International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijfatigue

Statistical distribution functions and fatigue of structures

J. Schijve*
Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Kluyverweg 1, P.O. Box 5058, 2600 GB Delft, The Netherlands
Received 5 August 2004; received in revised form 9 February 2005; accepted 22 March 2005
Available online 13 May 2005

Abstract
Three statistical distribution functions are compared. The log(N) normal distribution, the 3-parameter Weibull distribution and the
3-parameter log(NKN0) normal distribution. The latter function is relatively new. Attention is paid to very low probabilities of failure.
Various sources of scatter of fatigue test data and fatigue of structures in service are recapitulated. Different practical problems for which
statistics are important are defined. Limitations of statistical predictions are briefly discussed. The significance of fatigue acceptance tests and
realistic full scale service-simulation tests are emphasized.
q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Fatigue; Statistical distribution functions; Structures; Service life

1. Introduction In general, the statistical analysis of fatigue problems

The evaluation of statistical fatigue problems of
structures and materials is addressed in numerous publi-
cations in the open literature. The variety of objectives
includes essentially different purposes. The most-simple
case is to characterize the variation of fatigue properties,
such as the standard deviation of a fatigue limit. A practical
case occurs in comparative test programs if the question is
whether option A is statistically superior to option B. As an
example, is the fatigue life of a joint with a new type of
fasteners statistically superior to the life obtained with
fasteners previously used? In the industry comparative
fatigue tests are also carried out to check the quality of a
material or a product procured from suppliers.
Another category of publications is dealing ‘with
designing against fatigue’, predictions on fatigue, and
safety issues. Statistical aspects must then be recognized.
Safety factors to avoid fatigue failures of industrial products
are to be used for reasons of economy and liability. This
implies that very low probabilities of failure have to be
considered. Sometimes the growth of fatigue cracks is part
of a statistical scenario. Inspections should then prevent
catastrophic failures.
requires a statistical distribution function of the relevant
variables. Unfortunately, statistical distributions for fatigue
problems cannot be derived from a physical description of
the fatigue phenomenon, in spite of the fact that the
knowledge about fatigue damage of a material is fairly well
developed in a qualitative way [1]. As a consequence, a
statistical distribution function must be assumed. The most
well-known function is the normal distribution (also
Gaussian distribution). In this paper three distribution
functions are considered; (i) the log(N)-normal distribution
function, (ii) the 3-parameter Weibull distribution function,
and (iii) the log(NKN0)-normal distribution function. The
latter function appears to be a new one although it was
proposed long ago. The three functions are used for data
fitting to results of a two fatigue test series. Attention is paid
to very low probabilities of failure. The paper continues with
general observations about scatter of fatigue results caused
by different sources. The significance of scatter for practical
problems of industrial production and the structure in
service is summarized and different types of planning
fatigue tests are stipulated. The paper is completed with a
number of conclusions.

* Tel.: C15 3695 194; fax: C15 278 1151. 2. Three statistical distribution functions
E-mail address: j.schijve@lr.tudelft.nl

0142-1123/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. The most well known and classical distribution function
doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.03.001 is the normal distribution function, also called the Gaussian
1032 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039

function. The equation for the probability of values v%x is
given in Eq. (1).
 y K m 2
ðx
1 K12
PðxÞ Z pffiffiffiffiffiffi e s dv (1)
s 2p KN
In this equation m is the mean value, s is the standard
deviation, and v the integration variable. A linear function
between P(x) and the variable x is obtained if this function is
plotted on so-called normal probability paper, see Fig. 1.
The slope of the straight line depends on s. Usually, log(N)
is adopted as the variable x for the evaluation of test results
of similar fatigue tests.
Another popular distribution function is the 3-parameter
Weibull distribution function [2], presented as Eq. (2).
 x K x b
K
0 showed that statistical data of a skew distribution could be
PðxÞ Z 1 K e a (2)
There are three parameters in this equation. The function
has a lower limit x0 for which P(x)Z0. It implies that
fatigue lives smaller than N0 (corresponding to x0Zlog(N0))
cannot occur. This appears to be realistic from a physical
point of view. The parameter a is called the scale parameter,
and b the shape parameter in view of their effects on
the probability density curve. In several publications x0
is assumed to be zero and Eq. (2) then reduces to the
2-parameter Weibull distribution function. If a Weibull
distribution is fitted to test results, three parameters
obviously allow a better correlation with the data than two
parameters. The 2-parameter Weibull distribution function
will not be considered any further in this paper.
99
90
50
P (%)
A second 3-parameter distribution function with a lower
limit for the fatigue life will now be discussed. In his book
Statistical Theory with Engineering Applications [3], Hald
discussed skew distributions. According to Hald, distri-
butions influenced by economics, psychological and
biological factors are generally skew. Hald also states that
theoretically it is always possible to determine a function
g(x) which will transform a skew distribution of x into a
normal distribution. As a noticeable example, Hald
discusses the logarithmic normal distribution with the
transformation function g(x)Zlog(x). Actually, this applies
to the log(N)-normal distribution function discussed above.
Hald also mentions the transformation function g(x)Z
log(xKa) with ‘a’ as an additional parameter of the
logarithmic normal distribution. This function was already
discussed in 1916 by Kapteyn and Van Uven [4]. They
fitted by a linear relation between P(x) and log(xKa) if
plotted on normal probability paper. With the present
notation of N for the fatigue life, the statistical variable x is:
x Z logðN K N0 Þ (3)
The probability function is still the same as in Eq. (1) but
now xZlog (NKN0), and m and s are the mean value and
standard deviation of log (NKN0), respectively. The
distribution function is still a normal distribution, but now
three parameters are involved. The attractive feature is that a
lower limit of the fatigue life N0 is introduced as a location
parameter, although mathematically in a different way as in
the Weibull 3-parameter equation. It may be appreciated
that the normality of the distribution function is maintained.
The option of the log(NKN0)-normal distribution
function apparently escaped the attention of papers on
statistical evaluations of fatigue test results. De Jonge in
1983 [5] compared this distribution function with the
3-parameter Weibull distribution function. He showed that
approximately similar shapes of the probability density
function, depending on the 3 parameters, can be obtained by
both distribution functions. It then may be expected that
the log(NKN0)-normal distribution and the 3-parameter
Weibull distribution can both agree in a similar way with

test data. This is explored in the section below.

10

1 3. Fitting distribution functions to test data

0.1 Results of similar fatigue tests can be plotted in a normal

probability plot at an estimated probability of failure
0.01
equal to:
100 200 500 1000 2000
Fatigue life (1000 cycles)
i K 0:5
Pi Z (4)
n
Fig. 1. Test results of 15 similar fatigue tests on welded specimens plotted
in a normal probability graph [6]. Data fitting with the log(N)-normal with n as the number of test results and the rank number iZ1
distribution function (straight line) and the 3-parameter Weibull distri- to n for the fatigue life data in an increasing order of
bution function (non-linear curve, N0Z168 kc). magnitude. Other approximation equations for Pi are
 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039 1033

presented in the literature (e.g. PiZ(3iK1)/(3nC1)) but the 99

differences with Eq. (4) are small if n is not too small. The
differences are insignificant for the discussion below.
90
3.1. First test series

The results of 15 fatigue tests on a welded joint specimen 50

are presented in Fig. 1 [6]. The polished specimens with a
transverse welding joint were made of an 8 mm thick plate
of a low carbon steel. The fatigue tests were carried out at
SaZ242 MPa, RZK1. The straight line in Fig. 1 applies to
the log normal distribution function plotted with the
calculated values of m and s (slog(N)Z0.17). Data fitting
was also done with the 3-parameter Weibull distribution
function. The values of the three parameters x0, a and b were
obtained with a regression analysis previously used and
described in [7]. It implies that the root mean square (rms)
value of the deviations between the test data and the
corresponding values according to the distribution function
at the same Pi is minimized.
The test data in Fig. 1 do not show a tendency towards a
skew distribution, and both distribution function are
apparently in good agreement with the test results. The
question which of the two functions gives the better
agreement with the test result can obviously not be
answered by Fig. 1. The rms deviation between the test
results and the distribution function was 0.0260 for the
log(N)-normal distribution function and 0.0250 for
3-parameter Weibull distribution function. The two values
are small (good fit) and hardly different. However, the value
of x0 for the 3-parameter Weibull distribution function
corresponds to a minimum fatigue life of 168 kc (dotted
vertical line in Fig. 1) whereas a lower limit for the log-
normal distribution function is theoretically equal to zero.
The lower tail of the Weibull distribution function in Fig. 1
clearly suggests a deviation from the normal distribution
function. As said earlier, a lower limit of statistically
possible fatigue lives appears to be realistic from a physical
point of view. Unfortunately, it cannot be concluded from
Fig. 1 that the predicted lower limit of 168 kc according to
the 3-parameter Weibull distribution function is realistic
information.
P (%)
10
1
0.1
300 500 1000 2000 4000
Fatigue life (1000 cycles)
Fig. 2. Results of 30 similar tests on a notched 2024-T3 Al-alloy specimens,
plotted in a normal probability graph [8]. Data fitting with the log(N)-
normal distribution function (straight line) and the 3-parameter Weibull
distribution function, non-linear curve with N0Z631 kc.
and a lower limit might be relevant. The log(N)-normal
distribution function, i.e. the straight line in this figure,
does not agree with the test results, but the 3-parameter
Weibull distribution function gives a good agreement with
the data. The lower limit x0 corresponds to NZ631 kc,
which is fairly close to the lowest test results of 650 kc.
The log(NKN0)-normal distribution function for the
same test data is shown in Fig. 3. The value of N0 is again
calculated with the rms deviation method. The value now is
N0Z561 kc. It turns out that the log(NKN0)-normal
distribution function gives a similarly good fit to the test
99
90
50
P (%)

The log(NKN0)-normal distribution function was also

used to fit the test data in Fig. 1. The least square method
was adopted again to determine the three parameters. It
10
turned out that N0 was as small as 1100 cycles which implies
that the log(NKN0)-normal distribution function practically
coincides with the log(N)-normal distribution function.
1

3.2. Second test series

0.1
300 500 1000 2000 4000
Results of a larger test series with 30 similar fatigue tests
on edge notched specimens (KtZ2.85) of an aluminium Fatigue life (1000 cycles)
alloy (2024-T3 Alclad, thickness 5 mm) [8] are presented in Fig. 3. The same data of Fig. 2 but now data fitted with the log(NKN0)-
Fig. 2, again in a normal probability graph with log(N) as normal distribution function. Slightly different non-linear curve with
the variable. The results clearly show a skew distribution N0Z561 kc.
1034 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
results. The rms deviation for the log(NKN0)-normal
distribution function and the 3-parameter Weibull distri-
bution function are 0.0189 and 0.0193, respectively. Again
the two rms deviations are small and hardly different. The
rms deviation for the log(N)-normal distribution function is
0.0459, which is a significantly larger value. It confirms that
the log(N)-normal distribution function does not agree with
the test results.
The somewhat lower N0-value of 561 kc for the
log(NKN0)-normal distribution function, as compared to
631 kc of the 3-parameter Weibull distribution function,
appears to be a bit more realistic when comparing the
curves for the lower test data of the skew distributions in
Figs. 2 and 3.
In conclusion, the analysis of the two test series indicate
that a good fit of test results in the range of the test data is
very well possible with the log(NKN0)-normal distribution
function and the 3-parameter Weibull distribution function.
This is not true for the log(N)-normal distribution function if
the test data indicate a skew distribution. Secondly,
extrapolation of the distribution function to very low
probabilities of failure remains an uncertain procedure. It
means that the distribution function is actually unknown.
4. Some general trends of scatter in fatigue tests
4.1. Scatter and the S–N curve
Observations on scatter of fatigue were usually made in
laboratory experiments under constant-amplitude (CA)
loading. In general scatter was larger at low stress
amplitudes and lower at high amplitudes as shown by
Fig. 4. This trend is discussed in [9,10]. The fatigue life
Fig. 4. S–N curve with narrow scatter band at high Sa (low cycle fatigue) and wide scatter band at low Sa (high-cycle fatigue). Three probability density
functions are indicated [10].
covers two periods: the crack initiation period and the crack
growth period. The fatigue mechanism during the crack
initiation period is a surface phenomenon. Crack growth in
the second period is a material bulk phenomenon associated
with the fatigue crack growth resistance of the material. The
crack initiation is much more sensitive to various circum-
stances at the material surface, with local surface roughness
as a predominating factor. At a high Sa (low-cycle fatigue)
the crack can occur relatively easy and scatter is low. At a
low Sa (high-cycle fatigue) the initiation of the first
microcrack meets with more difficulties depending on the
local circumstances. As a result scatter is larger. For
amplitudes around the fatigue limit it is even a kind of a
threshold problem whether a microcrack will be initiated
and can pass the very first micro-barriers for further growth.
The previous discussion on three statistical distribution
functions was related to the finite life region of the S–N
curve. For scatter of the fatigue limit, the statistical fatigue
life distribution functions are not applicable. It is generally
assumed that the normal distribution applies to the fatigue
limit, a common assumption for strength properties.
Although this may be considered to be reasonable, it should
be recognized that the distribution function is not really
known. Statistical trends about the fatigue limit can be
obtained from fatigue experiments. The stair-case method is
the most well known procedure to obtain an estimate of the
mean value and the standard deviation [11]. Unfortunately,
it is an expensive procedure because to obtain a reasonable
confidence level, a large number of long lasting tests is
required to obtain these properties with a reasonable
confidence level.
The fatigue limit is supposed to be a relevant material
property for components subjected to very high numbers
of cycles in service while failure in service is not allowed.
 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
This applies to several engine components. It is not always
realized that the fatigue limit of unnotched specimens does
not indicate whether a material is notch sensitive. Moreover,
different sources of scatter apply to laboratory experiments
and the production of components as discussed in [9,10].
4.2. Scatter under variable-amplitude loading
In the last century, fatigue tests with a variable-amplitude
(VA) load sequence were often carried out to check damage
accumulation models, noteworthy the Pålmgren-Miner rule.
Scatter in such tests was occasionally analyzed. It was
concluded in [9] that the standard deviation in such tests is
of the same order of magnitude as obtained in CA tests at the
highest stress amplitudes applied in the VA tests, even if
high fatigue lives are obtained in the VA tests. It implies that
the scatter can be relatively low under VA loading. The
trend was explained by recognizing the prevailing influence
of the most severe cycles of the VA load sequence on the
crack initiation mechanism. In view of this observation, it
must be concluded that it is not correct to predict the scatter
under VA loading by pooling scatter data obtained in CA
tests for the stress amplitudes used in the VA tests.
4.3. Scatter and size effects
Effects of the specimen size on the fatigue limit of both
unnotched and notched specimens have drawn attention in
the past. It was thought that a weakest link theory could
account for these effects. It is indeed an intriguing but
difficult question. Size effects should then be related to the
probability of favourable locations for microcrack nuclea-
tion in unnotched specimens and at the root of a notch in
notched specimens. In the latter case, stress gradients must
be considered. A fundamental question is whether the
probability of microcrack nucleation will be a volume effect
(three-dimensional), a surface effect (two-dimensional), or
a corner edge effect (one-dimensional) [10, p. 144]. The
probability of having favourable sites for microcrack
initiation can also depend on the type of material including
inclusions and impurities. Although the occurrence of a size
effect can be understood from a weakest link point of view,
this has not led to a rational theory to account for the effect.
The same is true for the correlation between the fatigue limit
of notched and unnotched specimens. In practice, empirical
rules are still used for the prediction of notch effects.
4.4. Scatter due to variations of the material
It is a good practice of laboratory investigations to plan
fatigue experiments in such a way that scatter will be
minimal. This is done to avoid that scatter of the test results
will obscure quantitative conclusions about the phenomenon
to be studied. Useful information can be obtained with a
lower number of tests if scatter can be avoided or minimized.
Well-known precautionary measures are the production of
1035
all specimens from a single sheet, plate or bar, and
manufacturing of all specimens with great care in one
machine shop. From a fatigue point of view, materials are not
fully characterized by the standardized composition of the
major alloying elements. In several materials crack nuclea-
tion starts from microscopic inclusions at or near the material
surface. It implies that the contents of impurities, the material
production and the heat treatment can affect the fatigue
properties. It has been observed that the fatigue properties of
aircraft aluminium alloys can be different for the same
nominally alloy obtained from different producers, and even
for different batches of the same producer [10]. Similarly, the
effect of impurities on the fatigue limit of low-alloy high-
strength steels (alloying elements Cr, Mo, Ni, V) heat treated
to high stress levels can also be significant [10]. The cleaner
steels are superior from a fatigue point of view. The effect of
different sizes and shapes of inclusions on crack initiation
and initial crack growth has extensively been investigated by
Murakami [12].
The production of components and structures in the
industry cannot be associated with an exactly constant
quality of the material procured from year to year, in spite of
ordering the material in agreement with the same material
specification.
4.5. Scatter due to production variables
The industry has to take care of the production quality of
a structure or a component to be maintained at a good
standard. This problem is easily recognized for mass
production of various vehicles with motorcars as out-
standing examples. It also applies to aircraft, which are
produced during many years. The quality of the product can
change over the years for several reasons, partly because of
variations of the production techniques and the materials
used, but also because of introducing a new and more
economic production process.
Walter Schütz carried out an investigation on different
types of riveted lap joint used in the aircraft industry [13].
Some years later he was asked to repeat a series of these
tests on riveted joint specimens manufactured according to
the original drawing. He then found that the fatigue life was
about three times larger then obtained in the first test
program. Schütz showed that the deviating results were due
to more intensive squeezing of the rivets. Later this riveting
variable was extensively investigated in Delft by Müller
[14]. It confirmed that the squeezing force had a large effect
on the fatigue life and thus could be a source of scatter due
to the variability of the production.
In the motor car industry, but also in other industries,
various components are procured from small companies
specialized in the production of those components. It then
should be ascertained that the product meets the standard of
sufficient quality for each supply. Partly this can be done by
simple means such as hardness testing, visual inspection
and tolerance measurements. However, with respect to
1036 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
Fig. 5. A forged control lever of a motorcar tested under a service-
simulation fatigue load history to check the variability of the quality of
the product. In two years 130 levers were tested. Scatter was large,
slog(N)Z0.29 [15].
the fatigue quality, this can only be done in a realistic way
by some kind of a ‘fatigue acceptance test’. Several car
industries have developed testing procedures for this
purpose. A few items of a large number of components of
a supply are randomly selected for fatigue testing under a
cyclic load history, which should discriminate between
sufficient and insufficient quality. The load sequence is
conservatively chosen for the loads on the component in
service. Depending of the component, the sequence may be
either CA or VA loading.
In an older investigation of the German motorcar
industry 130 control levers shown in Fig. 5 were tested
under a service-simulation load history, [15]. The levers
were taken from different deliveries during a period of
2 years. The material was a 0.4C steel (40Mn4) with
SUz850 MPa. The life to failure showed much scatter with
slog(N)Z0.29. Analysis of the 130 levers indicated that
scatter was mainly caused by changing dimensions due to
wear out of the forging dies and to somewhat different
machining shapes near the fatigue critical cross section.
4.6. Scatter and load spectra
Scatter of load spectra applied to a structure in service
is an entirely different problem that the other sources
summarized before. Those sources could be manipulated
by the manufacturer of the structure. However, the loads
on the structure are depending on the operator of the
structure. Nevertheless, the load spectrum is an essential
input for any prediction on the fatigue performance of a
structure. In general, a structure will not be used in the
same way by all owners. Severe load spectra and mild load
spectra may be applicable to the same structure. An
overloaded truck driving along roads in a poor condition
will see a relatively severe load spectrum. An example of
an opposite case occurred to a Fokker aircraft, which was
used by a firm as an executive aircraft. Since the
executives did not fly when stormy weather was fore-
casted, the counting accelerometer data of the aircraft
indicated a low severity spectrum [10, p. 326].
Scenarios about how a structure will be used and can be
used must lead to a decision about the design load spectrum
for the analysis of the fatigue behaviour of a structure.
If the various loads on the structure are defined, the loads
inside the structure depend on the dynamic response of the
structure. A simple case is a pressure vessel, which is
periodically loaded to a certain pressure level. However,
complex problems can arise for e.g. a motorcar, a coach, a
truck, or an aircraft wing where the dynamic response may
be rather complex. Different loads in various directions and
not necessarily in phase can occur simultaneously.
By the end of the previous century, techniques and
apparatus for measuring load-time histories were developed
to a high level of perfection. Load-time measurements can
even be used as input signals for simulation tests. In the
automotive industry, this is attractive, because it opens the
possibility for a virtual reality simulation in the laboratory.
Unknown load spectra can be measured under service
conditions if a structure is available for that purpose.
Continuous measurements are sometimes made on military
aircraft in order to know the scatter of the load spectra in a
fleet of aircraft. In summery, load spectra, if they cannot be
calculated, can now be measured without great difficulties.
5. Scatter of the fatigue endurance in service
Case histories of scatter of fatigue lives of a structure in
service are rarely published. If some similar failures occur,
and if these failures are unacceptable, remedial actions are
carried out to prevent more failures in the future. Just one or
two data are then available. Secondly, fatigue failures are
generally associated with poor publicity for either the
industry or the operator of the structure. As a result
interesting case histories are documented in restricted
company reports, but not in the open literature.
The situation is different for civil aircraft structures
because accident reports are not always confidential. If a
fatigue failure with serious consequences has occurred,
relevant information is spread amongst the aircraft oper-
ators. It must be explored whether similar cracks are present
in the same type of aircraft. If this is true, it is a case of a
symptomatic fatigue critical component. Such cases have
been reported [9]. In 1976, a Hawker Sideley 748 lost a
wing due to a large fatigue crack in the tension skin. Cracks
were then observed in 19 similar aircraft. In 1977, a Boeing
707 lost a horizontal tail plane. Cracks were found in 12
similar aircraft.
Sometimes it can be shown that a failure in service is due
to an incidental cause, such as damage of the structure
which in general should not occur. The problem then is how
such damage can be prevented. A well-known example of
an incidental case is the crash of an F-111 aircraft due to a
relatively large flaw already present in the wing skin plate
material as delivered to the aircraft industry. The flaw was
not detected during inspection of the material. The flaw
initiated fatigue crack growth followed by wing failure [16].
It has led to various precautionary measures to eliminate
similar accidents in the future.
 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
Dealing with scatter of fatigue properties of a structure is
not just a single well-defined problem. The requirements
applicable as a fatigue design scenario of a structure can be
quite different. Some major categories are:
(1) Fatigue cracks are unacceptable in service.
(2) Fatigue cracks in service are acceptable, but failure
should not occur.
(3) Fatigue cracks in service are acceptable, even if failure
can occur.
Brief comments on these conditions are made below.
5.1. Fatigue cracks are unacceptable in service
Two different cases should be mentioned. First, the
structure during its life time will be loaded by large numbers
of cycles (millions) with relatively high stress amplitudes,
which was defined in [10] as a flat load spectrum, see Fig. 6.
It can apply to high speed rotating systems, such as engines,
pumps and helicopters. It general crack initiation will not be
allowed because crack growth can lead to failure relatively
soon. Frequent inspections might prevent final failure
(damage tolerant in aerospace engineering), but in many
cases inspections are not a feasible option. Theoretically the
criterion is to design for an infinite life of the structure, or in
more practical terms, designing with allowable stress levels
below the fatigue limit. The statistical problem then is how
to account for possible scatter of the fatigue limit, and also
for other possible sources of scatter (e.g. component
production, load spectra).
A second case of cracks being not acceptable is associated
with ‘finite life structures’. The load spectrum with load
cycles above the fatigue limit of the structure implies that
crack initiation can occur. This applies to load spectra with
load cycles with amplitudes above the fatigue limit, such as
for the steep load spectrum in Fig. 6. But it can also apply to
structures, which meet with low numbers of high-amplitude
cycles, e.g. pressure vessels. Crack initiation is possible
100
load level (% max. load)
flat spectrum
80 steep spectrum
60
40
20
1 10 102 103 104
number of exceedings in 1000 hrs
Fig. 6. A flat load spectrum with many high-amplitude cycles and a steep
load spectrum with a relatively low number of high amplitude cycles and
many low-amplitude cycles [10].
1037
and if inspections are not carried out a sufficient crack
initiation fatigue life must be provided. The statistical
problem is then associated with scatter of the crack initiation
life, and of course again with various sources of scatter.
5.2. Fatigue cracks in service are acceptable, but failure
should not occur
This problem is well known as the damage tolerance
philosophy. It is documented in airworthiness requirements
for aircraft, both for civil and military aircraft. The same
approach is also adopted in various other technical
disciplines, noteworthy in large welded structures.
It is obvious that the application of the damage tolerance
procedure requires information about several aspects. It
includes the crack initiation lifetime, possibilities for crack
detection, crack growth, inspection periods, and final
failure. All aspects are subjected to scatter. With respect
to crack detection the concept of the probability of detection
(POD) has been introduced for aircraft operations [17].
Another source of scatter is again the load spectrum of the
structure.
5.3. Fatigue cracks in service are acceptable, even if failure
can occur
Failures in service can be acceptable if no liability
consequences are involved and if the economy of the
industry is not adversely affected. The latter condition can
still be significant in a way that sufficient life until failure
should be available. In that case scatter of the fatigue life
until failure is still involved.
6. Discussion
Various sources of scatter have been revealed in the past
as a result of extensive laboratory investigations. Moreover,
it is well understood why and how these sources are
affecting fatigue properties, but the understanding is
qualitative in nature. Because of the practical design and
production circumstances of the industry and the exploita-
tion of structures in service, the statistical properties of a
structure in service cannot be predicted with a clearly
defined and rational theory. The relevant distribution
functions of the production variables and load spectra are
quantitatively unknown. Moreover, assumed distribution
functions for very low probabilities of failure offer
additional uncertainties as discussed earlier. Under such
conditions, clever engineering judgement should be guiding
to some practical procedures for the industry as well as for
105 106
the operator of structures in service.
As pointed out before, ‘fatigue acceptance tests’ have
been introduced for mass production. Such tests should be
as realistic as possible. The tests should be carried out on
components as produced or delivered by sub-contracted
1038 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
suppliers. The load history in the tests should be
representative and conservative for the expected service
load histories. Knowledge about fatigue damage accumu-
lation associated with load cycle interactions is essential for
planning these tests. Employing the Miner rule for
simplification of the test load history must be discouraged
because the Miner rule is unreliable for the assessment of
equal damage. Results of periodic fatigue acceptance tests
are a kind of a data bank which can provide information
about the uniformity of the production population.
If the number of structures to be manufactured is not very
large, a realistic service-simulation fatigue test on a
prototype structure is advisable. This procedure is fre-
quently adopted in aerospace engineering. The test article
should preferably include the full structure, but an
alternative is to test the most fatigue critical part of the
structure selected by FE analysis of the stress distribution in
the structure. Such tests are more informative if they are run
until failure occurs. If a failure does not occur, then the test
can be continued at an increased severity level of the load
history.
Actually, a major argument for a full-scale test on a new
aircraft structure is also to find fatigue critical areas. If
cracks are found in the test, then a local redesign is
introduced. As a result, the aircraft structure at the end of the
flight-simulation fatigue test may still be free from visible
fatigue cracks. It is common to continue such tests until
twice the anticipated operational life in service. The
structure then is torn down in order to see whether there
are small cracks in the joints and other hidden areas.
Prototype testing is also becoming more usual for motor-
cars and trucks. A fully instrumented prototype (strain gages
and accelerometers) is subjected to severe driving circum-
stances to see whether the dynamic behaviour of the
structure agrees with FE calculations, and to indicate
locations with severe stress concentrations. It is more or
less a function test to find local areas where the structure can
still be improved before it goes into production.
The results obtained in a service-simulation fatigue test
provide information about the fatigue performance of a
single structure. Statistical information for a large number
of structures is not obtained. Again based on engineering
judgement, assumptions have to be made about scatter for a
large number of structures. The uniformity (or the lack of
uniformity) of the industrial production of the structure,
including the uniformity of the material, must be considered
for this purpose. Data about scatter observed in test series on
components can be instructive. Let it be assumed that an
estimate of the mean value of the distribution is available.
The estimate can be the test result obtained in a service-
simulation fatigue test, or a predicted value, which is
considered to have a reasonable credibility. The most simple
approach then is to assume that the log(N)-normal
distribution function is applicable. A standard deviation of
log(N) must then be chosen. Adenstedt [18] analyzed scatter
data of numerous test series covering CA and VA tests of
component specimen, including small components, welded
and mechanical joints and various technical metallic
materials. Average values of slog(N) of the test series were
in the range of 0.10–0.20. It depends on the uniformity of
the quality of the component if a low or a high value in this
range must be selected.
Instead of the log(N)-normal distribution function, a
3-parameter distribution can also be used for the above
question. However, in addition to the mean value, two other
parameters have to be estimated. It then becomes difficult to
arrive at credible choices. For the 3-parameter Weibull
distribution function the shape parameter could be selected
at a value bZ3.5 because then the distribution becomes
somewhat similar to a normal distribution. For the log(NK
N0)-normal distribution function, the standard deviation of
log(NKN)0 could again be chosen in the range 0.10–0.20.
However, for both 3-parameter distributions a value for the
location parameter N0 is needed. As discussed earlier, there
is no rational criterion for this question. Anyway, it will be
clear that the 2-parameter log(N)-normal distribution
function will be on the safe side (see Fig. 1).
In the literature, the calculation of statistical confidence
levels are proposed in order to be more safe about statistical
probabilities. However, a basic requirement for such
calculations is that all structures can be considered to be a
sample of one and the same statistical population with a
known distribution function. In general this requirement is
not satisfied. As a consequence, assumptions must be made
based on available experience and understanding. A special
problem is how to account for environmental conditions and
structural maintenance. It remains a delicate subject to
balance the significance of the various relevant conditions.
Furthermore, aspects associated with safety, economy and
liability may come into play in order to see whether
conservative assumptions can be made. Profound judgement
is required.
7. Summarizing conclusions
1. A comparison has been made between three statistical
distribution functions: (1) the log(N)-normal distribution
function, (2) the 3-parameter Weibull distribution
function, and (3) the log(NKN0)-normal distribution
function. The third one is a normal distribution of
log(NKN0), a function which was largely overlooked in
the literature. The second and the third function both
contain a statistical minimum of the fatigue life (N0) as a
3rd parameter, although mathematically in a different
way. Both functions gave a good data fit of the results of
30 similar tests with a skew distribution, but it still has to
be recognized that the distribution function is actually
unknown. The physical significance of the estimated
N0-value remains unclear. A major problem of fatigue
life distribution functions is the extrapolation to low
 J. Schijve / International Journal of Fatigue 27 (2005) 1031–1039
probabilities of failure which are not supported by
relevant experimental data.
2. A summary is presented of different sources for scatter in
laboratory test series and scatter of fatigue lives in
service under practical circumstances. Although labora-
tory test data can be informative, it remains a difficult
issue to account for scatter to be expected in service.
Theories with a physical and rational basis for this
problem do not exist.
3. If the industry is forced to consider the statistical
variability of mass production for reasons of economy,
safety and liability, so-called fatigue acceptance tests on
components should be carried out under a conservative
and realistic fatigue load history. A realistic service-
simulation fatigue test on a prototype structure is also
advised although it provides little information on scatter
due to the variability of the production. However, such a
test can also show the dynamic response on external
loads. Moreover, design improvements can then still be
made at an early stage.
4. In order to reduce scatter of the fatigue properties of a
structure, the uniformity of the production process must
be carefully controlled.
5. If the risk of fatigue failures of a structure is a crucial
issue, load-history measurements in service should be
advised.
References
[1] Schijve J. Fatigue of structures and materials in the 20th century and
the state of the art. Int J Fatigue 2003;25(8):679–702.
[2] Weibull W. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability.
J Appl Mech 1951;18(3):293–7.
1039
[3] Hald A. Statistical theory with engineering applications. New York:
Wiley; 1957.
[4] Kapteyn JC, Van Uven MJ. Skew frequency curves in biology and
statistics. Groningen: Hoitsema Brothers; 1916.
[5] De Jonge JB. Some properties of the Weibull-distribution (in Dutch).
Nat Aerospace Laboratory, NLR, Amsterdam. Memorandum SB-83-
008; 1983.
[6] Results of a test series carried out at the DAF industry, Eindhoven.
Data provided by HTM van Lipzig.
[7] Schijve J. A normal distribution or a Weibull distribution for fatigue
lives. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 1993;16:851–9.
[8] Schijve J, Jacobs FA. Fatigue tests on notched and unnotched clad 24
S-T sheet specimens to verify the cumulative damage hypothesis. Nat
Aerospace Laboratory, NLR, Amsterdam. Report M.1982; 1955.
[9] Schijve J. Fatigue predictions and scatter. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 1994;17:381–96.
[10] Schijve J. Fatigue of structures and materials. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers; 2001.
[11] A guide for fatigue testing and the statistical analysis of fatigue data.
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, ASTM
STP No.91-A; 1963.
[12] Murakami Y. Metal fatigue: effects of small defects and nonmetallic
inclusions. Oxford: Elsevier; 2002.
[13] Schütz W. The endurance of single shear light-alloy riveted joits (in
German). Laboratorium fúr Betriebsfestigkeit LBF, Darmstadt,
Bericht Nr.F-47; 1963.
[14] Müller RPG. An experimental and analytical investigation on the
fatigue behaviour of fuselage riveted lap joints. The significance of the
rivet squeeze force, and a comparison of 2024-T3 and Glare 3. Doctor
thesis, Delft University of Technology; Oct. 1995.
[15] Lipp W. Statistical analysis of fatigue life scatter of a large number of
forged components (in German). Laboratorium für Betriebsfestigkeit,
LBF, Darmstadt, TM Nr.56/70; 1970.
[16] Mar JW. Structural integrity of aging airplanes: a perspective. In:
Structural integrity of aging airplanes. Berlin: Springer; 1990.
p. 241–262.
[17] POD assessments of NDI procedures using a round robin test.
AGARD report 809. Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and
Development. NATO, Paris; 1995.
[18] Adenstedt R. Scatter of the fatigue strength (in German). Doctor
thesis, Technical University Claustahl, Germany; 2001.