Fatigue Testing

Chairperson: Robert Ritchie, University of California at Berkeley

Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681 Infinite-Life Criterion (S-N Curves) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681 Finite-Life Criterion (-N Curves) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682 Fracture Mechanics Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683 Fatigue, Creep Fatigue, and Thermomechanical Fatigue Life Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 686 Process of Fatigue Crack Initiation and Early Growth . . . . . . . . 686 Fatigue Testing Machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 688 Ancillary Equipment and Specimens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 690 Electronic Test Controls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 698 Baseline Isothermal Fatigue Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700 Testing for Effects of Variables on Fatigue Resistance . . . . . . . . 704 Creep-Fatigue Interaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 708 Thermomechanical Fatigue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 710 Helpful Guidelines for Fatigue Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 713 Ultrasonic Fatigue Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717 Historical Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717 Strain Rates, Frequency, and Time Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . 717 Testing Principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 718 Testing Equipment and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719 Test Specimens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 725 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 728 Fretting Fatigue Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 730 Fretting and Fretting Fatigue Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 731 Typical Systems and Specific Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 732 Testing, Modeling, and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 734 Variables Investigated during Fretting Fatigue Tests . . . . . . . . . 735

Prevention or Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 737 Fatigue Crack Growth Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740 Fracture Mechanics in Fatigue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740 Test Methods and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 742 Specimen Selection and Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743 Crack-Length Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746 Loading Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750 Analysis of Crack Growth Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 751 Appendix: High-Temperature Fatigue Crack Growth Testing . . 753 Fatigue Testing and Behavior of Plastics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 758 Fatigue Crack Initiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 758 Fatigue Crack Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 761 Factors Affecting Fatigue Performance of Polymers. . . . . . . . . . 763 Fractography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766 Fatigue Testing of Brittle Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768 Fatigue Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768 Fatigue Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 769 Strength-Based Test Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 769 Fracture Mechanics Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773 Comparison of Indirect and Direct Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775 Multiaxial Fatigue Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779 Stress States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779 Testing of Cylindrical Specimens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780 Testing of Specimens Containing Notches or Cracks . . . . . . . . . 780 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 783

ASM Handbook, Volume 8: Mechanical Testing and Evaluation H. Kuhn, D. Medlin, editors, p681685 DOI: 10.1361/asmhba0003313

Copyright 2000 ASM International All rights reserved. www.asminternational.org

Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics

FATIGUE is the progressive, localized, and permanent structural damage that occurs when a material is subjected to cyclic or fluctuating strains at nominal stresses that have maximum values less than (and often much less than) the static yield strength of the material (Ref 1). This process of fatigue failure can be divided into different stages, which, from the standpoint of metallurgical processes, can be divided into five stages (Ref 1): 1. Cyclic plastic deformation prior to fatigue crack initiation 2. Initiation of one or more microcracks 3. Propagation or coalescence of microcracks to form one or more microcracks 4. Propagation of one or more macrocracks 5. Final failure This division is defined by the characterization of the underlying fatigue damage of a material. It also clearly defines the requirement of plastic deformation for the onset of crack initiation. In general, three simultaneous conditions are required for the occurrence of fatigue damage: cyclic stress, tensile stress, and plastic strain. If any one of these three conditions is not present, a fatigue crack will not initiate and propagate. The plastic strain resulting from cyclic stress initiates the crack; and the tensile stress (which may be localized tensile stresses caused by compressive loads) promotes crack propagation (Ref 1). The stages of fatigue can also be defined in more general terms from the perspective of mechanical behavior of crack growth. For example, another division of the fatigue process is defined as follows (Ref 2): include all processes leading up to crack initiation. In general, the fatigue process consists of a crack initiation and a crack propagation phase. There is, however, no general agreement when (or at what crack size) the crack initiation process ends, and when the crack growth process begins (Ref 3). Nonetheless, the separation of the fatigue process into initiation and propagation phases has been an important and useful advance in engineering. Another important engineering advance is the transfer of the multistage fatigue process from the field to the laboratory. In order to study, explain, and qualify component designs, or to conduct failure analyses, a key engineering step is often the simulation of the problem in the laboratory. Any simulation is, of course, a compromise of what is practical to quantify, but the study of the multistage fatigue process has been greatly advanced by the combined methods of strain-control testing and the development fracture mechanics of fatigue crack growth rates. This combined approach (Fig. 1) is a key advance that allows better understanding and simulation of both crack nucleation in regions of localized strain and the subsequent crack growth mechanisms outside the plastic zone. This integration of fatigue and fracture mechanics has had important implications in many industrial applications for mechanical and materials engineering. This introductory article briefly reviews the three basic types of fatigue properties, which are: structure can be considered a continuum (i.e., those meeting the no cracks assumption). In the event of a crack-like discontinuity, the S-N or -N methods (except through residual life testing) offer little or quantitative basis for assessment of fatigue life. Another limitation of the S-N and -N methods is the inability of the controlling quantities to make sense of the presence of a crack. A brief review of basic elasticity calculations shows that both stress and strain become astronomical at a discontinuity such as a crack, far exceeding any recognized property levels that might offer some sort of limitation. Even invoking plasticity still leaves inordinately large numbers or, conversely, extremely low tolerable loads. The solution to this situation is the characterization and quantification of the stress field at the crack tip in terms of stress intensity in linear elastic fracture mechanics. It recognizes the singularity of stress at the tip and provides a tractable controlling quantity and measurable material property. The use of the stress intensity as a controlling quantity for crack extension under cyclic loading thus enhances the engineering analysis of the fatigue process. More detailed information on fatigue and fracture mechanics can be found in Fatigue and Fracture, Volume 19 of ASM Handbook.

Infinite-Life Criterion (S-N Curves) (Ref 4)

The safe-life, infinite-life philosophy is the oldest of the approaches to fatigue. Examples of attempts to understand fatigue by means of

Stress-life (S-N) Strain life (-N) Fracture mechanic crack growth (da/dN K)
These three types of fatigue properties each play a role in engineering, and each property is used in the context of an underlying fatigue design philosophy as follows:
Principal testing data description

Nucleation (initiation of fatigue cracks) Structurally dependent crack growth rates

(often called the short crack or small crack phase) Crack growth rates that can be characterized by either linear elastic fracture mechanics, elastic-plastic fracture mechanics, or fully plastic fracture mechanics Final instability

Design philosophy

Design methodology

Safe-life, infinite-life Safe-life, finite-life Damage tolerant

Stress-life Strain-life Fracture mechanics

S-N -N da/dN K

This definition of the stages in the fatigue process is roughly equivalent to the first, except that crack propagation is expressed in terms of crack growth rates, and nucleation is meant to

The S-N and -N techniques are usually appropriate for situations where a component or

Fig. 1

Laboratory simulation of the multistage fatigue process. Source: Ref 2

682 / Fatigue Testing

properties, determinations, and representations that relate to this method include August Whlers work on railroad axles in Germany in the mid-1800s. The design method is stresslife, and a general property representation would be S-N (stress versus log number of cycles to failure). Failure in S-N testing is typically defined by total separation of the sample. General applicability of the stress-life method is restricted to circumstances where continuum, no cracks assumptions can be applied. However, some design guidelines for weldments (which inherently contain discontinuities) offer what amount to residual life and runout determinations for a variety of process and joint types that generally follow the safe-life, infinite-life approach. The advantages of this method are simplicity and ease of application, and it can offer some initial perspective on a given situation. It is best applied in or near the elastic range, addressing constant-amplitude loading situations in what has been called the long-life (hence, infinite-life) regime. The stress-life approach seems best applied to components that look like the test samples and are approximately the same size (this satisfies the similitude associated with the use of total separation as a failure criterion). Much of the technology in application of this approach is based on ferrous metals, especially steels. Steels are predominant as a structural material, but steels also display a fatigue limit or endurance limit at a high number of cycles (typically >106) under benign environmental conditions. The infinite-life asymptotic behavior of steel fatigue life, thus, provides a useful and beneficial result of S-N testing. However, most other materials do not exhibit this infinite life response. Instead, many materials display a continuously decreasing stress-life response, even at a great number of cycles (106 109), which is more correctly described by a fatigue strength at a given number of cycles. Assessing Fatigue S-N Properties. Given the extensive history of the stress-life method, substantial property data are available, but beware of the testing conditions employed in producing older data. The usefulness of property data is a critical point due to the numerous variables that influence fatigue results. For example, if a series of tests are conducted at a constant stress ratio (R = Smin/Smax), and the alternating stress amplitude (Sa) is used as the other independent dynamic variable, an S-N curve for that situation can be produced, and all dynamic variables can be determined. However, if only one variable is given (e.g., Sa or Smax), there is insufficient information to tell what the test conditions were and the data are virtually useless. In many cases, insufficient information is available for the effective use of S-N data. Many necessary pieces of data are simply missing. A partial list of important questions might be as follows:

What was the temperature? Was an environment other than lab air em What was the specimen orientation in the Does the line represent minimum, mean, or How many samples were tested? What was the scatter? If the plot is based on constant-amplitude
data, what were the frequency and waveform? Was testing performed using variable-amplitude loading? What was the spectrum? What was the failure criterion? If there were runouts, how were they handled and represented? median response? original material? ployed?

man representation as a means of approximating actual response through the model of the behavior. For materials that do not have a fatigue limit, or for finite-life estimates of materials that do, the fatigue strength at a given number of cycles can be substituted for the intercept on the stress-amplitude axis. Examples of the Haigh and constant-life diagrams are provided in Fig. 2 and 3. Figure 3 is of interest also because of its construction in terms of a percentage of ultimate tensile strength for the strength ranges included.

Finite-Life Criterion (-N Curves) (Ref 4)

Strain life is the general approach employed for continuum response in the safe-life, finitelife regime. It is primarily intended to address the low-cycle fatigue area (e.g., from approximately 102 to 106 cycles). The -N method can also be used to characterize the long-life fatigue behavior of materials that do not show a fatigue limit. From a properties standpoint, the representations of strain-life data are similar to those for stress-life data. However, because plastic strain is a required condition for fatigue, strain-controlled testing offers advantages in the characterization of fatigue crack initiation (prior to subsequent crack growth and final failure). The S-N method is based on just one failure criterion the total separation of the test coupon. In contrast, any of the following may be used as the failure criterion in strain-controlled fatigue testing (per ASTM E 606): separation, modulus ratio, microcracking (initiation), or percentage of maximum load drop. This flexibility can provide better characterization of fatigue behavior. Testing for strain-life data is not as straightforward as the simple load-controlled (stressMean stress, MPa 200 400 600 Fatigue limit or fatigue strength 300

What were the coupon size and geometry? Was there a stress concentration?

If the data found describe a thin sheet response, it is the wrong data. If the product form is correct, but the plot represents testing done at R = 0.3 and fully reversed data are required, the plot may be helpful, but it is not what is desired. An example of what should be considered important as supporting facts can be found in ASTM E 468, Presentation of Constant Amplitude Fatigue Test Results for Metallic Materials. It provides guidelines for presenting information other than just final data. S-N Data Presentation. Stress is the controlling quantity in this method. The most typical formats for the data are plots of the log number of cycles to failure (sample separation) versus either stress amplitude (Sa), maximum stress (Smax), or perhaps stress range (S). Mean stress influences are also very important, and each design approach must consider them. According to Bannantine et al. (Ref 5), the archetypal mean (Sm) versus amplitude (Sa) presentation format for displaying mean stress effects in the safe-life, infinite-life regime was originally proposed by Haigh. The Haigh diagram can be a plot of real data, but it requires an enormous amount of information for substantiation. A slightly more involved, but also more useful, means of showing the same information incorporates the Haigh diagram with Smax and Smin axes to produce a constant-life diagram. Examples of these are provided subsequently. For general consideration of mean stress effects, various models of the mean-amplitude response have been proposed. A commonly encountered representation is the Goodman line, although several other models are possible (e.g., Gerber and Soderberg). The conventional plot associated with this problem is produced using the Haigh diagram, with the Goodman line connecting the ultimate strength on Sm, and the fatigue limit, corrected fatigue limit, or fatigue strength on Sa. This line then defines the boundary of combined mean-amplitude pairs for anticipated safe-life response. The Goodman relation is linear and can be readily adapted to a variety of manipulations. In many cases Haigh or constant-life diagrams are simply constructs, using the Good-

50

30

Goodman line

200

20 100 10 0 0 20 60 80 40 Mean stress, ksi Ultimate strength 0 100

Fig. 2

A synthetically generated Haigh diagram for an alloy steel (620 MPa, or 90 ksi, ultimate tensile strength) based on typically employed approximations for the axes intercepts and using the Goodman line to establish the acceptable envelope for safe-life, infinite-life combinations. The Goodman line represents an unconnected 106 estimate at 50% failure (criterion: separation).

Stress amplitude, MPa

40

Stress amplitude, ksi

Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics / 683

controlled) S-N testing. Monitoring and controlling using strain requires continuous extensometer capability. In addition, the developments of the technique may make it necessary to determine certain other characteristics associated with either monotonic or cyclic behavior. Further details on testing are given in the article Fatigue, Creep Fatigue, and Thermomechanical Fatigue Life Testing in this Volume. stress concentration for a given steel tested in a benign environment. The data also indicate the existence of a fatigue-crack-initiation threshold, KI/ th, below which fatigue cracks would not initiate at the roots of the tested notches. The value of this threshold is characteristic of the steel and increases with increasing yield or tensile strength of the steel. The data show that the fatigue-crack-initiation life of a component subjected to a given nominal-stress range increases with increasing strength. However, this difference in fatigue-crack-initiation life among various steels decreases with increasing stress-concentration factor (Ref 8). Finally, fatigue-crack-initiation data for various steels subjected to stress ratios (ratio of nominal minimum applied stress to nominal maximum applied stress) ranging from 1.0 to +0.5 indicate that fatigue-crack-initiation life is governed by the total maximum stress (tension plus compression) range at the tip of the notch (Ref 9). The data presented in Fig. 5 (Ref 10) indicate that the fatigue-crack-initiation threshold, KI / th, for various steels subjected to stress ratios ranging from 1.0 to +0.5 can be estimated from
K total = 10 ys (Eq 2)

Fracture Mechanics Approach (Ref 7)

Fracture of structural and equipment components as a result of cyclic loading has long been a major design problem and the subject of numerous investigations. Although a considerable amount of fatigue data are available, the majority have been concerned with the nominal stress required to cause failure in a given number of cycles namely, S-N curves. Usually, such data are obtained by testing smooth specimens which, although of some qualitative use for guiding material selection, are subject to limitations caused primarily by the failure to adequately distinguish between fatigue-crackinitiation life and fatigue- crack-propagation life. The existence of surface irregularities and cracklike imperfections reduces and may eliminate the crack-initiation portion of the fatigue life of the component. Fracture-mechanics methodology offers considerable promise for improved understanding of the initiation and propagation of fatigue cracks and problem resolution in designing to prevent failures by fatigue. Fatigue-Crack Initiation. Initiation of fatigue cracks in structural and equipment components occurs in regions of stress concentrations, such as notches, as a result of stress fluctuation. The material element at the tip of a notch in a cyclically loaded component is subjected to the maximum stress range, max. Consequently, this material element is most susceptible to fatigue damage and is, in general, the origin of fatigue-crack initiation. It can be shown that, for sharp notches, the maximum-stress range on this element can be related to the stress-intensity-factor range, KI, as follows (Ref 8):
max = 2 K I = ( kt ) (Eq 1)

A constant-life diagram for alloy steels that provides combined axes for more ready interpretation. Note the presence of safe-life, finite-life lines on this plot. This diagram is for average test data for axial loading of polished specimens of AISI 4340 steel (ultimate tensile strength, UTS, 860 to 1240 MPa, or 125 to 180 ksi) and is applicable to other steels (e.g., AISI 2330, 4130, 8630). Source: Ref 6

Fig. 3

where is the notch-tip radius, is the range of applied nominal stress, and k t is the stress-concentration factor. Fatigue-crack-initiation behavior of various steels is presented in Fig. 4 (Ref 8) for specimens subjected to zero-to-tension bending stress and containing a smooth notch that resulted in a stress-concentration factor of about 2.5. The data show that KI/ , and, therefore, max is the primary parameter that governs fatigue-crack-initiation behavior in regions of

Fig. 4

Fatigue-crack-initiation behavior of various steels at a stress ratio of +0.1. Source: Ref 8

K/, MPa

K/, ksi

684 / Fatigue Testing

where K total is the stress-intensity-factor range calculated by using the tension-pluscompression stress range, and ys is the yield strength of the material. Fatigue-Crack Propagation. Extensive data have shown that the fatigue-crack-propagation behavior of metals is controlled primarily by the stress-intensity-factor range, KI. The fatigue-crack-propagation behavior of metals can be divided into three regions, as shown in Fig. 6 (Ref 11). The behavior in region 1 exhibits a fatigue-crack-propagation threshold, Kth, which corresponds to the stress-intensity-factor range, below which cracks do not propagate under cyclic-stress fluctuations. An analysis of experimental results published on nonpropagating fatigue cracks shows that conservative estimates of Kth for various steels subjected to different stress ratios, R, can be predicted (Ref 8) from:
K th = 6.4 (1 0.85 R )

Kth, which can be represented by the power-law relationship:

da = A( K I ) n dN (Eq 4)

where a is crack length, N is number of cycles, and A and n are constants. Extensive fatigue-crack-growth-rate data for various steels show that the primary parameter affecting growth rate in region 2 is the stress-

intensity-factor range, and that the mechanical and metallurgical properties of these steels have negligible effects on the fatigue-crackgrowth rate in a room-temperature air environment. The data for martensitic steels fall within a single band, as shown in Fig. 7 (Ref 8), and the upper bound of scatter can be obtained (Ref 8) from:
da = 0.66 10 8 ( K I ) 2 . 25 dN (Eq 5)

102

Kc or Klc final failure

for
R + 0.1 (Eq 3a)

da/dN, mm/cycle

104

da/dN = C (K)n

and
Kth = 5.5 for R < +0.1 (Eq 3b)

where Kth is in ksi in. Equation 3 indicates that the fatigue-crackpropagation threshold for steels is primarily a function of the stress ratio and is essentially independent of chemical or mechanical properties. The behavior in region 2 (Fig. 6) represents the fatigue-crack-propagation behavior above

106 Threshold Kth log K

Fig. 6

Schematic illustration of variation of fatigue-crack-growth rate, da/dN, with alternating stress intensity, K, in steels, showing regions of primary crack-growth mechanisms. Source: Ref 11

3 2 102 8 6 4 3 2 10 8 6 4 3 2 1.0 12Ni steel 10Ni steel HY-130 steel HY-80 steel
da dN

Stress-intensity-factor range, K, ksi in.

da dN

= 0.27 108 (K)2.25

= 0.66 108 (K)2.25

107

3 4

6 8 106

6 8 105

3 4

6 8 104

3 4

6 8 103

Crack-growth rate, da/dN, in./cycle

Fig. 5

Dependence of fatigue-crack-initiation threshold on yield strength

Fig. 7

Summary of fatigue-crack-growth data for martensitic steels. Source: Ref 8

Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics / 685

where a is in inches and KI is in ksi in. Similarly, as shown in Fig. 8 (Ref 8), data for ferrite-pearlite steels fall within a single band (different from the band for martensitic steels), and the upper bound of scatter can be calculated from:
da = 3.6 10 10 ( K I ) 3. 0 dN (Eq 6)
100 80 60
Stress-intensity-factor range, KI, ksi in.1/2

A36 ABS-C A302-B A537-A

40

20

where a is in inches and KI is in ksi in. The stress ratio and mean stress have negligible effects on the rate of crack growth in region 2. Also, the frequency of cyclic loading and the wave form (sinusoidal, triangular, square, or trapezoidal) do not affect the rate of crack propagation per cycle of load for steels in benign environments (Ref 8). The acceleration of fatigue-crack-growth rates that determines the transition from region 2 to region 3 appears to be caused by the superposition of a brittle or a ductile-tearing mechanism onto the mechanism of cyclic subcritical crack extension, which leaves fatigue striations on the fracture surface. These mechanisms occur when the strain at the tip of the crack reaches a critical value (Ref 8). Thus, the fatigue-rate transition from region 2 to region 3 depends on the maximum stress-intensity factor, on the stress ratio, and on the fracture properties of the material (Ref 8).

da/dN = 3.6 1010 (Kl)3.0 For da/dN in in./cycle Kl in ksi in.1/2

10 8 6 4 6 8 106 2 4 6 8 105 2 4 6 8 104

Crack-growth rate, da/dN, in./cycle

Fig. 8

Summary of fatigue-crack-growth data for ferrite-pearlite steels. Source: Ref 8

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Sections of this article were adapted from several ASM Handbook articles, in particular those cited as Ref 1 4 and 7.

REFERENCES
1. M.E. Fine and Y.-W. Chung, Fatigue Fail-

ure in Metals, Fatigue and Fracture, Volume 19, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 1996, p 63 72 2. D.W. Hoeppner, Industrial Significance of Fatigue Problems, Fatigue and Fracture, Vol 19, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 1996, p 3 4 3. E. Krempl, Design for Fatigue Resistance, Materials Selection and Design, Vol 20, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 1997, p 516 532 4. D.W. Cameron and D.W. Hoeppner, Fatigue Properties in Engineering, Fatigue and Fracture, Vol 19, ASM Handbook, ASM International, 1996, p 15 26 5. J.A. Bannantine, J.J. Comer, and J.L. Handrock, Fundamentals of Metal Fatigue Analysis, Prentice-Hall, 1990 6. R.C. Juvinall, Engineering Considerations of Stress, Strain, and Strength, McGrawHill, 1967, p 274

7. J.M. Barsom, Fracture Mechanics Fatigue and Fracture, Metals Handbook Desk Edition, 1985, p 32-2 to 32-7 8. S.T. Rolfe and J.M. Barsom, Fracture and Fatigue Control in Structures Applications of Fracture Mechanics, 3rd ed., ASTM, 1999 9. M.E. Taylor and J.M. Barsom, Effect of Cyclic Frequency on the CorrosionFatigue Crack-Initiation Behavior of ASTM A 517 Grade F Steel, Fracture Mechanics: Thirteenth Conf., STP 743, ASTM, 1981 10. R. Roberts, J.M. Barsom, J.W. Fisher, and S.T. Rolfe, Fracture Mechanics for Bridge Design, FHWA-RD-78-69, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Research and Development, July 1977 11. R.O. Ritchie, Near-Threshold FatigueCrack Propagation in Steels, Int. Met. Rev., Vol 24 (No. 5, 6), 1979