M E T A L S A N D MATERIALS, Vol. 4, No. 3 (1998), pp.

520~523

Stress and Fatigue Analyses of an Induction

Hardened Component
Yanyao Jiang
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Nevada at Reno
Reno, N V 89557, U.S.A.
Stress analysis of an induction hardened shaft subjected to cyclic torsional loading is conducted. Finite difference method is employed with the application of an Armstrong-Frederick type cyclic plasticity model.
Predictions of residual stresses and their relaxation agree well with the experimental observations. Fatigue is
analyzed using the results from the stress analysis. Three critical plane multiaxial criteria are evaluated. Due
to the variation of material properties and residual stresses, failures can be initiated at surface and subsurface sites. The shear based fatigue parameters can correlate the experimentally observed fatigue lives as
well as the crack initiation locations. It is noted that it is critical to consider the residual stresses and the
residual stress relaxation in the fatigue life prediction for the induction hardened shafts.

Key words : residual stress, fatigue, cyclic plasticity, induction hardening, stress relaxation.

1. I N T R O D U C T I O N

2. S T R E S S A N A L Y S I S

Induction hardening of mild steel components often

results in significant improvements in the cyclic load capability, with comparatively small increases in cost.
Load bearing capacity can be doubled or tripled when
an hardened component is subjected to combinations of
bending and torsion [1]. One of the difficulties associated with induction hardening is the resultant residual stress field. For an induction hardened component,
both surface and subsurface failures are noted. Induction
hardening results in a great depth of residual stress field
and a change in material properties with regard to both
deformation and fatigue life. When plastic deformation
occurs, stress relaxation will occur.
Recent development in cyclic plasticity theories allows cyclic stress-strain behavior to be modeled with
confidence. The three dimensional nature of the residual
stress field is considered in the deformation modeling.
Simple induction hardened shafts subjected to cyclic torsional loading will be considered in this investigation.
The goal of this investigation is to model the possible relaxation of the three dimensional residual stress field and
the influence on fatigue life by utilizing several different
fatigue damage parameters. The basic methodology
presented should provide an improved basis for optimizing hardening profiles.

A finite difference method is used for the cyclic elastic-plastic stress analysis of the induction hardened
shaft. For the problem of a circular shaft subjected to axial-torsional loading, the finite difference method is very
convenient in implementing a realistic nonlinear cyclic
plasticity model. A uniform axial strain and linear gradient for the shear strain are assumed. The following equilibrium and compatibility conditions are enforced,
dr
dr

ao-- ar
r

'

de o

e, - e o

dr

(1)

where or is the stress in the radial direction, o0 is the

stress in the circumferential direction, I~r is the strain in
the radial direction, e0 is the strain in the circumferential
direction, and r is the radius from the center of the shaft.
Recent investigations [2-3] into the feasibility of various cyclic plasticity models for engineering applications
have identified a class of Armstrong-Frederick type hardening rules to be superior to those utilizing a Mr6z
type rule. For this investigation, a plasticity model modified based on the Armstrong-Frederick hardening rule
will be employed. The model is summarized in Table 1.
Details of the model can be found in references [4-6]. In
Table 1, the prefix denotes infinitesimal increment. A
bold letter with a tilde below represents a second order

Stress and Fatigue Analyses of an Induction Hardened Component

521

Table 1. Cyclic Plasticity Model Used in the Investigation

Yield
function

S = deviatoric stress tensor

= backstress in the deviatoric stress space
k = yield stress in simple shear

f = (SS.- if): (S - ~) - 2k2 = 0

Normality
flow rule

dE p =

EP = plastic strain tensor

n = unit normal on the yield surface.h
h = plastic modulus function

<dS:n> n

M
: Z Q~(i)
i=l

Hardening
rule

dQ~(i):c(i)r(i,

[ 7

where: L<i~= ~0

L (i) dp

~i) = ith backstress tensor (i=l, 2 ..... M)

c(i) r(i)' ~r = material constants
dp = equivalent plastic strain increment

( i = 1 , 2, ... , M)

I
I~i~l = ~
dp = ~ J ~ d 7

( i - - 1 , 2, --- , M)

Cartesian tensor and a colon between two tensors denotes their inner product. The symbol < > denotes the
MacCauley bracket (i.e., <x>=0.5 (x+lxl)).
The material properties considered are representative
of cyclically stable response, and the material is considered to be of the homogeneous isotropic Massing
type. One of the difficulties when analyzing an induction hardened component in addition to the residual
stress field is the variation in material properties. Four
levels of through hardened 1045 steel specimens with
micro-structures corresponding to the SAE induction hardened shaft program serve as a baseline for both deformation and fatigue life properties. The elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio are essentially independent of
hardness, and are chosen to be 203 GPa and 0.3, respectively. A power function formulation is employed to describe the cyclic stress-strain behavior. It is found that the
cyclic strain hardening exponent, n', can be approximated as a constant (n'=0.20) for different hardness.
The cyclic strength coefficient K' is a function of hardness BHN,
K'=2262-12 (BHN)+0.036 (BHN) 2

(2)

The following functional form,

m

BHN = BHN0 + BHNIexp ( - ~ I R

(3)

is used to represent a generalized hardness gradient.

BHN0, BHN1, Ro, R1, and m are fitting constants and
they are, 240, 440, 7.5, 4.5, and 5, respectively, for the

shaft investigated.
In order to simulate the residual stress field, a methodology employing the concept of a thermal gradient in a
long circular cylinder is adopted. Percent martensite (%
M) causes a volumetric change that can be simulated as
a temperature change. The following relationship is established to relate percent martensite to Brinell Hardness
(BHN) for 1045 steel,
AT=%M=0.28023 BHN-66.12

(4)

3. F A T I G U E D A M A G E A S S E S S M E N T
Three critical plane multiaxial fatigue parameters will
be used and they are listed in Table 2. FP denotes
"Fatigue Parameter." In all the three parameters, critical
plane is defined as the plane where the fatigue parameter
is a maximum.
The general equation for a given hardness and fatigue
parameter follows,
(FP-FPo)2N~=Co

(5)

where FPo and Co are material constants dependent on

the fatigue parameter used and the hardness. The value
of K for FP1 is assumed to be linear function of hardness,
K=-0.0857+0.0012 BHN

(6)

4. R E S U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N
Utilizing the plasticity model described in the pre-

Yanyao Jiang

522

Table 2. Multiaxial Fatigue Criteria Used in the Investigation

A'c

F P I = AT + KO.max

[71

FP2 = --~- 1 +
[8-91
AE

FP3 = ~
[10-11]

trmax

K-x /

shear stress amplitude on the critical plane

2
trmax = maximum normal stress on the critical plane
K = material constant
-

AT - shear strain amplitude on the critical plane

2
K* = material constant
try = yield stress
ZIE

normal stress amplitude on the critical plane

2
trmax = maximum normal stress on the critical plane
-

vious section, the residual stresses were predicted and

the results are shown in Fig. 1. Very close agreement
can be found between the simulations and the experimental data.
Several loading levels corresponding to fatigue lives
ranging from 10 3 to 10 6 cycles were simulated for 32 cycles. It is found that residual stress relaxation occurs; the
larger the loading amplitude, the more severely the residual stress relaxes. There is approximately a 50% reduction in the surface longitudinal compressive residual
stress at the loading level corresponding to a fatigue life
of 10000 cycles.
Figs. 2 through 4 show the predictions obtained by using the three different fatigue criteria listed in Table 2
and the experimental results. Three life curves should be
noted on these plots. The solid lines represent the fatigue life predictions when residual stresses and residual
stress relaxation are considered. The dotted lines are the
predictions when the residual stresses are considered but
the residual stresses are assumed to persist without relaxation. The dashed lines are simulated results when no
residual stresses are considered in the analysis.
A cusp in the life prediction curve is often noted, and
should not be considered to be poor computational or

Fig. 1. Residual stress simulation and experimental data.

graphical technique. It corresponds to the shift in the

predicted failure location from surface to subsurface
sites. In the life regime considered, not all the predictions display this transition. Generally the steeper
slopes indicate subsurface failures, while the shallower
regions point to surface failures. It was experimentally
observed that when the torque amplitude is larger than
600 N-m (which corresponds to a fatigue life of 30000
cycles), surface failure occurs. When the loading amplitude is smaller than 600 N-m, subsurface failure is

Fig. 2. FP1 model fatigue life predictions and experimental data.

Fig. 3. FP2 model fatigue life predictions and experimental data.

Stress and Fatigue Analyses of an Induction Hardened Component

Fig. 4. FP3 model fatigue life predictions and experimental data.

523

portant factors when calculating fatigue lives. A plasticity formulation has been forwarded that is computationally amenable to solving this problem. The finite
difference approach utilized in this investigation expedites the numerical solution for the specimen geometry and nominal loading considered. Incorporation of the
algorithm into a finite element code may be advantageous for more complex geometry and loading. The
shear based fatigue damage models provide reasonable
life estimates in comparison to a principal stress formulation.

REFERENCES
resulted. All the three fatigue criteria can capture this fatigue phenomenon of the induction hardened shafts.
However, the FP3 criterion, which is a principal stress
formulation, does not correlate the experimental data
well. The shear based parameters, FP1 and FP2, render
superior fatigue life predictions.
It is noted from Figs. 2 through 4 that the life predictions are substantially different when residual stresses
are ignored or when no residual stress relaxation is considered. When the residual stresses are neglected in the
fatigue life predictions, surface failure is always anticipated and the predicted fatigue lives are remarkably
higher than the experimental observations in the long fatigue life region. Residual stress relaxation also has a significant influence on the fatigue life.

5. CONCLUSIONS
Residual stresses and residual stress relaxation are im-

1. P. Kurath and Y. Jiang, SAE Paper No.950707 (1995).

2. Y. Jiang and P. Kurath, ACTA Mech. 118, 213 (1996).
3. Y. Jiang and P. Kurath, Inter. J. Plasticity 12, 387
(1996).
4. Y. Jiang and H. Sehitoglu, ASME J. Appl. Mech. 63, 720
(1996).
5. Y. Jiang and H. Sehitoglu, ASME J. Appl. Mech. 63, 726
(1996).
6. N. Ohno and J. -D. Wang, Eur. J.~ Mech. A/Solids 13,
519(1994).
7. W. N. Findley, ASME J. Eng. Industry 38, 301 (1959).
8. A. Fatemi and D. F. Socie, Fat. Fract. Mat. Struct. 11,
149 (1988).
9. A. Fatemi and P. Kurath, ASME J. Eng. Mat. Technol.
110, 380 (1988).
10. K. N. Smith, P. Watson, T. H. and Topper, J. Mat. 5,
767 (1970).
11. D. F. Socie, ASME J. Eng. Mat. Technol. 109, 293
(1987).