1 (8)

Low Cycle Fatigue Ð Introduction

Finite or Infinite Fatigue Life?

HCF
• Both infinite or finite fatigue life is possible and
can be analyzed
LCF σ
• Only finite fatigue life is possible and should be x
analyzed using LCF-criteria ∆σ x

Stress or Strain? x
∆σ x
HCF
• Elastic material ε
Small strain increment -> large stress increment ∆ε ∆ε
LCF
• Stresses close to (or at) the yield limit
Small stress increment -> large strain increment.
Best “resolution” if strains are employed in
fatigue model.
Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg
 2 (8)

LCF Ð Introduction contÕd

Damage Mechanisms
Induced fatigue damage will be due to
• global plasticity
• local plasticity (same as in HCF)
For high load amplitudes (and/or high maximum
magnitudes of loading) global plasticity will be the
dominating cause
For low load magnitudes, the model should tend to
similar results as for HCF criteria (i.e. the Wöhler
curve)
Note that the static load carrying capacity must not be
exceeded. This must be checked separately

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 3 (8)

Morrow Design Rule

According to Morrow, the relationship between

strain amplitude, ε a , and pertinent fatigue life, Nf
can be written as
σ f′
= (2 Nf ) + ε f′ (2 Nf ) σ
b c
ε a = ε ael + ε apl
E x
Nf is the number of load cycles to failure

log ε a
log ε f′
ε
σ f′ ε apl ε a = ε ael + ε apl
log ε el ε pl
E
ε ael

0 2 4 6 log(2Nf )

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 4 (8)

Mean Stress Effects

According to Morrow, the effect of a mean stress,

sm, can be taken into account by redefining the
criterion as

(σ f′ − σ m )
ε a = ε ael + ε apl = (2 Nf ) + ε f′ (2 Nf )
b c
E
log ε a
σm < 0
(compressive)

σm > 0
(tensile)

0 2 4 6 log(2Nf )

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 5 (8)

Coffin Ð Manson Design Rule

For the elastic part, the relationship between strain amplitude

and fatigue life can be approximated by
σ UTS −0.12
ε ael = 1.75 Nf
E

The fatigue life in the plastic part can be approximated by

ε apl = 0.5 D0.6 Nf −0.6
where D is the ductility, defined as
A0
D ≡ ln ≈ ε fra
Afra

This yields the Coffin – Manson relationship

σ UTS −0.12
ε a = 1.75 Nf + 0.5D0.6 Nf −0.6
E

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 6 (8)

LCF Design Ð some notes

Comparison of the criteria

The Morrow criterion includes five material parameters
E, σ f′ , ε f′ , b, c
The Coffin – Manson criterion includes three material
parameters
E, D, σ UTS
It is also possible to express the criteria using the strain
range, ∆ε (and not the strain amplitude ε a ) in the
Coffin-Manson criterion (see Eq. 5h
Approximations

ε a = 1% ⇒ ∆ε = 2% ⇒ Nf = 103
ε a = 0.5% ⇒ ∆ε = 1% ⇒ Nf = 10 4

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 7 (8)

Stress and strain concentrations

Stress concentration
The stress concentration factor ahead of a
notch is defined as
σ max K Kε
Kσ ≡
σ∞
In a similar manner, the strain Kt K ε > Kσ
concentration factor ahead of a
notch is defined as
ε max Kσ
Kε ≡
ε∞ σY σ∞
Kt
If we load above the yield limit, which is
the case for LCF conditions, we get
∆σ ≠ ∆ε and Kε ≠ Kσ

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg

 8 (8)

NeuberÕs rule

Kε ⋅ Kσ = Kf2 where Kf = 1 + q( Kt − 1) σ
which yields
σ max
σ max ⋅ ε max = Kσ σ ∞ ⋅ Kε ε ∞ = Kf2σ ∞ε ∞
Assuming elastic conditions far from the
notch, we get the Neuber hyperbola
Kf2σ ∞
2 ε max ε
σ max ⋅ ε max =
E
The equation of the Neuber hyperbola has Constitutive
relation
two unknown
Neuber
But, the stress must also fulfil constitutive hyperbola
relationship between stress and strain
Thus, two equations and two unknown

Solid Mechanics Low Cycle Fatigue (LCF) Anders Ekberg