4.6 Article

Effect of Loading Frequency Ratio on Multiaxial Asynchronous Fatigue Failure of 30CrMnSiA Steel

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 14, Issue 14, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14143968

Keywords

30CrMnSiA steel; crack growth path; fatigue life prediction; asynchronous loading; frequency ratio

Funding

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [11702012, 11772028, 11872131, U1864208, 11572058]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multiaxial asynchronous fatigue experiments on 30CrMnSiA steel showed that frequency ratio affects fatigue crack initiation and propagation, with cracks propagating differently on stress planes and leading to different crack growth lengths for constant and asynchronous loading. Various fatigue life prediction models were compared, with the Bannantine-Socie cycle counting method, section critical plane criterion, and Palmgren-Miner's cumulative damage rule proving to be more applicable.
Multiaxial asynchronous fatigue experiments were carried out on 30CrMnSiA steel to investigate the influence of frequency ratio on fatigue crack initiation and propagation. Test results show that the surface cracks initiate on the maximum shear stress amplitude planes with larger normal stress, propagate approximately tens of microns, and then propagate along the maximum normal stress planes. The frequency ratio has an obvious effect on the fatigue life. The variation of normal and shear stress amplitudes on the maximum normal stress plane induces the crack retardation, and results in that the crack growth length is longer for the constant amplitude loading than that for the asynchronous loading under the same fatigue life ratio. A few fatigue life prediction models were employed and compared. Results show that the fatigue life predicted by the model of Bannantine-Socie cycle counting method, section critical plane criterion and Palmgren-Miner's cumulative damage rule were more applicable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available