IntJ FatiguelO No 2 (1988) pp 109-116

Notch fatigue behaviour of SAE1045

steel
M. T. Yu, D. L. D u Q u e s n a y and T. H. T o p p e r

The effects of notch diameter, material heat treatment and applied stress ratio on the
notch fatigue behaviour of an SAE1045 steel were investigated. The fatigue notch
factor increases with notch diameter for sharp notches, but it decreases with notch
diameter for blunt notches. The notch sensitivity of the quenched-tempered martensitic
steels was higher than that of the as-received ferritic-pearlitic steel, especially for small
notches. However, the notch sensitivity of the quenched-tempered materials was not
significantly affected by the tempering temperature. The fatigue notch factor was found
to be higher for R = - 1 tests than for R = 0 tests for a given notch size in the
as-received material. Short crack fracture mechanics was applied to predict the fatigue
life for sharp and blunt notches. A reasonable agreement between the experimental
and predicted data was observed.

Key words: fatigue notch factor; heat treatment; notch fatigue behaviour; SAE1045
steel; short crack fracture mechanics

Introduction to pure uniaxial tension or compression, K, can be approxi-

Most engineering components contain geometrical discon-
tinuities, such as shoulders, keyways, oil holes, grooves and
threads, which are generally termed notches. Notches induce
high local stresses and strains at their roots, and fatigue
cracks responsible for failures in notched components almost
always begin in, and subsequently propagate from, these
stress and strain concentrators. For this reason the fatigue
behaviour of notches has been studied extensively and still
remains of great interest. 1-6 Medium carbon steel, such as
SAE1045, is widely used in the automobile and machinery
industries for making components which are subjected to
cyclic load. Heat-treatment processes are generally applied
to increase the strength and service life of such components.
However, as the steel's material strength is increased, its
notch sensitivity may also increase. The purpose of this study
is to investigate the notch fatigue behaviour of an SAE1045
steel in the as-received condition and in various heat-treated
conditions. Special attention is paid to the prediction of
fatigue notch factors using short crack fracture mechanics,
and to the effect of tempering temperature on notch
sensitivity.
F a t i g u e n o t c h f a c t o r and s h o r t c r a c k
fracture mechanics
The theoretical elastic notch stress concentration factor, K,,
is defined as the ratio of the local stress at the notch root,
O.o,ch, to the nominal stress in the component at the cross
section containing the notch, S
KI ---- ~notedS (1)
K t depends on the geometry of the component, the
geometry of the notch and the type of loading. For example,
for a central circular notch in a plate specimen subjected
mated using the following equation: 7
Kt = 2 + (1 - 2DIW) 3 (2)
where D is the notch depth, and W is the width of the
plate.
However, notch fatigue strength reductions are often
less severe than is indicated by the elastic solution. The
following three factors may contribute to this discrepancy: s
1) The material in the notch root may experience cyclic
plastic strains.
2) Beneficial muhiaxial stresses may exist at the notch root.
3) For sharp notches, it is possible for cracks to begin
at the notch root, grow to a certain length, and then
become non-propagating. Complete fracture of the com-
ponent will not occur unless the applied stress is raised
to a level which is sufficient to cause continuous propa-
gation of such a crack. The higher stress required to
produce failure gives rise to a strength reduction that
is less than K,.
Because the theoretical stress concentration factor may
not provide an accurate estimate of the strength reduction
due to notches, the fatigue notch factor is usually substituted
for it in estimating the fatigue strength of notched com-
ponents. The fatigue notch factor, Kf, is defined as the ratio
of the fatigue strength of an unnotched specimen, Sue, to
the fatigue strength of a notched specimen, She, at the same
fatigue life. Hence
Kf = A & d A & o (3)
The value of the fatigue notch factor depends on the
properties of the material, the geometry of the notch, the
type of loading, and the applied load ratio. In addition,

0142-1123/88/020109-08 83.00 1988 Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd

Int J Fatigue April 1988 100
for a given set of the above conditions there may be a Table 1. Chemical composition of SAE1048 steel
notch size effect, in which the fatigue notch factor varies (weight %)
with the size of the notch. The fatigue notch factor may
vary between its theoretical maximum value equal to K t C S Mn Si P Fe
and its minimum possible value of unity.S 0.461 0.023 0.081 0.17 0.027 remainder
Topper and E1 Haddad 9 pointed out that there are two
different conditions controlling notch fatigue behaviour. For
'blunt' notches the maximum threshold stress occurs at crack 22.2 diameter
initiation at a notch root, and for 'sharp' notches the maxi- (typical)
mum threshold stress occurs at a finite crack length from
a notch root. The critical radius, Pc,, which separates blunt =--44145 ~'1 I~- 6.35
and sharp notches is equal to 5.5 /o,8 where lo is given by o2.
the following equation: N
13.05 r ios /
Io = (1/n)(AKth/FASo) 2 (4) (typical) ~'~l( (~
where AKth is the threshold stress intensity factor range and 5.08 diameter~l~',- ~ ~: _
AS0 is the fatigue limit stress range. The value of P, which 2.54
is geometry dependent, is approximately 1.12 for a smooth
specimen when the crack is small compared to other 12.70-20 UNF -121 i
geometric dimensions. thread(typical) -I~1~ N
N
Topper and Haddad, 9 who considered only elastic .-t-.. I
material conditions, suggested that for blunt notches in which i
the initiation stress, ASi, is sufficient to propagate a crack a b
to fracture, Kf will be equal to K t. For sharp notches the
fatigue notch factor Kf was derived from Fig. 1 Specimen geometry and dimensions: (a) smooth specimen;
(b) plate specimen
Kf = (1/F)[I + x/(O/lo)] (5)
Using a similar derivation for the case of plasticity at Table 2. M e c h a n i c a l properties
the fatigue limit, the following equations are suggested by
the authors: s Yield Tensile True fracture
lo = (1/x)(AKth/FCEA~c) 2 (6) strength strength strain
(MPa) (MPa) In(Ao/A )
where C is a shape correction factor, a value of C = 0.63
is appropriate for a semi-elliptical surface crack in a plain AR 390 720 0.538
specimen as suggested by Rooke and Cartwright; ~ At; is T1200 645 798 1.007
the fatigue limit strain range, and E is the elastic modulus. T900 1054 1182 0.643
The fatigue notch factor for sharp notches is given by T600 1617 1984 0.103
Kr = C'ASc(1 + x/D/Io)/(FECAc~) (7)
where C' is a crack shape correction factor for the notched For the heat-treated steels, rough machined specimens were
plate specimen and is approximately equal to C, and for austenized at 843C, quenched in oil and tempered for two
blunt notches and a half hours at 315, 482 and 649"C (600, 900 and 1200*F,
respectively). The specimens were then fine machined to
Kr = KtASe/(ASc'Ase'E) 1/2 (8) the dimensions shown in Figs la and b. The materials in
where AS~' and ACe' are the local (notch root) fatigue limit these conditions are hereafter referred as T600, T900, and
stress and strain ranges. In the case of fully reversed nominal T1200, respectively. The monotonic mechanical properties
loading, Equation (8) can be simplified to for the various material conditions are listed in Table 2.
A circular notch geometry was selected as the basis for inves-
Kr = Ktx/(ASe/AEcE) (9) tigations into the notch fatigue behaviour. The circular notch
where AS, and A6 are the stress and strain ranges at the is representative of many notches, defects, or discontinuities
fatigue limit of a smooth specimen. If the notch root strains in real components in terms of both its geometry and its
remain elastic at the fatigue limit, then Equation (9) indicates stress concentration factor. Also, the circle is the easiest
that Kf will be equal to K,. Equations (6) to (9) (which geometry to machine at the centre of a plate specimen, and
it provides a high degree of consistency between specimens
were derived using short crack fracture mechanics) will be
and is easily reproduced. Notch diameters of 0.24, 1.00 and
used for notch strength analysis in this study.
3.00 mm were used in all materials. Notch diameters of
0.50 and 5.00 mm were also used for the as-received steel.
Experimental details The test equipment and techniques are described in
References 11 to 13.
Two types of specimen were used in this study: smooth
cylindrical gauge length specimens and centre-notched plate
specimens. All specimens were fabricated from 12.7 mm ( Smooth specimen fatigue strength
inch) thick, hot rolled plate with the loading axes parallel
to the rolling direction. The chemical composition of the Smooth specimen fatigue tests for each material condition
material is shown in Table 1. As-received (AR) ferrite-pearlite were performed under strain control at a stress ratio, R,
steel and quenched-tempered martensite steels were tested. equal to - 1 . The as-received steel (AR) was also tested

110 Int J Fatigue April 1988

 1400
t- D (mm)
O Smooth
2000 - x Z~ 0.12
x a 0.25
1200 - 0 0.5
~ 1000_ \.~. . ~

w
1.5
2.5
v
ol
600
~. ~, ~ O---
10oo \
400

,,'~ 800 ~ 200

100 I I lllllll I IIIIIIII I I lltlllI I llllllll I I llllllI i IIIIIII

~ 600 102 103 104 l0 s 106 107 108
Cycles to failure
Fig. 4 Fatigue life for R = - 1 loading of smooth and centre-notched
specimens of AR steel
400
Fig. 3) and stress control (open circles) are clustered onto
a single curve. From an engineering viewpoint, it is con-
cluded that stress-life curves plotted using either the stable
200
stress amplitude under strain control conditions or the stress
amplitude under load control conditions are practically
identical.
o I t To examine the effect of specimen cross-sectional
0 0.5 1.0 geometry on fatigue life, plate specimens without centre
Strain (%) notches were tested under stress control (R = - 1 ) . No
Fig. 2 Cyclic stress-strain curves for SAE1045 steel in various significant difference was observed between the fatigue lives
conditions obtained from cylindrical specimens (circles in Fig. 3) and
plate specimens (squares in Fig. 3). In Fig. 3 it can be seen
that the smooth specimen fatigue strength generally increases
2000 as the monotonic tensile strength increases. However, the
hardest material, T600, shows no significant increase in the
fatigue limit stress compared with the somewhat softer T900.
w
1000.~ -- 0 ~ This is probably because the sensitivity of the fatigue limit
to surface roughness increases with hardness of the material. 14
600 Since all the specimens were machined by the same process,
5 it is reasonable to assume that they had the same surface
~ 400 roughness. Hence, the potential increase in the fatigue limit
stress for the hardest material (T600) is offset by the simul-
OO AR taneous increase in its sensitivity to surface roughness.
zx T1200
~200 T900
0 T600 Notched specimen fatigue strength
lOn~ .......I ........ , ..... ,,,1 , ..... ,,l I t I Illll] [ Centre-notched specimens were tested under stress control
~o ~ 103 104 10s 106 107 at a stress ratio, R, equal to - 1 for all material conditions,
Cycles to failure and the AR steel was also tested at R = 0. Cracks always
Fig. 3 Smooth specimen S-N curves for SAE1045 in various originated from the centre notch. The fatigue life was defined
conditions as the number of stress cycles endured until a specimen
completely separated into two pieces. For notch fatigue analy-
under stress control at R = - 1 , in order to examine the sis, the fatigue life of the smooth and the notched specimens
effects of the test control parameters (stress or strain) on tested at R = - 1 is plotted against the nominal elastic-plastic
fatigue life. Under strain controlled testing, the T600, T900 parameter (ASAeE) t/2 for each material condition in Figs
and T1200 heat-treated materials experienced cyclic softening, 4 to 7. For the notched specimens this elastic-plastic para-
while the AR material showed cyclic hardening at high strain meter is identical to nominal stress at all stress levels tested
ranges and cyclic softening at intermediate strain ranges. in this study. The fatigue life of the smooth and notched
The cyclic stress--strain curves (R = - 1 , under strain con- specimens of the AR steel tested at R = 0 is plotted against
trol) for all material conditions are given in Fig. 2. The stress range in Fig. 8. In Figs 4 to 7, it can be seen that
cyclic yield strengths of the as-received and the heat-treated the notch fatigue strength reduction is most pronounced
steels are markedly lower than their respective monotonic in the high-cycle region, and gradually decreases in the finite-
yield strengths. The stress level at half-life is plotted against life region for all of the conditions examined. The effect
the number of cycles to failure in Fig. 3. The fatigue life of notch radius on the fatigue life is very significant for
data for the AR steel under strain control (solid circles in the AR steel. The fatigue life curves approach that for the

Int J Fatigue April 1 9 8 8 111

 r 7ooi_ X

o
Notch radius (ram)
un-notched
0.12
0.25
8oo~ \.\ ,. ~ ~ 600

o
0.50
1.50
x V 2.50
r \ . .,.
I 500
400 ]-- O (ram) "~'~--,'~L~ I

/ 0 ~mooth
A 0.12
~ I ~,,--
~.
200F <)0.50 [ 400
i ,150 i
10011 llllllll I llllllll l llllllll I llllllll 1 11111111 I I IIIIIII
10 2 I0 s 10 4 I0 a 10 6 10 7 10 8 (~

Cycles to failure 300

Fig. 5 Fatigue life for R = - 1 loading of smooth and centre-notched
specimens of T1200 steel

200 AR
R=0

, i I I I L I
10 4 10 s 10 6 107 10 e
"~ ~,~ -O--- Cycles to failure
1000
'~. ~,~. Fig. 8 Stress-life curves for R = 0 loading of unnotched and centre-
~ - ~ notched specimens of AR steel

D (mm) 700

_o
O Smooth D (ram)
A 0,12
600 - O Smooth
0 0.50 0.12
1.50 ,~ 0.50
500
100 I lllHId I ,,,.,,[ , [ JHill[ I alliHli = lJlllJKl = IllIH] a.
102 103 104 105 106 107 108
.~_ 400
Cycles to failure E
Fig. 6 Fatigue life for R = - 1 loading of smooth and centre-notched 300
specimens of T900 steel
LL
2O0

100 --
4OOO

I I I I
400 800 1200 1600 2000
2000
S. (MPa)
Fig. 9 Dependence of fatigue strength on ultimate tensile strength
~ I000
unnotched specimens as the notch radius decreases. The
~ 600
notch fatigue life curve for a notch diameter of 5.00 m m
is above that for the 3.00 mm diameter notches, since the
400 theoretical stress concentration factor decreases as the ratio
of the notch diameter to the specimen width increases
(Equation (2)). The notch fatigue strength reduction for the
2OO 0.24 m m diameter hole is less than that for the 1.00 mm
and 3.00 mm holes in the heat-treated steels. The fatigue
lives for the 1.00 and 3.00 mm diameter holes are roughly
I lliill[ n I LIilil] i llllllll I llllllll i i lllllll i lllllll
100 the same for the T1200 and T900 steels. The fatigue limits
102 103 104 105 106 107 108
of the notched and unnotched specimens, taken at 107 cycles,
Cycles to failure are plotted against ultimate tensile strength in Fig. 9. The
Fig. 7 Fatigue life for R = - 1 loading of smooth and centre-notched smooth specimen fatigue strength of the T1200 steel is greater
specimens of T600 steel than that of the AR steel, hut there is no corresponding

112 Int J F a t i g u e April 1988

T a b l e 3. F a t i g u e p r o p e r t i e s

AR AR T1200 T900 T600

( R = 0) (R = -1) (R = -1) (R = -1) (R = -1)

Fatigue limit stress

ra nge (M Pa) 448 604 760 1134 1200
Threshold stress
intensity factor
(M pavr~) 6.9 4.5 3.85 3.49 3.75
Io (mm) 0.151 0.08 0.065 0.023 0.023

2D
(mm)
0.24 1.37 1.69 2.5 2.57 2.21
0.50 1.44 1.96
1.00 1.62 2.17 3.04 3.05 2.48
3.00 1.97 2.45 3.04 3.05 2.67
5.00 1.90 2.32

increase in the notch fatigue strength. The notch fatigue

strength for all three notch sizes increased continuously as 3.0 .._..."~ . . A Kf = K t
the ultimate tensile strength of the heat-treated materials
was increased. "L. ~ ~ ~ ~ Kf = 0.87 K t "
~ 2.5 -&/ / ..... e---__.~__
J~
Analysis of notch fatigue strength
o 2.0
reduction
/ 20
The smooth specimen fatigue limit, the threshold stress 2= ' ------- A R predicted
intensity factor, the parameter lo, and the experimental fatigue
notch factors for each material condition are given in Table
" 1.5
.....
A R observed
T 1200 predicted
i
3. It can be seen that 0.24, 0.50 and 1.00 m m diameter T 1 2 0 0 observed
holes are sharp notches for the as-received steel, while the 1.0 I I I ] [ [ [ I
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.5
3.00 and 5.00 m m diameter notches are blunt. The 0.24
m m diameter hole is sharp for the T1200 steel, and is about Notch size, D (mm)
the critical size that separates sharp and blunt notches for Fig. 10 Variation of fatigue notch factor with notch size for R =
- 1 loading of AR and T1200 steels
the Tg00 and the Tt00 steels. The 1.00 mm and 3.00 m m
diameter notches are blunt for all three heat-treated steels.
The total strain range at the fatigue limit (R = - 1 )
for the as-received steel is 0.0039, and the modulus of 3.0---- _..._ --- ~. Kf = K t
elasticity for this steel is approximatly 206 000 MPa. Hence,
based on Equations (8) and (9), the fatigue notch factors
are given by 2.5 -- K , = 0 . 6 6 (1 + D~b-~o)
| E q u a t i o n (8)
Kf = 0.87K t for blunt notches ~- ,~,e Kf = 0.70 K t
Kf = 0.67 (1 + x/D/lo) for sharp notches o= 2 0 ..... _,____
None of the three heat-treated steels exhibited measurable
plastic strains at the fatigue limit. For blunt notches in these _ // R=O
materials the fatigue notch factor should be equal to K. u. 1.5 cAD arpJ BI
and for sharp notches Kf should be equal to Observed
7 = Sh unt ~ Predicted
Kr = 0.89(1 + JD/lo) Oil I
0
I
0.3 0.6
[ = l
0,9 1.2
l
1.5
I I
1.8 2.1
I I
2.5
The theoretical stress concentration factors, the predicted Notch size, D (mm)
fatigue notch factors and the experimental fatigue notch
Fig. 11 Variation of fatigue notch factor with notch size for R =
factors for the AR and the T1200 steels at R = - 1 are 0 loading of AR steel
plotted on axes of fatigue notch factor, Kf, against notch
radius, D, in Fig. 10. A reasonable agreement is obtained mechanics to determine the fatigue notch factor. A computa-
between the predicted and experimental fatigue notch factors tional technique, based on Neuber's rule, 15 was used to
for both materials. predict the fatigue notch factors for notched specimens of
There was distinct cyclic plasticity and notch root stress the AR steel under R = 0 nominal loading. The details
cycle asymmetry in the AR steel tested at R = 0. For this of the computation are given in Reference 8. The observed
condition, the fatigue notch factors cannot be predicted using and predicted values of the fatigue notch factor are shown
Equations (7) and (8). The cyclic notch stresses and strains in Fig. 11.
must be estimated and used in conjunction with fracture The fatigue notch factors for the T900 steel are about

Int J Fatigue April 1988 113

the same as those for the T1200 steel, as shown in Table 1.2
3. This table also s h o w s that the fatigue notch factors for
the hardest material (T600) are lower than those for the 1.0i_ .~Ig._oLT_..12tO0~~. _ .
softer materials (T1200 and Tg00). It is generally considered / , ,' AR, R =-1 o_ _ _ .

that the fatigue notch factor should increase as the material
hardness is increased. The lower value of the fatigue notch
factor for the hardest steel (T600) corresponds to the low
fatigue strength observed in smooth specimens. It is well
known that harder materials are more sensitive to surface
conditionsJ 6 For example, the fatigue life of a fine-ground
smooth specimen is about 90% of that for a mirror-polished
specimen when the material tensile strength is lower than
about 1100 MPa. However, this value decreases to 70%
when the tensile strength is greater than about 1100 MPa. 16
All specimens tested in this study were fine-ground, and
their ultimate strengths were less than 1100 MPa, except
for the T600 steel. Consequently, it is reasonable to speculate
that if mirror-polished specimens were used, the fatigue notch
factor of the T600 steel would not be lower than that of
the T1200 and the Tg00 steels.
Equation (9) can be extended to include the finite life
region by replacing AS c and A~e with the smooth specimen
stress and strain ranges at the fatigue life for which Kf is
calculated. The blunt notch fatigue strength predicted using
(a) the theoretical stress concentration factor, Kt (dash-dot
line), and (b) the fatigue notch factor, Kf, given by Equation
(9) (dashed line) are plotted along with the experimental
data in Figs 4 to 7. In the high-cycle range, Kf is roughly
equal to K t. However, the difference between Kf and K t
increases as the fatigue life decreases. The experimental data
are in good agreement with the predictions based on Equa-
tion (9) for the blunt notches in the as-received steel, as
shown in Fig. 4. In Figs 5 to 7 the theoretical stress concen-
tration factor was taken as 2.88 (the average of 2.94 and
2.81 for the 1.0 and 3.0 mm diameter notches, respectively)
for clarity, since separate curves using K, values of 2.94
and 2.81 would be virtually identical. A reasonable agreement
between the fatigue strength predicted by Equation (9) and
the experimental fatigue strength of the blunt notches is
observed in the high-cycle range. In the low-cycle range,
Equation (9) is conservative, but it is more accurate than
Kt for predicting the fatigue strength of the blunt notches.
The conservative estimates of fatigue strength are probably
due to the fact that Neuber's rule, is when used with the
stable cyclic stress-strain curve, tends to over-estimate the
notch root stresses in the finite life region. This over-estimate
occurs because a unique stable stress-strain curve is not
representative of the material in the notch root, since time-
dependent cyclic softening/hardening occurs at different rates
across the net section of the notched specimen. Although
the notch strength reductions could be more accurately pre-
dicted using elastic-plastic finite element techniques, the
slightly conservative results presented here, based on a simple
application of Neuber's rule, are adequate for most engineer-
ing applications.
Notch sensitivity
Notch sensitivity is usually defined as: 6
q = (Kr - 1)/(Kt - 1) (1 O)
Some authors, 17 however, have preferred to define notch
sensitivity as the ratio of KdK,, which will be used in this
study. According to this definition, the notch sensitivity for
sharp notches is given by
o81- /" X/ / r7--7 -
~ "to AN, H = 0
ii / / o/~--/-7--------w ~----.
~0.6'- / /o //../%
.////~/i
0.4,5_GSz" AR, R = O
OAR }
0.2 - & T1200 R = -1
T900
I I
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.5
~O" (mm- 1/2)
Fig. 12 Predicted and experimental fatigue notch sensitivity (KdK~)
vs notch size (x/D) for various material conditions
K J K t = (1 + x/D/lo)/(FK,) (11)
and for blunt notches, the notch sensitivity is
Kr/Kt = x/(ASe/EAe.e) (12)
Equation (11) shows that notch sensitivity for sharp notches
is a function of lo (which is itself a function of material
properties and stress ratio), and the notch size (D). Equation
(12) shows that notch sensitivity for blunt notches is
independent of notch size. The notch sensitivities, KdKt,
predicted from these two equations and the values calculated
from the experimental fatigue notch factors, Kf, and the
theoretical stress concentration factors, Kt, are plotted against
x / D in Fig. 12. The predicted notch sensitivity (dashed lines)
increases as notch size increases at both stress ratios (R =
0 and R = - 1 ) for the AR steel until the critical notch
radius is reached. There is a reasonable agreement between
the predictions and the experimental data. The notch sensiti-
vity of the AR steel at R = 0 is much lower than at R
= - 1 for the four notch sizes tested in this study. The
notch sensitivity of the as-received steel is much lower than
that of the heat-treated steels for all notch sizes examined
at R = - 1 .
The true fracture strain [ln(Ao/Af)], ultimate tensile
strength (Su), smooth specimen fatigue limit strength (S_1) ,
and the notch sensitivity (KdKt) of the heat-treated steels
are normalized with respect to the corresponding values of
these parameters for the as-received steel and are plotted
against tempering temperature in Fig. 13. In this figure it
can be seen that the normalized notch sensitivity is higher
for the small notches than for the large notches. For a large
notch (D ~> 1.5 mm) the notch sensitivity of the heat-treated
steel is not significantly higher than that for the as-received
steel. It is interesting to note that tempering temperature
has only a slight effect on the notch sensitivity for a given
notch size.
It can be seen from Fig. 13 that there is no direct
relationship between notch sensitivity and ductility in terms
of true fracture strain, ln(Ao/Af) , which is supposed to relieve
local high stress and decrease notch sensitivity. Also, Fig.
13 shows that there is no direct relationship between notch
sensitivity and tensile strength (Su) or fatigue strength (S_ t)"
Discussion
The results of this study indicate that short crack fracture
mechanics can be applied to predict the fatigue strength

114 Int J Fatigue April 1 9 8 8


@ In (Ao/Af)
_ S,
eS_l
0 Kf/Kt(D = 0.12 mm
Kf/Kt{D1 5 mm)
~ 2- J-
0 I I I I notch sensitivity.
250 350 450 550 650
Tempering temperature (C)
Fig. 13 Normalized properties of heat-treated steels vs tempering
temperature
of sharp notches and accounts for the so-called 'notch-size
effect'. Equations (7) and (8) give reasonable fatigue notch
factor predictions for sharp and blunt notches, respectively.
For the various notch sizes tested in this study, ferrite-
pearlite (AR) showed a much lower value of notch sensitivity
(especially for small notches) than the quenched-tempered
martensites (T600, T900 and T1200). For the quenched-
tempered martensites the notch sensitivity is not significantly
affected by tempering temperatures at a given notch size.
In the authors' previous work, 12 it has been shown that
the as-received ferrite-pearlite has a much higher threshold
stress intensity factor than the quenched-tempered marten-
sites at three stress ratios (R equal to 0, 0.4 and 0.7) and
that the threshold stress intensity factor for the quenched-
tempered martensites is not significantly affected by temper-
ing temperature at a given stress ratio. It is not surprising
to find a similar effect of microstructure (ferrite-pearlite or
quenched-tempered martensite) and tempering temperature
on the sensitivity of the material to sharp notches since
both the threshold and the sensitivity to sharp notches are
related to crack propagation resistance. Free ferrite in the
as-received steel may play an important role in blunting
a crack tip and increasing crack closure. Instead of free ferrite,
there are uniformly distributed carbides in the heat-treated
steels. Decohesion of carbides and connection of micro-
decohesion cracks may be responsible for the low crack pro-
pagation resistance of the heat-treated steels. The effect of
size and spacing of carbides, which are dependent on the
tempering temperature, on the crack propagation resistance
is relatively small. The effect of microstructure on crack
propagation resistance is under further study.
It is generally considered that notch sensitivity increases
with material tensile strength. 6"18-20 For example Reference
18 shows a series of curves for the quenched-tempered steels
which suggest that for a notch of a given radius, the notch
sensitivity increases with tensile strength in the range 1380
MPa > S, > 345 MPa. However, the results of this study
show that there was no significant difference between the
notch sensitivities of three quenched-tempered steels with
tensile strengths ranging from 798 MPa to 1984 MPa. It
is worthwhile to note that, in terms of stress amplitude,
the steel with the highest tensile strength (T600) has the
highest notch fatigue strength for all three notch sizes tested
in this study, as shown in Fig. 9. The lowest tensile strength
material (T1200) is no better than the higher strength
Int J F a t i g u e April 1 9 8 8
materials (T900 and T600) in terms of both absolute notch
fatigue strength and notch sensitivity.
Comparing the mechanical behaviour of the two types
of microstructures, the monotonic yield strength of the low-
temperature tempered martensite (T600) was increased by
a factor of 4 and the ultimate tensile strength was increased
by a factor of 2.75 over the as-received ferrite-pearlite as
shown in Fig. 13. However the improvement in fatigue
strength was not as great. The smooth specimen fatigue
strength was increased by a factor of 2, sharp and blunt
notch fatigue strengths were increased by factors of 1.5 and
1.8, respectively. Again, the high-temperature (650C)
tempering showed no advantage over the as-received ferrite-
pearlite in terms of both absolute fatigue strength and fatigue
Conclusions
1) The fatigue limit of the centre-notched specimens
increases as the tempering temperature decreases for
all three notch sizes. The steel tempered at the highest
temperature (T1200) does not show an improvement
in fatigue behaviour in terms of either notch sensitivity
or absolute notch fatigue strength over that of the as-
received steel (AR) or the steels quenched and tempered
at medium (T900) or low temperatures (T600).
2) There is a reasonable agreement between the experi-
mental fatigue notch factors and those predicted from
short crack fracture mechanics.
3) In the finite fatigue life region and for blunt notches,
Equation (9) gives reasonable and conservative fatigue
life predictions.
4) For sharp notches the notch sensitivity, Kf/Kt, increases
as the notch size increases. The notch sensitivity of
the as-received steel is much higher at a stress ratio
o f R = - 1 than that at R = 0. At the same stress
ratio (R = - 1 ) , the as-received steel is much less
sensitive to notches, especially to small notches, than
the heat-treated steels. The notch sensitivity of the heat-
treated steels, however, is not significantly affected by
tempering temperature for a given notch size. There
is no direct relationship between notch sensitivity and
ductility measured by true fracture strain.
Acknowledgements
The financial support of this work by G K N Technology
Limited is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. Paterson, R. E. 'Stress concentration phenomena in fatigue
of metals' Applied Mechanics Section, Trans ASME58 (1933)
p 157
2. Neuber, H. Theory of notch stress (J. W. Edwards Co., Ann
Arbor, Michigan, 1946) p 155
3. Moore, H. F. "The effect of size and notch sensitivity on
fatigue characteristics of two metalic materials" USAF
Technical Report 5726 (USAF Air Material Command, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 1948)
4. Dowling, N. E. and Wilson, W. K. 'Analysis of notch strain
for cyclic loading" Westinghouse R & D Center Scientific
Paper 79-1D3 PALFA-P2 (1979)
5. Leis, B. N., Gowda, C. V. B. and Topper, T. H. 'Cyclic
inelastic deformation and the fatigue notch factor' ASTM STP
519 (American Society for Testing and Materials, 1973) pp
133-150
115
 6. Peterson, R, E. Stress Concentration Factors (Wiley, 1974)
7. Heywood, R. B. Designing by Photoelesticity (Chapman
and Hall, London, 1952)
8. DuOuesnay, D. L., Yu, M. T. and Topper, T. H. 'An analy-
sis of notch-size effects at the fatigue limit' J Testing and
Eva116 4 (1988)
9. Topper, T. H. and El Haddad, M. H. 'Fatigue strength
prediction of notches based on fracture mechanics' Fatigue
Thresholds, Proceedingsof an International Conference held
in Stockholm, 1-3 June 1981 (EMAS, Warley, UK, 1981)
pp 777-798
10. Rooke, D. P. and CarZwright, D. J. A Compendium of
Stress Intensity Factors (HMSO, London, 1974)
11. Yu, M. T., Topper, T. H., DuQuesnay, D. L. and
Pompetzki, M. A. "Fatigue crack growth threshold and crack
opening of a mild steel' ASTM J Test and Eva/14 No 3
(May 1986) pp 145-151
12. Yu, i . T. and Topper, T. H. 'The effects of material strength,
stress ratio and compressive overload on the threshold beha-
vior of a SAE1045 steel' Trans ASME (January 1985) pp
19-25
13. Yu, M. T., Topper, T. H. and Au, P. 'The effects of stress
ratio, compressive load and underload on the threshold
behavior of a 2024-T351 aluminium alloy" Fatigue 84,
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fatigue
116
and Fatigue Thresholds, Birmingham, UK, 3-7 September
1984 (EMAS, Warley, UK, 1984) pp 179-190
14. Hertzberg, R. W. Deformation and Fracture Mechanics of
Engineering Materials (Wiley, 1976)
15. Neuber, H. 'Theory of stress concentration for shear strained
prismatical bodies with arbitrary non-linear stress strain law'
JApplMech28 (1961) pp 544-550
16. Boyer, H. E. Atlas of Fatigue Curves (ASM, 1986) p 33
17. Buch, A. "The effect of different factors on the sensitivity
of engineering materials to stress concentration in the case
of fatigue loading" Technion (Israel Institute of Technology,
Department of Aeronautical Engineering, 1984) TAE No 551
18. Sines, G. and Waieman, J. L. (eds) Metal Fatigue
(McGraw-Hill, 1959) pp 293-306
19. Kuhn, P. and Hardrath, H. F. 'An engineering method
for estimating notch-size effect in fatigue tests of steel' NACA
Tech Note 2805 (1952)
20. Heywood, R. B. 'Stress concentration factors' Engng 179
(1955) p 146
Authors
The authors are with the Civil Engineering Department of
the University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Int J Fatigue April 1988