Cumulative Damage Prediction

Cumulative Damage Models and
Multi-Stress Fatigue Life Prediction

W. HWANG AND K. S. HAN
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

State University of New York at Buffalo
Buffalo, New York 14260
(Received August 1, 1984)
(Revised March 6, 1985)
ABSTRACT
Cumulative damage during fatigue is studied analytically. Extensive reviews are performed on the published damage models. Three different cumulative damage models
are defined using several physical variables such as fatigue modulus and resultant
strain. Proposed model I is defined using fatigue modulus, while models II and III are
defined using resultant strains. Proposed models are derived as functions of normalized applied stress level, r, and number of fatigue cycle, n. It is verified that the
proposed cumulative damage model III has better agreement with the two stress level
fatigue experimental data than other models.
INTRODUCTION
SERVICES,
DURING
jected varing
ENGINEERING STRUCTURES AND MACHINES ARE SUB-
or random loadings as well as constant amplitude

loadings. The nature of multi-stress level fatigue is more complicated than
constant amplitude stress fatigue. There have been numerous studies [1-23,
25-32] to explain multi-stress level fatigue phenomena and predict its life by
cumulative damage model approaches, approaches without a damage model,
and statistical approaches, etc. Cumulative damage model approach could be
classified as damage models defined by number of cycles and material char-
to
acteristic variables.
Defining fatigue damage of composite materials is not a simple problem.

Failure modes of composite materials are complicated and quite different
from those of isotropic materials. For short fiber composite materials, fibermatrix debonding, fiber fracture, and matrix failure are the main possible
failure modes. For composite laminates, delamination is also a possible
failure mode, in addition to the above failure modes. Based on these failure
modes, crack length, crack density, delamination, and number of deboned
fibers are apparent damages, which can be detected through microscopes, or
NDT instruments. These variables could be used to define the damage.
Journal of
COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 20-March 1986

0021-9983/86/02 0125-29 $4.50/0
@ 1986 Technomic Publishing Co., Inc.
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at GRAND VALLEY STATE UNIV LIB on November 8, 2016
125
126
Besides the above visible physical variables, modulus, acoustic emission,

residual strength, and strain, which would vary during fatigue loadings, may
be used to define the damage. A damage model defined by material
characteristic variables should be formulated as a function of number of
cycles and applied stress level in order to use it for calculation of the damage
and prediction of fatigue life. In this study, three different fatigue damage
models are proposed using fatigue modulus and resultant strain, and
evaluated for the two-stress-level fatigue life predictions.
STRUCTURE OF DAMAGE FUNCTION
Fatigue damage of a material depends on applied stress level, number of

fatigue cycles, frequency, temperature, moisture content and geometric shape
of the specimen, etc. The damage can be written as a functional form,
where,
number of
fatigue cycle
applied stress level
f : frequency
n:
r:
T: temperature
M: moisture content
As a first approach, constant frequency and environmental conditions are
assumed. In addition, the effect of temperature rise during a fatigue test is ignored. Then the Equation (1) is reduced,
It is also assumed that the function
following
two
F(n,r)
could be
expressed
as
either of
relations, i.e.,
or
With
an assumption of no initial damage, the damage functions should

satisfy following initial and final boundary conditions.
For a constant amplitude loading,
127
For
sequence
loading,
where,
N: number of cycles to failure
number of load sequence until final failure
AD,: amount of damage accumulation during fatigue at stress level r,
m :
Damage function is also assumed a monotonically increasing function with

number of cycles. With this assumption and Equation (3), the damage function is plotted in Figure 1. The Equation (3.a) seems a function of n alone
explicitly but the equation has stress effect because of N which is related to
applied stress. Though the Equation (3.a) contains applied stress effect, the
damage model which do not have stress dependent constants are classified as
a stress independent damage model. The reason is that these damage models
can be represented by one function and one curve, as shown in Figure 2.
The damage function has a trend either A, B, or C in Figure 2. The trend
can be determined by first derivative of D, dDldn (damage rate), or second
derivative, d zDldn 2. Following determinations can be made;
Figure
1.
Damage as a function of number of cycles for different stress levels.
128
Figure 2. Damage
as a
function of cycle ratio and damage trends.
Remaining fatigue life of two-stress and multi-stress level can be predicted

using the above three equations in the following manner;
Two-stress level fatigue life prediction:
1. Find n,2 , the cycle at the stress r2, which has equivalent damage under the
stress r, and cycle n, , by equating
or
2. Then the
predicted remaining life becomes,
129
Multi-stress level
fatigue life prediction;

above procedure 1.
1. Same as the
2. Find n23 , the cycle at r3 which has equivalent
curred under stresses r, and r2 , by equating
damage accumulation
oc-
or
where,
4D<~ - ,
1)k: total amount of damage accumulation after
3. Do procedure 2 until finding n <&dquo;, 4. Then the remaining life becomes,
(k - I)&dquo; load
1)&dquo;,
It should be pointed out that I:1D2 is not the same asj(n2/N2). Since AD2 is
defined by the damage accumulated under the stress level r2 , it becomes,
The stress independent models predict the same fatigue life

3. It can be also proved in the following manner.
as
shown in
Figure
[Proof]
Since there is only
The damage
sum
one
function, from the Equation (6),
accumulated during fatigue at
stress
level r, and r2 becomes,
130
Figure 3.
Four step
fatigue
life
prediction by stress-independent damage
models.
Substitution of Equation (11) into (12) provides,
Finally it
can
be written
From the final condition of constant
amplitude loading (Equation (4)),
The function f in Equations (14) and (15) is same, therefore the arguments of
the function must be equal.
Namely,
131
The Equation (16) represents Palmgren-Miners rule. That means the stress
independent models predict same multi-stress level fatigue life though they
could have different damage accumulation procedure during the fatigue test.
There is another damage summation method, the so called equivalent stress
approach (Leve [1]). According to this summation method, the damage sum
could be expressed,
If Equation (17) is used for damage sum, each stress independent model
predicts a different fatigue life. But the equivalent stress approach, which is
from the direct consideration of the result, fails to explain the effect of sequence of loading as well as the damage accumulation procedure.
REVIEWS
Palmgren [2,3] proposed a linear and stress independent cumulative

damage rule which was developed further by Miner [4]. This is the first
cumulative damage theory and known as Palmgren-Miners rule or linear
damage rule. This rule defined the damage as the ratio of the number of
cycles of operation v.s. the number of cycles to failure, i.e.,
The damage model predicts a damage trend B in Figure 2. By mathematical

treatments, remaining life can be obtained as follows;
Remaining life for two-stress level
Remaining life for multi-stress level
Because of its simplicity, this rule is still widely used. But this rule fails to
predict the effect of load history. Experimental data indicate that the order in
which various stress levels are applied, does have significant influences on the
fatigue behavior of materials. It is a generally known fact that the PalmgrenMiners damage sum to failure is greater than unity for low-high tests and less
than unity for high-low tests.
A nonlinear damage model, which is called modified Palmgren-Miners
132
was considered for predicting multi-stress level fatigue life
cisely. The damage is defined as follows;
rule,
more
pre-
Where C is constant and independent of applied stress. Therefore this model

is a stress-independent model and predicts the same remaining life with
Palmgren-Miners rule. According to Leve [ 1 ], the constant C is greater than
1. Then this damage model has a trend C in Figure 2.
Shanley [5] proposed a linear damage model, which is expressed as follows;
where,
S:
C,k :
applied
stress
constants (k is
greater than 1)
b : slope of the central portion of the S-N
curve
Marco-Starkey [6] presented a non-linear cumulative stress dependent

damage model which has a similar form as modified Palmgren-Miners
model. The damage model is;
Where C, is a stress dependent constant. The value of C, should be determined in order to predict multi-stress level fatigue life. But evaluation of C, is
not possible unless the damage model matched with some physical variables
which can be detectable during fatigue tests. Only the following inequalities
can be obtainable from the Equation (6) and Figure 4.
where,
Henry [7] proposed

assumptions.
1. The S-N curve
stress value
can
be
cumulative damage theory based
on
the
following
suitably represented empirically by cycle v.s.
where,
over-
133
Figure 4. Marco-Starkeys damage as a
function of cycle ratio.
K: material constant
limit of a virgin specimen
81: fatigue
2. When fatigue damage accumulates, both the K and 81 is general will be affected. Thus damage will have a new fatigue limit and a new fatigue life at
each stress level above the new fatigue limit value.
3. The K value for any degree of damage is assumed to be proportional to the
new specimen fatigue limit corresponding to the degree of damage.
The
damage is
defined as,
where,
St : fatigue limit after damage

Using the above three assumptions, Henry formulated
predict fatigue limit after damage;
following equation
to
134
As
final result, he
presented,
where,
x:
cycle ratio,
q: overstress
n IN
ratio, (S - Sl )lSl
Corten and Dolran [8-10] proposed

defined as follows:
cumulative damage theory which is
where,
m :
c,a :
number of damage nuclei

function of the stress condition
predicting multi-stress level fatigue life, they postulated the following.

1.During the two-stress repeated block stress histories, the predominant influence of stress history was accounted for by assuming that once damage
nuclei were introduced at high stress level r&dquo;, they remained and propagated during subsequent loadings at both high and low stresses.
2. The rate of propagation of damage nuclei was determined solely by the
stress amplitude, either r, or r2, regardless of previous stress history.
3. The a in Equation (28) is not a function of applied stress condition but a
For
constant.
By the above assumptions, they derived two stress level

dition which can be written,
The
fatigue failure con-
Equation (29) expanded for multi-stress fatigue; that is
It was further assumed that the stress-dependent ratio C, /Cl might be

equivalent to another ratio involving stresses Sl and S, that could be more
easily evaluated. Pursuing this thought, Corten and Dolan formulated the
relationship;
Substitution of Equation (31) into Equation (30) provides,
135
Gatts [11] derived a life prediction equation using residual strength and
fatigue limit degradation approaches. He defined the damage as a power
function form of the load; that is
where,
St : fatigue limit
a:
following assumptions were used.

Residual strength degradation rate is proportional to the damage.
Fatigue limit is proportional to residual strength.
The damage function is related to strain energy associated with strains and
stresses that exceed the level of the fatigue limit.
For
1.
2.
3.
constant
developing
4. Failure
his theory,
occurs
when residual
strength is reduced to applied
he derived
For constant stress amplitude;
Using the above assumptions,
stress.
following equations.
At failure;
For
fatigue limit
where,
81: fatigue
limit of
virgin specimen
k, C :
constants
q: stress amplitude
q,:
ratio, S/S,
fatigue limit ratio, 8//81
Marin [12] proposed a cumulative damage theory based on the consideration of relations between damage as a function of cycle ratio and changes in
the S-N curve due to damage accumulation. As a result he derived a multistress level fatigue failure criterion which is exactly same as the CortenDorans criterion, Equation (32). Marin developed the Equation (32) further
136
by assuming the S-N curve could be adequately approximated by an equation

of the form.
Using Equation (37), Equation (32) could be written
as
where,
It is interesting to note that the Marins criterion reduces to Palmgren-Miners

hypothesis if p 0.
Manson [ 13,14] presented a double linear damage rule based on the fatigue
cycles for crack initiation and crack propagation. He assumed that the crack
propagation period Np can be written in terms of the total life N by the equa=
tions,
Where C is a constant to be determined.

The crack initiation cycle is
Finally he presented following criteria by applying Palmgren-Miners rule to

crack initiation and crack propagation cycles.
For crack initiation period
For the crack
propagation period;
137
Owen and Howe [15] studied about debonding and resin cracking of a
glass-reinforced plastic during fatigue. They concluded that resin cracking
could represent fatigue damage in the composite. A stress independent model
was established based on the experimental results; that is
Where B and C are constants. It is interesting that the two constants can be
reduced to one if the failure condition (D 1 when n N) is considered, i.e.:
=
This model predicts the same multi-stress level fatigue life with PalmgrenMiners rule since it is a stress-independent model.
Subramanyan [16] proposed a non-linear cumulative damage model based
on S-N curve, fatigue limit and isodamage line in S-N curve. As the final
results, he presented following equations.
Damage model;
where,
Nt
number of cycles at
Two stress level
Multi-stress level
fatigue limit
fatigue life;
fatigue life;
where,
x, :
n, IN,
(8, + 1 - 81)(8, - 81)

stress at ith loading
limit
S,: fatigue
t~:
S, : applied
Later Srivatsavan and Subramanyan [17] studied this model further
sidering the effect of fatigue limit reduction.
by con-
138
Lemaitre and Plumtree [ 18] proposed damage models in creep, fatigue and
Their fatigue damage model can be expressed;
creep-fatigue interaction.
where,
=
a =
1 /(p + 1 )
11(c + p + 1)
when strain is controlled

when stress is controlled
p: material constant
c:
For
material constant, may be found from S-N
curve
damage accumulation, they suggested,
multi-stress level fatigue life with Palmgren[19] stated that the constant depends upon the
testing conditions including strain range. Socie et. al. [20] determined the
value of p from crack length, load drop and strain accumulation measurement. For cast iron, they presented a following relation.
Equation (49) predicts
same
Miners rule. Later Plumtree
Their result shows that better agreement of Equation (49) with experimental
Palmgren-Miners rule for the programmed strain control tests.
Fong [21]equated a non-linear damage model with the following assumptions.
data than
1. The damage is function of normalized cycle ratio, x, only.

2. Damage varies linearly with D.
Namely,
where,
k, k :
constants
The solution to
The
Equation (51),
damage trend depends
on
with initial and failure conditions, is,
the value of k. The trend is A, B, and C in
139
Figure 2 when k is negative, null, and positive, respectively. Throughout his

research, this damage model is matched with many physical variables such as
residual strength, maximum damage length, number of debonded fibers and
total resin crack length, etc.
There have been other damage models defined by physical variables during
fatigue test but not equated as a function of fatigue cycles. Cole et. al. [22]
studied the damage in composite materials by non-destructive techniques.
They determined the attenuation due to the damage from the total attenuation and undamaged material attenuation. Dibenedetto and Salee [23] investigated fatigue crack propagation in graphite fiber reinforced nylon 66. In
this study, the rate of damage (crack propagation rate) is defined by the rate
of change of compliance with time, dCldt. Fitzgerald [24] suggested a
damage model defined by undamaged and damaged modulus. This damage
model was investigated further by Wang et. al. [25] for fatigue of short fiber
SMC composite. Wang et. al. [26] also presented a shear fatigue damage
model defined by shear modulus.
The disperse nature of fatigue data is well known. Some efforts have been
given to study multi-stress level fatigue by statistical approaches. Yang et. al.
[27,28] predicted multi-stress level fatigue life by a residual strength degradation model. Chou [29] proposed a percent-failure damage model. He defined
the damage by the percentage of failure occurred during the load. Johnsen
and Dover [30] expanded Palmgren-Miners rule by Monte Carlo method.
They assumed that value of damage sum at failure follows normal distribution and the fatigue life at an applied stress level is lognormally distributed.
They presented the following life prediction equation.
where,
Z:
damage
sum
at failure
1, 2,
n &dquo;&dquo; Z and N, : random variables
n, : constant
(i
...,
m -
1)
NEW FATIGUE DAMAGE MODELS
Three different fatigue damage models are defined using fatigue modulus
and resultant strain. Those models are made mainly for the purpose of
predicting multi-stress level fatigue life. To derive the damage models as functions of number of cycle, the assumptions used in Reference [34] are needed.
The values of material constants B and C, which can be evaluated by one
stress level fatigue test, are used for the prediction of remaining fatigue life. It
is also postulated that the constant amplitude fatigue life is well followed by
the life equation which is derived in Reference [34].
140
Fatigue Damage Model I

The fatigue modulus, which varies with number of cycle during fatigue,
could be used to define the damage. The fatigue damage, D, which satisfies
the initial and final boundary conditions, is defined as follows;
1. Proposed
Substitution of Equations (7) and (8) in Reference [34] into the above equation provides,
Equation (55) has exactly same form with modified Palmgren-Miners model.
The constant C is determined by one stress level fatigue life equation, in
Reference [34]. It is expected that C is between null and unity regardless of
material system. Therefore this model predicts damage trend A in Figure 2.
The Equation (55) represents a stress-independent damage model. This result
is mainly due to the assumption that fatigue modulus is function of number
of cycle, n alone (refer to Reference [34]). If the stress effects on the fatigue
modulus were found, this model might be derived as a stress-dependent
model.
2.
Proposed Fatigue Damage Model II

Fatigue damage is defined by the ratio of the resultant strain
v.s. the failure strain,
at nth
cycle
The resultant strains are defined in the Figure 5. By the fatigue modulus concept, the applied stress and resultant strain could be written,
From the Equation (10) in Reference

failure strain could be expressed,
Substituting Equations (57)
[34] and the strain failure criterion, the
and (58) into
Equation (56) gives,
Consideration of Equation (7) in Reference [34]
on
the above
equation pro-
vides,
141
Figure 5.
Schematic stress-strain relation
during cyclic loading.
where,
The damage in Equation

Reference [34]).
(60)
can
be also
expressed
as
followings (Refer
to
This model predicts damage amount r at n 0 (when stress reaches maximum applied stress level during first fatigue cycle) as shown in the Figure 6.
At a specific fatigue cycle, the damage is proportional to applied stress level
according to this model. This relation is presented in the Figure 7. The r, in
the Figure 7 is the applied stress level which has fatigue life N, cycles and r1 is
fatigue limit.
Multi-stress level fatigue life can be predicted by the procedure in the structure of damage function of this study. Two-stress level fatigue life is ex=
pressed as follows;
3. Proposed
Fatigue Damage Model
Fatigue damage is defined
as
III
follows;
Figure 6. Proposed damage mode/
Figure
7. Stress effect
on
the
11 representation.
damage at a specific loading cycle, proposed model 11.
142
143
where,
Substitution of Equations (57), (58), and (64) into Equation (63) provides,
The
Equation (7) in Reference [34]
Consideration of the
Equation (66)
can
on
be rewritten,
the
Equation (65) provides,
If the constant amplitude fatigue life Equation (13) in Reference [34] is considered on the damage Equation (67), the damage could be also equated as
follows,
This model predicts damage trend A in the Figure 2. The relation between
damage amount and applied stress level at a specific fatigue cycle can be also
predicted. Figure 8 shows this relation.
Mathematical calculations provide following equivalent cycles for two
stress level fatigue.
EVALUATION OF DAMAGE AND TWO STRESS-LEVEL

FATIGUE LIFE
Theoretical
damages are calculated and depicted in the Figures 9-13 at each

using the results of Reference [34]. The effect of applied
applied
stress level on the damage at a fatigue cycle are also predicted and plotted in
the Figures 14 and 15 for the proposed models II and III, respectively. The
stress level, r
0.33 in the Figures 14 and 15 is regarded as an approximate
fatigue limit which denotes a stress level predicted by the Equation (13) in
Reference [34] when the fatigue life in 106 cycles.
Two stress level fatigue life is predicted in the case of low-high test and
high-low test. The predicted values are compared with the experimental data
which are presented by Han and Hamdi [31]. The lower stress level is 38.52
ksi (r 0.6) and the higher stress level is 44.94 ksi (r 0.7). The value of n, is
stress level
Figure 8.
Stress effect
on
the
damage at a specific loading cycle, proposed model III.
Figure 9. Damage prediction by proposed model L

144
Figure
Figure
10.
11.
Damage predIctIOn
Damage prediction
at each
at each
applled stress level by proposed model II.
applted stress level by proposed model 1/.
145
Figure
Figure
12.
13.
Damage prediction
Damage prediction
at each
at each
applied stress level by proposed model III.
applied stress level by proposed mode/ 11/.
146
Rgure
14. Prediction of stress effect on the
damage at a specific loading cycle, proposed model
II.
Rgure
15. Prediction of stress effect on the damage at a specific loading
cycle, proposed model
III.
147
148
Table 1. Comparison of predicted two-stress-level
fatigue life with experimental data.
* Palmgren- MinersRule,
Modified
Palmgren-Miners Rule, and Owen-Howes Rule
Table 2. Two-stress-level
damage sum
to failure
10,000 cycles for the low-high test while 300 cycles for the high-low test. The
specimen material is glass fiber cloth epoxy composites (G-10 CR). The
fatigue life used here is the mean log fatigue life of ten experimental data
(both low-high and high-low tests). The results are presented in the Table 1.
The comparison shows that the presented model III has better agreement with
experimental data than the other models. The damage sums to failure are
evaluated in the Table 2. As it is expected, the result shows that the PalmgrenMiners damage sum to failure is greater than unity for low-high test and less
than unity for high-low test.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
(1) To explain multi-stress level fatigue phenomena and predict its life, the
cumulative damage model approach may be useful.
(2) For understanding multi-stress level fatigue phenomena, it is desirable
to define cumulative damage model by physical variables than by number of
cycles. It is because the direct use of number of cycles to define damage model
can not escape the empirical relation though the damage model predicts
multi-stress level fatigue life well.
(3) Fatigue modulus and resultant strain could be used as parameters of
representing damage.
149
(4) Further investigation on the cyclic stress-strain behavior could provide

improved final damage functions using the proposed damage concepts.
(5) It seems impossible to establish a universal fatigue damage model right
now. But the effort must be given to find it. As an attempt to establish a
universal fatigue damage model, the following requirements are proposed.
a. It should explain fatigue phenomena at an applied stress level.
b. It should explain fatigue phenomena for an overall applied stress range.
i) During a cycle at a high applied stress level the material should be more
damaged than that of at a low applied stress level.
ii) If it is true that failure occurs at each maximum applied stress level,
then the final damage (damage just before failure) at a low applied
stress level should be larger than that of a high applied stress level.
c. It should explain multi-stress level fatigue phenomena.
d. It is desirable to establish the fatigue damage model without S-N curve.
more
REFERENCES
1. Leve, H. L., "Cumulative Damage Theories," Metal Fatigue: Theory and Design, A. F.
Madayag, Ed., pp. 170-203 (1960).
2. Palmgren, A., "Die Lebensadauer von Kugellagern," Z. Vereines Deutcher Ingenieure, Vol.
68, pp. 339-341 (1924).
3.
Palmgren, A., Ball and Roller Bearing Engineering

, translated by G. Palmgren, et al. 1st ed.,
(1945).
A., "Cumulative Damage in Fatigue," J. of Appl. Mech., pp. A-159-164 (1945).
5. Shanley, F. R., "A Theory of Fatigue Based on Unbonding During Reversed Slip," The
Rand Corporation, P-350 (November 11, 1952).
6. Marco, S. M. and Starkey, W. L., "A Concept of Fatigue Damage," Transac. ,
of ASME 76,
pp. 626-662 (1954).
7. Henry, D. L., "A Theory of Fatigue-Damage Accumulation in Steel," Transac. of the
ASME, pp. 913-918 (1955).
8. Corten, H. T. and Dolan, T. I., "Cumulative Fatigue Damage," Proceed. of the Inter.
Confer. on Fatigue of Metals, IME and ASME (1956).
9. Liu, H. W. and Corten, H. T., "Fatigue Damage During Complex Stress Histories," NASA
Tech. Note, D-256 (1959).
10. Liu, H. W. and Corten, H. T., "Fatigue Damage Under Varying Stress Amplitudes," NASA
Tech. Note, D-647 (1960).
11. Gatts, R. R., "Application of a Cumulative Damage Concept to Fatigue," Transac. of the
ASME, pp. 529-540 (1961).
12. Marin, J., Mechanical Behavior of Engineering Materials
, Prentice-Hall (1962).
13. Manson, S. S., "Interfaces between Fatigue, Creep, and Fracture," International J. of Frac.
Mech., Vol. 2, pp. 307-363 (1966).
14. Manson, S. S., Freche, J. C. and Ensign, C. R., "Application of a Double Linear Damage
Rule to Cumulative Fatigue," Fatigue Crack Propagation, ASTM STP 415, pp. 384-412
(1967).
15. Owen, M. J. and Howe, R. J., "The Accumulation of Damage in a Glass-Reinforced Plastic
: Vol. 5, pp. 1637-1649 (1972).
under Tensile and Fatigue Loading," J. of Phys. D
pp. 82-84
4. Miner, M.
150
Subramanyan, S., "A Cumulative Damage Rule Based on the Knee Point of the S-N
Curve," J. of Eng. Mats. and Tech., pp. 316-321 (1976).
17. Srivatsavan, P. and Subramanyan, S., "A Cumulative Damage Rule Based on Successive
Reduction in Fatigue Limit," J. of Eng. Mats. and Tech., Vol. 100, pp. 212-214 (1978).
18. Lemaitre, J. and Plumtree, A., "Application of Damage Concepts to Predict Creep-Fatigue
Failures," J. of Eng. Mats. and Tech., Vol. 101, pp. 284-292 (1979).
19. Plumtree, A., Discussion, Fatigue Mechanisms, ASTM STP 675, J. T. Fong. Ed., pp.
620-621 (1979).
20. Socie, D. F., Fash, J. W. and Leckie, F. A., "A Continuum Damage Model for Fatigue
Analysis of Cast Iron," ASME International Conference on Advances in Life Prediction
Methods, pp. 53-64 (1983).
21. Fong, J. T., "What is Fatigue Damage? " Damage in Composite Materials, ASTM STP 775,
K. L. Reifsnider, Ed., pp. 243-266 (1982).
22. Cole, C. K., Cornish, R. H. and Elliott, J. P., "Effect of Voids and Structural Defects on the
Compressive Fatigue of Glass Reinforced Plastics," 21st Annual RP/CI Confer. Sec. 17-C
(1966).
23. Dibenedetto, A. T. and Salee, G., "Fatigue Crack Propagation in Graphite Fiber Reinforced
., Vol. 19, pp. 512-518 (1979).
Nylon 66," Polymer Eng. and Sci
24. Fitzgerald, J. E., "Some Divigations with Respect to an Operational Definition of Damage,"
Workshop on a Continuum Mechanics Approach to Damage and Life Prediction, Carrollton, Kentucky, U.S.A., pp. 153-158 (May 1980).
25. Wang, S. S. and Chim, E. S. M., "Fatigue Damage and Degradation in Random Short-Fiber
SMC Composite," J. of Com. Mat., Vol. 17, pp. 114-134 (1983).
26. Wang, S. S., Goetz, D. P. and Corten, H. T., "Shear Fatigue Degradation and Fracture of
Random Short-Fiber SMC Composite," J. of Com. Mat., Vol. 18, pp. 2-20 (1984).
27. Yang, J. N. and Jones, D. L., "Load Sequence Effects on the Fatigue of Unnotched Com, ASTM STP 723, pp. 213-232
posite Materials," Fatigue of Fibrous Composite Materials
(1981).
28. Yang, J. N. and Du, S., "An Exploratory Study into the Fatigue of Composites under
Spectrum Loading," J. of Com. Mat., Vol. 17, pp. 511-526 (1983).
29. Chou, P. C., "A Cumulative Damage Rule for Fatigue of Composite Materials," Modern
Developments in Composite Materials and Structures, J. R. Vinson, Ed., ASME, pp.
343-355 (1979).
30. Johnsen, S. E. J. and Doner, M., "A Statistical Simulation Model of Miners Rule," J. of
Eng. Mats. and Tech., Vol. 103, pp. 113-117 (1981).
31. Han, K. S. and Hamdi, M., "Fatigue Life Scattering of RP/C," 38th Annual RP/CI Conference, SPI (1983).
32. Collins, J. A., Failure of Materials m Mechanical Design: Analysis, Prediction, Prevention,
John Wiley and Sons (1981).
33. Wool, R. P., "Material Damage in Polymers," Workshop on a Continuum Mechanics Approach to Damage and Life Prediction, Carrollton, Kentucky, U.S.A., pp. 28-35 (May
1980).
34. Han, K. and Hwang, W., "Fatigue of Composites—Fatigue Modulus Concept and Life
Prediction," Journal of Composite Materials
, Vol. 20 (March 1986).
16.
APPENDIX 1 : DAMAGE MODELS

1.
Palmgren-Miners Model
151
2. Modified
3.
Palmgren-Miners Model
Shanleys Model
4. Marco-Starkeys Model
5.
Henrys Model
where,
6. Corten-Dolans Model
7. Gatts Model
8. Mansons Model
For Crack Initiation
For Crack
Propagation
9. Owen-Howes Model
10.
Subramanyans Model
152
11. Lemaitre-Plumtrees Model
12.
Fongs Model
13. Coles Model
where,
C: attenuation of virgin specimen
A : total attenuation
AD: attenuation due to damage
14. Dibenedetto-Salees Model
where,
15.
Fitzgerald-Wangs Model
where,
E: modulus at a fatigue cycle
E* : reference modulus
16. Wools Model
17. Chous Model
18.
Proposed Model
153
19.
Proposed Model II
20.
Proposed Model
III
APPENDIX 2: COMPARISON OF DAMAGE MODELS

Cumulative Damage Prediction

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Cumulative Damage Prediction

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Cumulative Damage Models and

Multi-Stress Fatigue Life Prediction

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES AND MACHINES ARE SUB-

or random loadings as well as constant amplitude

Defining fatigue damage of composite materials is not a simple problem.

COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 20-March 1986

Besides the above visible physical variables, modulus, acoustic emission,

STRUCTURE OF DAMAGE FUNCTION

Fatigue damage of a material depends on applied stress level, number of

It is also assumed that the function

an assumption of no initial damage, the damage functions should

Damage function is also assumed a monotonically increasing function with

Damage as a function of number of cycles for different stress levels.

function of cycle ratio and damage trends.

Remaining fatigue life of two-stress and multi-stress level can be predicted

predicted remaining life becomes,

fatigue life prediction;

1)k: total amount of damage accumulation after

3. Do procedure 2 until finding n <&dquo;, 4. Then the remaining life becomes,

The stress independent models predict the same fatigue life

function, from the Equation (6),

accumulated during fatigue at

level r, and r2 becomes,

prediction by stress-independent damage

Substitution of Equation (11) into (12) provides,

From the final condition of constant

amplitude loading (Equation (4)),

Palmgren [2,3] proposed a linear and stress independent cumulative

The damage model predicts a damage trend B in Figure 2. By mathematical

Remaining life for multi-stress level

Where C is constant and independent of applied stress. Therefore this model

Marco-Starkey [6] presented a non-linear cumulative stress dependent

Henry [7] proposed

cumulative damage theory based

suitably represented empirically by cycle v.s.

Figure 4. Marco-Starkeys damage as a

function of cycle ratio.

St : fatigue limit after damage

Corten and Dolran [8-10] proposed

cumulative damage theory which is

number of damage nuclei

predicting multi-stress level fatigue life, they postulated the following.

By the above assumptions, they derived two stress level

fatigue failure con-

Equation (29) expanded for multi-stress fatigue; that is

It was further assumed that the stress-dependent ratio C, /Cl might be

Substitution of Equation (31) into Equation (30) provides,

following assumptions were used.

strength is reduced to applied

Using the above assumptions,

by assuming the S-N curve could be adequately approximated by an equation

Using Equation (37), Equation (32) could be written

It is interesting to note that the Marins criterion reduces to Palmgren-Miners

Where C is a constant to be determined.

Finally he presented following criteria by applying Palmgren-Miners rule to

For the crack

Two stress level

(8, + 1 - 81)(8, - 81)

Later Srivatsavan and Subramanyan [17] studied this model further

sidering the effect of fatigue limit reduction.

when strain is controlled

material constant, may be found from S-N

damage accumulation, they suggested,