8 N
30 0.250 7.50 4.622E-02 99.8 Y

ITERATION 26 SUMMARY
NUMBER OF FOURIER TERMS USED 40, TOTAL NUMBER OF INCREMENTS 120
CYCLE/STEP TIME 30.0, TOTAL TIME COMPLETED 31.0
AVERAGE FORCE 21.2 TIME AVG. FORCE 25.7

MAX. COEFFICIENT OF DISP. 0.142 AT NODE 24 DOF 2

MAX. COEFF. OF RESI. FORCE ON CONST. TERM 31.7 AT NODE 44 DOF 1
MAX. COEFF. OF RESI. FORCE ON PERI. TERMS 0.82 AT NODE 6 DOF 3
MAX. CORR. TO COEFF. OF DISP. ON CONST. TERM 0.002 AT NODE 50 DOF 3
MAX. CORR. TO COEFF. OF DISP. ON PERI. TERMS 0.015 AT NODE 50 DOF 3
Results output

Element and nodal output are written only when the stabilized cycle is reached. If a
stabilized cycle has not been reached at the end of a cycle, output is written for the last
iteration of the cycle. All standard output variables in Abaqus/Standard (“Abaqus/Standard
output variable identifiers,”Section 4.2.1) are available. In addition, the following variables
are available for progressive damage in bulk ductile material based on the continuum
damage mechanics approach:

STATUS Status of element (the status of an element is 1.0 if the element is active,
0.0 if the element is not).
SDEG Scalar stiffness degradation, D.
CYCLEINI Number of cycles to initialize the damage at the material point.

The following variables are available for discrete crack propagation along an arbitrary path
based on the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the extended finite element
method:

15
STATUSXFEM Status of the enriched element. (The status of an enriched element is
1.0 if the element is completely cracked, 0.0 if the element is not. If
the element is partially cracked, the value lies between 1.0 and 0.0.)
CYCLEINIXFEM Number of cycles to initialize the crack at the enriched element.
ENRRTXFEM All components of strain energy release rate range; i.e., the difference
between the energy release rate at the maximum loading and at the
minimum loading.

Recovering additional results for a stabilized cycle

You may want to recover additional results for a stabilized cycle. You can extract these
results from the restart data (see “Recovering additional results output from restart data in
Abaqus/Standard” in “Output,” Section 4.1.1).

Input File Usage: *POST OUTPUT, CYCLE=n

Abaqus/CAE Usage: Recovering additional results for a stabilized cycle is not supported
in Abaqus/CAE.

Specifying output at exact times

Output at exact times is not supported for low-cycle fatigue analysis. If output at exact times
is requested, Abaqus will issue a warning message and change the output to an output at
approximate times.

Limitations

A low-cycle fatigue analysis using the direct cyclic approach is subject to the following
limitations:

• Contact conditions cannot change during a given cycle when direct cyclic analysis is
used iteratively to obtain a stabilized solution.
• The analysis may not perform well when there is compressive load on the crack
surface during a loading cycle because the global stiffness is formed only one time at
the beginning of each given loading cycle.
• Geometric nonlinearity can be included only in any general step prior to a direct cyclic
step; however, only small displacements and strains will be considered during the
cyclic step.
16
Input file template

The following is an example of modeling progressive damage and failure in the bulk material
based on the continuum damage mechanics approach and progressive delamination growth at
the interface:

*HEADING
…
*BOUNDARY
Data lines to specify zero-valued boundary conditions
*INITIAL CONDITIONS
Data lines to specify initial conditions
*AMPLITUDE
Data lines to define amplitude variations
**
*MATERIAL
Options to define material properties
*DAMAGE INITIATION, CRITERION=HYSTERESIS ENERGY
Data lines to define material constants for bulk ductile material damage initiation
*DAMAGE EVOLUTION, TYPE=HYSTERESIS ENERGY
Data lines to define material constants for bulk ductile material damage evolution
**
*SURFACE, NAME=slave
Data lines to define slave surface at delamination interface
*SURFACE, NAME=master
Data lines to define master surface at delamination interface
*CONTACT PAIR
slave, master
**
*STEP (,INC=)
Set INC equal to the maximum number of increments in a single loading cycle
*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE
Data line to define time increment, cycle time, initial number of Fourier terms,
maximum number of Fourier terms, increment in number of Fourier terms,
and maximum number of iterations
Data line to define minimum increment in number of cycles,
maximum increment in number of cycles, total number of cycles,
and damage extrapolation tolerance
*DEBOND, SLAVE=slave, MASTER=master
17
*FRACTURE CRITERION, TYPE=FATIGUE
Data lines to define material constants used in Paris law and fracture criterion
**
*BOUNDARY, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to prescribe zero-valued or nonzero boundary conditions
*CLOAD and/or *DLOAD, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to specify loads
*TEMPERATURE and/or *FIELD, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to specify values of predefined fields
**
*END STEP

The following is an example of modeling discrete crack growth in the bulk material based on
the principles of linear elastic fracture mechanics with the extended finite element method
and progressive delamination growth at the interface:

*HEADING
…
*ENRICHMENT, TYPE=PROPAGATION CRACK, INTERACTION=INTERACTION,
ELSET=ENRICHED
*BOUNDARY
Data lines to specify zero-valued boundary conditions
*INITIAL CONDITIONS
Data lines to specify initial conditions
*AMPLITUDE
Data lines to define amplitude variations
**
*MATERIAL
Options to define material properties
*SURFACE, INTERACTION=INTERACTION
*SURFACE BEHAVIOR
*FRACTURE CRITERION, TYPE=FATIGUE
Data lines to define material constants used in the Paris law and fracture criterion in the
bulk
material for enriched elements
**
*SURFACE, NAME=slave
Data lines to define slave surface at delamination interface
*SURFACE, NAME=master
Data lines to define master surface at delamination interface
18
*CONTACT PAIR
slave, master
**
*STEP (,INC=)
Set INC equal to the maximum number of increments in a single loading cycle
*DIRECT CYCLIC, FATIGUE
Data line to define time increment, cycle time, initial number of Fourier terms,
maximum number of Fourier terms, increment in number of Fourier terms,
and maximum number of iterations
Data line to define minimum increment in number of cycles,
maximum increment in number of cycles, total number of cycles,
and damage extrapolation tolerance
*DEBOND, SLAVE=slave, MASTER=master
*FRACTURE CRITERION, TYPE=FATIGUE
Data lines to define material constants used in the Paris law and fracture criterion at the
interface
**
*BOUNDARY, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to prescribe zero-valued or nonzero boundary conditions
*CLOAD and/or *DLOAD, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to specify loads
*TEMPERATURE and/or *FIELD, AMPLITUDE=
Data lines to specify values of predefined fields
**
*END STEP
Additional references

• Coffin, L., “A Study of the Effects of Cyclic Thermal Stresses on a Ductile

Metal,” Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 76, pp.
931–951, 1954.
• Manson, S., “Behavior of Materials under Condition of Thermal Stress,” Heat
Transfer Symposium, University of Michigan Engineering Research Institute, Ann
Arbor, MI, pp. 9–75, 1953.
• Paris, P., M. Gomaz, and W. Anderson, “A Rational Analytic Theory of
Fatigue,” The Trend in Engineering, vol. 15, 1961.

19