Low-Cycle Fatigue Life - Plastic Strain

Estimates the fatigue life at a point from an elastic stress range using the Ramberg-Osgood cyclic curve, the Coffin-Manson strain-life relation and the Smith-Watson-Topper and Walker mean-stress corrections.

  • Used for calculating fatigue life of high-stress, plastic-strain, low-cycle fatigue

  • Local stress and strain from the elastic point stress (Neuber) with the Ramberg-Osgood cyclic curve

  • Life from the Coffin-Manson strain-life relation with Smith-Watson-Topper and Walker mean-stress corrections

Point Stress and Material Properties Inputs


Unit System: /

Cyclic Stress-Strain Curve





Strain-Life Constants





Walker


Point Stress



×

Coffin-Manson

Coffin-Manson Strain-Life Method

Problem Statement

A linear elastic analysis gives the stress at a point, for example Kt times the nominal stress at a notch root or the peak stress of a linear finite element model. When that stress exceeds the yield strength the material at the point does not carry it: it yields, the stress redistributes to the surrounding elastic material, and the point sees a lower stress and a larger strain than the elastic analysis reports. Fatigue cracks start at such points, and in the low-cycle regime, roughly below 104 cycles, the plastic strain at the point governs the life. The strain-life method therefore works in two steps: convert the elastic stresses of one load cycle into the local elastic-plastic stress and strain, then enter a strain-life relation fitted to strain-controlled tests of smooth specimens. The tool takes the minimum and maximum elastic stresses of the cycle, the cyclic stress-strain constants and the strain-life constants, and returns the local stresses and strains, the Coffin-Manson life, and the two mean-stress corrected lives described on the other pages.

Local Stress and Strain: Neuber's Rule

Neuber's rule states that the product of the local stress and the local strain equals the product of the elastic stress and the elastic strain at the same point: σϵ = σ1,max2/E. The right-hand side is known from the elastic analysis; the left-hand side is a hyperbola in the stress-strain plane. The local state is the point where that hyperbola meets the stress-strain curve of the material. For cyclic loading the curve is the cyclic stress-strain curve, the locus of the tips of stabilized hysteresis loops, written in Ramberg-Osgood form as

ϵ = σ/E + (σ/K′)1/n′

with the cyclic strength coefficient K′ (also written H′) and the cyclic strain hardening exponent n′. The tool solves this for the peak of the cycle by Newton's method and shows every iteration. The unloading from the peak follows the hysteresis branch, which by Masing's hypothesis is the cyclic curve with stress and strain doubled: Δϵ = Δσ/E + 2(Δσ/2K′)1/n′. Neuber's rule applied to the range, ΔσΔϵ = Δσe2/E with Δσe the elastic stress range, fixes the local stress range and strain range. The local minimum is the peak minus the range, and the strain amplitude, stress amplitude, mean stress and stress ratio R = σmin/σmax follow. Figure 1 on the results page draws both constructions. A cycle from zero to a tensile elastic stress usually produces a compressive local minimum, because the peak has yielded and the unloading is elastic-plastic along the doubled curve; the local R is then well below the elastic R of zero.

Neuber's rule is the standard choice and is somewhat conservative for notches under plane stress; the equivalent strain energy density method of Molski and Glinka gives a lower local strain and is not implemented here. The rule assumes the elastic stress is a true peak stress at a free surface, uniaxial, and that the material is the same at the point as in the smooth-specimen tests.

The Strain-Life Relation

Strain-controlled tests at zero mean strain show that the elastic and plastic parts of the strain amplitude each follow a power of the number of reversals 2Nf. Basquin's line for the elastic part and the Coffin-Manson line for the plastic part add to the total:

ϵa = (σ′f/E)(2Nf)b + ϵ′f(2Nf)c

The four constants are fatigue properties of the material. σ′f, the fatigue strength coefficient, is the stress intercept of the elastic line at one reversal; it is often close to the true fracture strength but is a fitted constant, not the fracture stress. b, the fatigue strength exponent, is the slope of that line, typically −0.05 to −0.15. ϵ′f, the fatigue ductility coefficient, is the strain intercept of the plastic line at one reversal, and c, the fatigue ductility exponent, its slope, typically −0.5 to −0.8. The two lines cross at the transition life; below it plastic strain dominates and ductility controls, above it elastic strain dominates and strength controls. Figure 2 on the results page draws the lines, their sum, and the solution. The tool solves the relation for 2Nf by Newton's method on ln(2Nf), starting from the elastic-line value where the function is monotonic, and shows the iterations. The result is the life in cycles to crack initiation at the point under constant-amplitude cycling between the two entered stresses.

The Coffin-Manson relation holds for fully reversed loading, R = −1 at the point. It takes no account of the mean stress of the local cycle, so for a tensile local mean it overestimates the life; the Smith-Watson-Topper and Walker pages describe the two corrections the tool applies.

Compatibility of the Cyclic Curve With the Strain-Life Constants

If the Masing loop and the two strain-life lines describe the same material, the cyclic constants follow from the strain-life constants: n′ = b/c and K′ = σ′f/ϵ′fn′. Published sets are fitted separately and rarely satisfy this exactly. The results page computes the compatible values and the ratio of the cyclic-curve stress amplitude to the one implied by the strain-life elastic line at the same strain amplitude, and warns when the entered constants deviate by more than 10 percent. The matter affects the Smith-Watson-Topper life, whose left-hand side takes the local peak stress from the cyclic curve while its right-hand side implies the strain-life stress; it does not affect Coffin-Manson or Walker, which use only the strain amplitude and R.

The Material Entries

The Material dropdown fills the seven constants from fits of public-domain strain-controlled test tables: Endo and Morrow's 1966 Naval Air Engineering Center report (7075-T6, 2024-T4, 4340 at 180 ksi, Ti-8Al-1Mo-1V), NASA TN D-1574 of 1963 (ten steel, titanium and aluminum conditions) and NASA TN D-7532 of 1974 (ten metals including Inconel 718 and 18Ni maraging 300). Each entry is a least-squares fit of the elastic line, the plastic line and the cyclic curve on the same specimens, kept only when it reproduces the measured lives within 0.3 decades rms; the labels carry the source's ultimate strength, and the tooltip gives each source's tested life range. The reports, the transcribed data and the fit records are in the site's References folder. These are 1960s and 1970s heats tested on round bar; check against the current specification before use. The fits for the aluminum alloys are the weakest because their plastic lines are concave downward, as the source authors themselves noted; use those entries within about 10 to 1,000 cycles. The entries cannot set the Walker exponent, since fully reversed tests carry no information about mean-stress sensitivity; see the Walker page.

Limitations

The life is to crack initiation at a point under constant-amplitude cycling in room-temperature air. No factor is applied for the stress gradient at a notch, surface finish, size, temperature, environment or variable-amplitude loading. The method assumes a uniaxial local stress and a material that stabilizes to a single cyclic curve; it is not valid for materials that transform or harden continuously, which is why several conditions of the NASA data were rejected from the dropdown. For lives beyond about 105 cycles the fitted elastic lines of some entries, especially those fitted only to short lives, extrapolate; the stress-life approach and the fatigue limit then govern.

×

Smith-Watson-Topper SWT

Smith-Watson-Topper Mean-Stress Correction

Problem Statement

The Coffin-Manson relation is fitted to fully reversed tests, where the local stress cycles symmetrically about zero. A load cycle between two elastic stresses that are not equal and opposite leaves the point with a mean stress after yielding, and a tensile mean stress shortens the life. Smith, Watson and Topper proposed in 1970 that the quantity governing fatigue damage is the product of the maximum stress and the strain amplitude of the local cycle, σmaxϵa. Two cycles with the same product are expected to give the same life whatever their mean stress. The quantity has the units of energy per volume and is often called the SWT parameter.

The Equation

For a fully reversed cycle σmax equals the stress amplitude σa = σ′f(2Nf)b, and multiplying the Coffin-Manson relation by it gives the SWT parameter as a function of life:

σmaxϵa = (σ′f2/E)(2Nf)2b + σ′fϵ′f(2Nf)b+c

The right-hand side needs only the four Coffin-Manson constants; no new material property is introduced. The tool evaluates the left-hand side with the local peak stress and strain amplitude from the Neuber constructions, solves the right-hand side for 2Nf by Newton's method on ln(2Nf), and shows the iterations. On the results page Figure 2 draws the equation divided by the local σmax as a curve in the strain-life plane, so the crossing with the computed strain amplitude is the SWT life. With a tensile local mean stress the curve lies below the Coffin-Manson curve and the life is shorter; with a compressive mean it lies above.

When the Method Applies

The parameter is meaningful only when the local peak stress is tensile. If σmax is zero or negative the product is zero or negative and the equation predicts no damage, which is the method's way of saying that a cycle held entirely in compression does not open a crack. The tool then omits the SWT and Walker results and reports the Coffin-Manson life only. In practice the method does well for aluminum alloys and for steels at moderate mean stresses; at high tensile means it tends to be unconservative for some steels, which is one motive for the Walker exponent.

Relation to the Walker Equation

In stress-life terms the SWT parameter is the Walker equation with γ = 0.5: the equivalent fully reversed stress amplitude is the geometric mean of the maximum stress and the amplitude, σar = (σmaxσa)1/2. Dowling's strain-life form of the Walker equation at γ = 0.5 is therefore often called the strain-based SWT. It is not the same equation as the one above. The classic SWT form multiplies the whole strain amplitude by σmax, which scales the product by the single factor 2/(1 − R); the Walker strain-life form replaces 2Nf by an equivalent number of reversals in both terms, which scales the plastic term by a larger power. In the low-cycle regime, where the plastic term dominates, the two differ, and the Walker life at γ = 0.5 is shorter than the classic SWT life. The tool solves the classic form in this section and the Walker form in the next, and reports both.

Sensitivity to the Cyclic Curve

Unlike the other two methods, SWT uses the local peak stress, which comes from the entered cyclic stress-strain curve. Its right-hand side implies the stress of the strain-life elastic line at the same strain amplitude. When the cyclic constants are not compatible with the strain-life constants, the ratio of those two stresses multiplies the mean-stress factor and can mask or exaggerate it; with some published constant sets the SWT life lands next to the Coffin-Manson life even with a sizable tensile mean. The results page prints the compatible cyclic constants and that ratio under the Coffin-Manson section so the effect is visible. Entries from the Material dropdown have cyclic and strain-life constants fitted to the same specimens and are free of it.

×

Walker

Walker Mean-Stress Correction

Problem Statement

Materials differ in how much a tensile mean stress shortens their fatigue life. The Goodman, Morrow and Smith-Watson-Topper corrections each fix that sensitivity by a formula, with no adjustable constant, so none of them can fit a material that is more or less sensitive than the formula assumes. Walker proposed in 1970 an equivalent fully reversed stress amplitude that weights the maximum stress and the amplitude with an exponent γ fitted to the material:

σar = σmax1−γσaγ = σa((1 − R)/2)γ−1

with R = σmin/σmax. At γ = 0.5 this is the SWT geometric mean; at γ = 1 the mean stress has no effect; as γ falls toward zero the maximum stress alone controls. A lower γ therefore means a material more sensitive to mean stress. Dowling, Calhoun and Arcari showed in 2009, on data for eighteen steels, nine aluminum alloys and one titanium alloy, that the Walker form fits mean-stress data better than the fixed formulas and that γ follows the strength of the material.

The Strain-Life Form

Dowling carried the equation into the strain-life relation in 2004 by requiring the stress amplitude of the Basquin line to equal the equivalent fully reversed amplitude. Writing σa = σ′f((1 − R)/2)1−γ(2Nf)b and defining an equivalent number of reversals 2N* = 2Nf((1 − R)/2)(1−γ)/b, the Coffin-Manson relation holds in terms of N*:

ϵa = (σ′f/E)(2N*)b + ϵ′f(2N*)c

The tool writes the same equation with the factor fW = ((1 − R)/2)1−γ on the elastic term and fWc/b on the plastic term, which is what the substitution of N* produces, and solves it for 2Nf by Newton's method on ln(2Nf). At R = −1 the factor is 1 and the Coffin-Manson life is recovered. Because c/b is typically 4 to 8, a modest reduction of the elastic term becomes a large reduction of the plastic term, so in the low-cycle regime the Walker life is markedly shorter than the Coffin-Manson life even for a moderate tensile mean, and shorter than the classic SWT life, which scales the product by 2/(1 − R) only. Figure 2 on the results page draws the Walker curve for the computed R. The form was checked against its reproduction as Equation 14 of Ince and Glinka's 2011 paper, filed in the site's References folder.

R here is the local stress ratio from the Neuber constructions, not the ratio of the elastic stresses; for a cycle from zero to a yielding tensile peak it is typically −0.5 to −0.8. The method requires a tensile local peak: for σmax ≤ 0 the ratio is 1 or undefined and the factor has no meaning, so the tool omits the Walker and SWT results and reports Coffin-Manson only.

Values of the Exponent

γ cannot be determined from fully reversed tests; it needs tests at two or more mean stresses. The published fits are those of Dowling, Calhoun and Arcari (2009). For carbon, low-alloy and other hardenable steels γ falls linearly with ultimate tensile strength, γ = 0.8818 − 0.000200 σu with σu in MPa, which gives about 0.72 at 800 MPa and 0.48 at 2000 MPa. High-strength aluminum alloys of the 2014, 2024 and 7075 class have γ of 0.41 to 0.57 with a mean near 0.47, close to the SWT value of 0.5; lower-strength aluminum alloys with ultimate strengths of 300 to 350 MPa have about 0.65. No published fit exists for austenitic stainless steels, titanium alloys, nickel alloys or copper. The Material dropdown sets γ from the steel line and the aluminum class value for the entries those fits cover, and clears the field for the others so that a value must be chosen deliberately; 0.5 is the usual starting point when nothing is known. The sources behind these numbers are listed on the references page and filed in the References folder; the 2009 paper itself is behind a paywall and was not reproduced.

Reading the Three Lives

With a tensile local mean the results page normally shows the Coffin-Manson life longest, the classic SWT life next and the Walker life shortest, the last two converging as γ approaches 1 and crossing only when γ is small. For a fully reversed local cycle all three coincide. For design the Walker life with a fitted γ is the best supported of the three; where γ is a guess, the spread between the SWT and Walker results is a fair measure of the uncertainty from mean-stress sensitivity alone.




References

Strain-Life Relation

  1. Basquin, O. H. (1910). "The Exponential Law of Endurance Tests." Proceedings of the American Society for Testing and Materials, 10, 625–630. [Elastic strain-life line: stress amplitude against life as a power law]
  2. Manson, S. S. (1953). "Behavior of Materials Under Conditions of Thermal Stress." NACA TN 2933, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. [Plastic strain-life line]
  3. Coffin, L. F. (1954). "A Study of the Effects of Cyclic Thermal Stresses on a Ductile Metal." Transactions of the ASME, 76, 931–950. [Plastic strain-life line]
  4. Morrow, J. (1965). "Cyclic Plastic Strain Energy and Fatigue of Metals." Internal Friction, Damping, and Cyclic Plasticity, ASTM STP 378, 45–87. [Strain-life equation in the four-constant form used here; mean-stress correction of the elastic term]

Mean-Stress Corrections

  1. Smith, K. N., Watson, P., and Topper, T. H. (1970). "A Stress–Strain Function for the Fatigue of Metals." Journal of Materials, 5(4), 767–778. [Smith-Watson-Topper parameter σmax·εa]
  2. Walker, K. (1970). "The Effect of Stress Ratio During Crack Propagation and Fatigue for 2024-T3 and 7075-T6 Aluminum." Effects of Environment and Complex Load History on Fatigue Life, ASTM STP 462, 1–14. [Walker equivalent stress with the exponent γ]
  3. Dowling, N. E. (2004). "Mean Stress Effects in Stress-Life and Strain-Life Fatigue." SAE Technical Paper 2004-01-2227. [Strain-life form of the Walker equation used by this tool: εa = (σ′f/E)(2N*)b + ε′f(2N*)c with N* = Nf((1 − R)/2)(1−γ)/b; γ = 0.5 gives a strain-based interpretation of SWT]
  4. Dowling, N. E., Calhoun, C. A., and Arcari, A. (2009). "Mean Stress Effects in Stress-Life Fatigue and the Walker Equation." Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures, 32(3), 163–179. [Walker exponent γ fitted for steels and aluminum alloys; γ of steels decreases linearly with ultimate strength]
  5. Ince, A., and Glinka, G. (2011). "A Modification of Morrow and Smith–Watson–Topper Mean Stress Correction Models." Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures, 34, 854–867. [Reproduces Dowling's strain-life Walker and SWT forms as its Eqs. (13)–(14); open copy in References/Low-Cycle-Fatigue]

Local Stress and Strain

  1. Neuber, H. (1961). "Theory of Stress Concentration for Shear-Strained Prismatical Bodies With Arbitrary Nonlinear Stress-Strain Law." Journal of Applied Mechanics, 28(4), 544–550. [Neuber's rule for the peak and the range]
  2. Masing, G. (1926). "Eigenspannungen und Verfestigung beim Messing." Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress of Applied Mechanics, Zurich, 332–335. [Hysteresis curve as the cyclic curve doubled]
  3. Ramberg, W., and Osgood, W. R. (1943). "Description of Stress-Strain Curves by Three Parameters." NACA TN 902, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. [Cyclic stress-strain curve form]

Textbooks

  1. Dowling, N. E. (2013). Mechanical Behavior of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and Fatigue, 4th ed. Pearson, Upper Saddle River, NJ. [Chapter 14: strain-based approach, Walker strain-life form, example strain-life constants]
  2. Stephens, R. I., Fatemi, A., Stephens, R. R., and Fuchs, H. O. (2001). Metal Fatigue in Engineering, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York. [Strain-life method and notch strain analysis]
  3. Bannantine, J. A., Comer, J. J., and Handrock, J. L. (1990). Fundamentals of Metal Fatigue Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. [Local strain approach]

Material Data Sources (Material dropdown)

  1. Endo, T., and Morrow, JoDean (1966). "Monotonic and Completely Reversed Cyclic Stress-Strain and Fatigue Behavior of Representative Aircraft Metals." Report NAEC-ASL-1105, U.S. Naval Air Engineering Center, Philadelphia (DTIC AD0653282, distribution unlimited). [Tables 2 to 5 fitted for the 7075-T6, 2024-T4, 4340 180 ksi and Ti-8Al-1Mo-1V entries]
  2. Smith, R. W., Hirschberg, M. H., and Manson, S. S. (1963). "Fatigue Behavior of Materials Under Strain Cycling in Low and Intermediate Life Range." NASA TN D-1574, Lewis Research Center. [Per-specimen Table III fitted for ten entries; five conditions rejected by the fit-quality rule]
  3. Nachtigall, A. J. (1974). "Strain-Cycling Fatigue Behavior of Ten Structural Metals Tested in Liquid Helium (4 K), in Liquid Nitrogen (78 K), and in Ambient Air (300 K)." NASA TN D-7532, Lewis Research Center. [Ambient-air rows of Table IV fitted for ten entries, including Inconel 718 and 18Ni maraging 300]
  4. Ozdes, H., Tiryakioglu, M., et al. (2017). "Walker Parameter for Mean Stress Correction in Fatigue Testing of Al-7%Si-Mg Alloy Castings." Materials, 10(12), 1401 (open access). [Quotes the steel fit of the Walker exponent from reference 8; the entries use that line and Dowling's aluminum class value from reference 13]
  5. Chopra, O. K. (1999). "Effects of LWR Coolant Environments on Fatigue Design Curves of Austenitic Stainless Steels." NUREG/CR-5704 (ANL-98/31), Argonne National Laboratory for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [Table 2 room-temperature air tests on Type 316NG fitted for the high-cycle entry]

DISCLAIMER: The methods and calculation on aNOWysis.com are provided as means to educate the reader. There is no warranty, expessed or implied, as to the relevance or accuracy of the methods or calculations. All calculations should be checked by a qualified analyst for appropriateness and accuracy. We will not be held liable for any damages, injuries or deaths caused by using methods or calculations from this site.