Transactions, SMiRT-23

Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015

Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

FATIGUE STUDIES ON CARBON STEEL TUBES UNDER MULTIAXIAL

LOADING
Punit Arora1, Suneel K. Gupta1, V. Bhasin1, R.K.Singh1, S. Sivaprasad2 and S. Tarafdar2
1

Reactor Design & Development Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400 085, India
National Metallurgical Laboratory, Jamshedpur 831 001, India

ABSTRACT
The tests investigations have been carried out in the area of Multiaxial Fatigue with an objective to
improve the fatigue damage assessment procedure and design rules. Fatigue tests were conducted on
tubular specimens of SA333Gr.6 material under combined axial-torsion in-phase/ out-of-phase load
combinations with triangular, sine and trapezoidal load waveforms. A software tool has been developed
for the evaluation of multiaxial fatigue damage parameter for analyzing the tests data using invariant
based fatigue model of ASME Sec.III code. The fatigue crack initiation life was predicted using the best
fit axial fatigue life curve (without use of safety factors). The analyses for fatigue crack initiation life
assessment have also been carried out using critical plane based models. A critical plane based model has
been proposed for the prediction of fatigue life for tests carried out on tube specimens.
INTRODUCTION
The loaded mechanical components such as piping, vessels etc. are subjected to periodic cyclic loading
during its normal operation, as well as during the design basis accident events and fail due to the fatigue
cycling. Generally the fatigue damage is evaluated according to the design codes, which use fatigue
design curves. The fatigue design curves are derived from materials uniaxial fatigue tests. However, due
to complex geometry and loadings on a component, the state of induced stresses / strains can be
multiaxial and non-proportional.
In view of above, systematic experimental and analytical studies have been carried on specimens made of
low carbon manganese steel conforming to ASME specification of SA-333 Gr.6. The material
specifications of this steel are same as used in Indian Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWR)
Primary Heat Transport (PHT) piping. Arora P. et. al. (2011) have conducted various types of tests such
as monotonic tensile, tension-compression that is pure axial fatigue tests on solid specimens, pure torsion
fatigue tests on tube specimen, in-phase axial-torsion fatigue tests on tube specimens and out of phase
axial-torsion fatigue tests on tube specimens. All these tests were conducted at room temperature and in
air environment with triangular load waveform. The results of these tests were investigated in details, to
understand and model the materials fatigue damage under multiaxial and non-proportional loading
condition.
Many models based on critical plane theory have been studied in detail. These models have used different
definitions of the critical plane and the Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP) on the critical plane. The FDP
in these models is based on the parameters such as stresses, strains, stress/ strain invariants or the strain
energy (that is the multiple of stress and strain components). Recently, Jiang Y. (2007) has made an
attempt to combine strain energy and critical plane approaches to develop a parameter which is
representative of strain energy on the critical plane.
In the past few years, many investigations on multiaxial fatigue have been reported in literature. The
energy criterion has been studied by Ellyin (1984, 1986) in detail for life predictions. McDiarmid (1994)

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

proposed the linear multiaxial fatigue models based on maximum normal and shear stress amplitudes on a
critical plane. Kandil et al. (1982) suggested a simplified linear expression between the maximum shear
strain and the normal strain components on critical plane which was further modified by Socie et al.
(1987) accounting the mean stress effect. The commonly used fatigue life estimation techniques are based
on strain components or the combination of stress and strain such as the critical plane based FDP as
proposed by Smith, Watson & Topper (1970), Fatemi & Socie (1988), Brown & Miller (1982), Glinka
(1995), Chu (1995), Jiang (2007) and Jing Li et al. (2009). These proposed models considered the shear
strain, normal strain and normal stress amplitudes on critical plane to account for damage due to extra
hardening in case of non-proportional cyclic loading conditions.
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS AND RESULTS
The fatigue experiments were conducted on standard solid cylindrical specimens and tubular specimens.
The specimens were fabricated from the pipe made of SA333 Gr.6 (low carbon manganese steel). The
typical microstructure of SA 333 Gr. 6 material in as received condition showed the banded pearlite and
ferrite phases (Figure 1). The uniaxial monotonic tests were carried out to determine tensile properties of
SA333 Gr.6 material by Arora P. et. al. (2011). The tensile properties as evaluated from these tests are
given in Table 1.
Table 1. Tensile properties of SA 333 Gr. 6 material
E (GPa)
203

Elongation (%)
y (MPa)
u (MPa)
305
524
28
y: yield strength, u: tensile strength, E: Youngs Modulus

Initially, the studies were carried for four different load categories, namely pure axial, pure shear, inphase axial-torsion and out of phase axial-torsion with phase shifts. During initial phase of tests
investigations by Arora P. et. al. (2011), the triangular loading waveform was applied. In the present
study the effect sinusoidal and trapezoidal waveforms have been studied in terms of fatigue life and
additional material hardening for non-proportional loading condition.

Figure 2: The comparison between the fatigue

Figure 1: The typical microstructure of SA failure curve of SA 333 Gr6 and ASME best fit
333 Gr. 6 material in as received condition: curve: Arora P. (2011)
Arora P. (2011)

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied
Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)
Animation

Figure 3: Dimensional details of tubular specimen

The ASME Code fatigue design curves, given in Appendix I of Section III, are based on straincontrolled
strain
tests of small polished specimens at room temperature in air environment. The design fatigue curves have
been developed from the bestfit
fit (or median fit that is corresponding to Probability of Failure (POF) as
0.5) curves obtained from experimental strainvs.life
strain
(N)
N) data and then reducing the fatigue life at
each point on the best-fit
fit curve by a factor of 2 on strain (or stress) or 20 on cycles. The factor of safety
takes care of the uncertainties in loading, fatigue data scatter, size effect, surface finish etc.
In present study, all the fatigue tests were conducted on small size polished specimens in air
a environment
and under strain control loading condition. In order to account the possibility of data scatter, the bounding
curves have been plotted with a factor of 2 on number of cycles in ASME best fit curve as shown in
Figure 2. This Figure shows that the pure axial LCF tests conducted on standard solid specimens of SA
333 Gr. 6 material fall within the permissible bounds for data scatter about ASME best fit curve. This
figure shows that the best fit curve to the tests data on SA 333 Gr. 6 material is very close to the ASME
median curve for carbon steel material.
Pure axial, pure torsion and combined axial-torsion
axial
fatigue tests details
Three numbers of pure axial fatigue tests have been conducted on tubular specimen geometry also. These
tests were conducted on a servo hydraulic tension-torsion
tension torsion machine with axial load capacity as 100kN
and torque capacity as 1000Nm. These specimens were fabricated following the standard specimen
configuration of ASTM E 2207-08.
08. The pure axial fatigue tests on tubular specimens have been carried
out to investigate the effect of small scale geometry configurations on fatigue life. The Figure 2 shows
marginally
ally lower fatigue crack initiation life for tubular specimens than solid specimens for a given strain
amplitude as brought out by Sivaprasad S (2014).
The pure torsion and axial-torsion
torsion fatigue tests were also conducted on tubular specimens under reversi
reversible
controlled strain cycling. The test specimen drawing has been shown in Figure 3. The thickness of the
tube specimen was taken on the lower bound side as prescribed in ASTM standard such that the effect of
shear stress gradient in thickness direction is minimized. The test set up for pure axial, pure torsion and
axial-torsion
torsion tests on tubular geometry has been shown in Figure 4. Figure 5 indicates the sheared section
in the gauge region of tubular specimen. Table 2 gives the details of axial
axial-torsion loading
ding condition with
o
90 phase difference.

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Figure 4: The test set up for pure torsion Figure 5: Schematic of the sheared
gauge section
and axial-torsion tests
Table 2. Loading and fatigue life details for axial-torsion (Out-of-phase) tests conducted on SA 333 Gr 6
material

: phase shift angle, Ni is corresponding to the number of cycles for load/ torque drop by 25%.

For axial-torsion fatigue tests, different strain paths (corresponding to triangular, sinusoidal and
trapezoidal waveforms) were used with phase shift angle as 90o. Typical strain paths for triangular,
sinusoidal and trapezoidal waveforms have been shown in Figure 6. This way, the effect of loading
waveforms has been studied for the same axial-torsion combinations with 90o phase shift.
The fatigue crack initiation life was defined with respect to 25 drop in load/ torque or a visible crack
size, whichever is earlier. Figure 7 shows the von-Mises equivalent stress and strain amplitudes for
different load cases. The von-Mises equivalent stress and strain have been evaluated using equations (1)
and (2) respectively.

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

eqa a 3 a
eqa

(1)

xy

2
2
2
2
xa ya ya za za xa 6 xya yza zxa
2(1)

(2)
where, is the effective Poissons ratio and is given
by equation (3).

el eqel pl eqpl

, el 0 . 3 and pl 0 .5
eqel eqpl
(3)

Figure 6: Typical strain paths for triangular,

sinusoidal and trapezoidal waveforms for 90o
phase shift

Figure 7. shows the extra hardening due to nonproportionality in case of out-of-phase axial-torsion
tests. Liu et. al. (2009) have carried out the
microstructure studies on aluminum alloy under
Transmission Electron Microscope (TEM) to

investigate the effect of nonproportionality/ phase shift on

dislocation sub-structures. It was
examined that repetitive activation/
de-activation of the multiple slip
systems under non-proportional tests
caused the interaction of gliding
dislocations on different slip planes
leading to the formation of
dislocation cross bands. The
mobility of the dislocations further
reduces, leading to extra strain
hardening in the material. This
results in higher fatigue damage and
reduction in fatigue life. Figure 7
also indicates the extent of nonproportional hardening is more in
case of trapezoidal waveform as Figure 7: von-Mises equivalent stress versus strain amplitude
compared
to
triangular
and showing extra hardening in material for multiaxial stress
sinusoidal waves.
Typical axial and shear stress-strain hysteresis loops for sinusoidal and trapezoidal waveforms for 90o
phase shift case have been shown in Figure 8. This figure shows that non-proportional hardening is higher
for trapezoidal waveform as compared to sinusoidal and triangular waves for the same axial-shear strain
amplitude combination.

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Figure 8: out of phase test (CA70S121p90) Axial-Shear hysteresis loops for a) triangular, b)
sinusoidal and c) trapezoidal waveforms

The tests have also been carried out at different Shear to Axial strain amplitude Ratios (SAR). The SAR
has been given by equation (4).

SAR

(4)

3 a

where, a and a are shear and axial strain amplitudes respectively.

The typical von-Mises equivalent cyclic stress-strain curves for different waveforms having SAR as 1,
have been compared in Figure 9. Figure 9 shows the predominant non-proportional hardening behavior
for trapezoidal strain path. This hardening, representing irreversible fatigue damage (or higher loop area),
has caused reduction in fatigue life as indicated in Figure 10.

Figure 9. The comparisons of stabilized von-Mises

equivalent stress-strain curves for different loading
waveforms under axial-torsion loading having phase
shift as 90o and SAR as 1.

Figure 10. The comparisons of von-Mises strain

amplitude-fatigue life curves for different loading
waveforms under axial-torsion loading having
phase shift as 90o and SAR as 1.

ANALYTICAL PREDICTION METHODOLOGIES

ASME Design Procedures
The ASME section III NB is based on the maximum shear stress (Tresca) theory and considers damage in
terms of maximum value of stress intensity amplitudes. The multiaxial fatigue tests data have also been

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

analyzed using the ASME procedure for constant-principal directions (that is proportional loading) and
varying principal directions (or non-proportional loading) conditions. It may be noted that this ASME
procedure is valid with pseudo elastic stress which reflects the actual strains at the material point. The
pseudo elastic (ijpe) stresses were evaluated from the applied strain tensor history ij(t) using the Lames
equations of elasticity as given by equation (5).
ijpe(t)=kk(t)ij+2Gij(t)

(5)

In above equation is Lames constant and G is shear modulus of elasticity. Based on the pseudo elastic
stress tensor history, that is ijpe(t), calculations for the alternating stress intensity are carried out. The
procedures for assessment of fatigue crack initiation life under proportional loading and non-proportional
loading are reproduced as below for ready reference,
Constant Principal Stress Directions (Proportional Loading)
Evaluate the Principal Stresses for one load cycle. These are designated as 1(t), 2(t) and 3(t).
Determine the stress intensities (Sij(t)) versus time for the complete load cycle i.e. S12(t)=1(t)-2(t),
S23(t)=2(t)-3(t) and S31(t)=3(t)-1(t).
Evaluate the absolute range for each stress intensity (Sij), find the maximum range amongst three
stress intensity ranges and designate it as Srij.
i.e., Srij=max[S12,S23,S31]
The alternating stress intensity (Salt) is half of the largest stress intensity range Srij.
Varying Principal Stress Directions (Non-Proportional Loading)
Evaluate the six stress components at highly stressed point versus time for one complete cycle (x(t),

y(t), z(t),xy(t),yz(t) andzx(t)).

Choose a reference point in time domain and designate it as t0. The stress components at this reference

time are denoted by (x(t0),y(t0),z(t0),xy(t0),yz(t0) andzx(t0)).

Evaluate the stress difference with respect to reference time such as,

'x(t)=x(t)-x(t0), 'y(t)=y(t)-y(t0) etc.

Evaluate
the
Principal
stresses
('1(t),'2(t),'3(t))
from
stress
differences
('x(t0),'y(t0),'z(t0),'xy(t0),'yz(t0) and'zx(t0)).
Determine the stress intensities (S'ij(t)): S12(t)= 1(t)- 2(t), S23(t)= 2(t)- 3(t) and S31(t)= 3(t)1(t) for one complete cycle.
Evaluate stress intensity ranges (Sij(t)) and determine the maximum amongst all stress intensities and
designate it as Srij(t)
Srij=max[S12,S23,S31].
The alternating stress intensity (Salt) for a reference time (to) is half of the maximum absolute stress
intensity range (Srij).
In the Varying Principal Stress Directions procedure, the guidelines for choosing the reference time have
not been specified. Therefore, it would be a rational approach to consider every point in one complete
cycle as a reference point and the alternating stress intensity (Salt) is largest value of the alternating stress
intensities corresponding to all reference points.
Figure 12 indicates that ASME procedure over-predicts fatigue life for non-proportional axial-torsion
loading condition.

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Figure 11: Alternating stress intensity amplitude (Salt) of ASME versus fatigue life for SA 333 Gr.
6

Figure 12: Comparison between predicted and test life for SA 333 Gr. 6
Fatigue life predictions using critical plane based approach
The critical plane based approach has been studied in detail and the life assessment for the tests conducted
on SA 333 Gr. 6 material in the present study has been carried out using various models such as Smith,
Watson & Topper (1970), Fatemi & Socie (1988), Brown & Miller (1982), Glinka (1995), Chu (1995)
etc. Fatemi and Socie (1988) performed multiaxial fatigue tests on Inconel 718 grade material and
proposed a modified equation (6) as given below,

a
Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP) = c 1 k

cmax
y

(6)

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

where, ac, cmax are the shear strain amplitude and maximum normal stress respectively on critical plane
(c,c).
Life prediction Criterion: FDP= f(Ni)
Critical Plane:

c , c max
[ lra ]
( , )

(7)
(8)

(a)
(b)
Figure 13: (a) The infinitesimal sphere with radius r0 on the outer surface of tubular specimen
and (b) schematic of tubular specimen
As per equation (8), the critical
plane has been defined as the
plane of maximum shear strain
amplitude (alr) at a material
point. Therefore, a plane defined
by (,) coordinate is sought on
which maximum shear strain
amplitude exists. Papadopoulos I.
V. (1997, 2001) proposed a
hypothesis to evaluate the
amplitude and maximum value of
normal and shear components of
stress/ strain using Longest Cord
(LC)/ Minimum Circumscribed
Circle (MCC) methods. The
Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP)
of Fatemi and Socie accounts for
the mean stress effect on critical
plane. The suggested model of
Fatemi-Socie like Brown, Miller
Figure 14: FDP versus test life for SA 333 Gr. 6 material for various loading
and Kandil model(1982) , also
waveforms
accounts the k as a material tuning
parameter determined from uniaxial test data. The value of k is further used for the prediction of fatigue
life under multiaxial stress conditions. The material constant k as 1, has been determined from the best fit
of FDP versus life curve under pure axial and pure torsion tests. The FDP versus test life has been shown
in Figure 14 for all the loading waveforms along with the reference uni-axial LCF data. The FDP based

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

fatigue crack initiation life for sinusoidal and trapezoidal waveforms is over-predicted by Fatemi-Socie
model.
It may be noted that in Fatemi-Socie model, the non-proportional hardening damage is not included
completely since the FDP is independent of shear stress and normal strain. In view of this, a BiaxialSmith-Watson-Topper (BSWT) model was proposed earlier by Gupta S.K. et. al. (2011). This model is
based on hypothesis that the plane / orientation which has maximum energy dissipation due to both shear
and normal deformation is the crack initiation plane and hence the Fatigue Damage Parameter was
proposed and is defined below,
a

max

Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP) = c c

ca ca

(9)

( c , c )

Life prediction Criterion: FDP f ( N i )

Critical Plane:

(10)

c , c max
[ FDP ]
( , )

(11)

The above Biaxial-Smith-Watson-Topper (BSWT) model was further validated under an Indo-German
collaborative project work, on five different materials and under different loading scenario such as pure
axial, pure shear, proportional and non-proportional axial-torsion conditions. The model has correlated
the fatigue crack initiation life reasonably well for all the tests on different material and loading
conditions. It may be noted here that the BSWT model gives equal weightage to shear and normal strain
energy in the total damage.
The fatigue crack initiation life was defined with respect to 25% load drop or visible crack size as it is
difficult to detect micro-crack initiation at lower length scales due to inadequate sensitivity of crack
detection instruments. It is a well known fact that the shear strain energy plays an important role up to
micro-crack (about few grain size) initiation event. Once the micro-crack has initiated, the normal stress/
strain component causes further damage. In order to define total damage up to 25% load drop or visible
crack size (~1mm) event, the relative contribution of damage due to shear and normal strain energy is
accounted in the form of 'k' parameter. Due to this reason, in past several models, McDiarmid
(1991),Chu(1995), Findley (1959), Brown Miller & Kandil (1982) etc., have developed model where
they have used a calibration factor k in the fatigue models to give different weightage to the shear and
normal stress/strain components. The parameter k is generally obtained from the pure axial and pure
shear fatigue tests data.
Further, under non-proportional loading conditions above models require special procedures for
evaluation of shear stress or shear strain amplitudes since in a plane their amplitude and direction both are
varying during a loading cycle. Some of these hypotheses are longest chord method (LC), minimum
circumscribing circle method (MCC) or minimum circumscribing ellipse method (MCE). These methods
are computationally intensive and at same time difficult in cases of arbitrary shaped loading as in
observed in power plant components during service transients.
In view of the above two observations, relative weightage to contribution from normal and shear damage
process and other special procedures requirement for computation of shear/stress strain amplitudes, the
earlier developed fatigue model, i.e. BSWT model, is further modified as Modified Chu model and is
given below,

max

Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP) = k c c

(1 k ) nla nla nra nra

(c , c )

(12)

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Life prediction Criterion: FDP f ( N i )

Critical Plane:

c , c max
[ FDP ]
( , )
Uniaxial
Pure Shear

10

(14)
In the above proposal, the energy density due to shear in l
and r directions are evaluated separately (Figure 13(a)) in
spite of evaluating the resultant shear strain energy. This
modification has been suggested on the basis of energy
being a scalar quantity. Therefore, it is not required to use
the hypotheses of Papadopoulos for resultant stress/ strain
evaluation.

Modified Chu (k =0.4)

100

FDP (Modified Chu)

(13)

0.1
100

1000

10000

100000

Number of cycles (N)

Figure 15: Evaluation of k-Modified Chu

parameter using best fit curve between FDP
and experimental life for pure axial and pure
torsion tests data of SA 333 Gr 6.

First, the analyses have been carried out for the pure
axial, pure shear for the evaluation of parameter k
(Figure 15). This has been calculated as 0.4 and is used
for the evaluation of FDP
for multi-axial nonproportional tests. A typical variation of FDP with
different plane orientations (,) at a material point in the
gauge region of tube specimen has been shown in Figure
16.

The FDP versus life curve has been plotted for SA 333
Gr. 6 under all test loading conditions. The multiaxial and uniaxial test data fall in the acceptable band of
2.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Figure 16: Typical variations of FDP of Modified-Chu model on all ( (o) , (o)) planes for
determining the critical planes under (a) pure axial, (b) pure torsion, (c) Axial-torsion with 0o
phase shift and (d) Axial-torsion with 90o phase shift tests

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Figure 17 indicates that FDP derived from uni-axial tests can be used to predict the life of component
subjected non-proportional multiaxial state of cyclic stress. This analyses/ observations are based on the
tests carried out on SA 333 Gr. 6 material.

Figure 17: Fatigue Damage Parameter (FDP) versus experimental life for SA 333 Gr 6 material
using Modified Chu model
CONCLUSIONS
The multiaxial fatigue studies on SA 333 Gr. 6 material concludes that the strain-life curve as obtained
from uniaxial tests is in agreement with the ASME best fit fatigue curve for carbon steel. The nonproportional fatigue loading causes extra material hardening leading to increase in fatigue damage in
terms hysteresis loop area. The additional strain hardening is higher in case of trapezoidal loading
waveforms for non-proportional axial-torsion tests in comparison to corresponding triangular and
sinusoidal waveforms. The ASME procedure (without use of safety factors) over-predicts fatigue life for
non-proportional load conditions. The predicted and test fatigue life for the non-proportional tests using
proposed (Modified Chu) model are comparable.
REFERENCES
Arora P, Gupta S.K. , Bhasin V., Vaze K.K., Sivaprasad S. and Tarafdar S. (2011), "Multiaxial fatigue
studies on carbon steel piping material of Indian PHWRs", Transactions, SMiRT-21, 6-11
November, 2011, New Delhi, India, Div-II: Paper ID -479.
ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (2010), Section III, American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
Bruun Aleksander (2013), "A dissertation submitted for Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering on
Fatigue Assessment of Components Subjected to Non-Proportional Stress Histories", Norwegian
University of Science and Technology.
Chu C C (1995), Fatigue damage calculations using the critical plane approach, Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology, vol. 117, 41-49.
Diarmid D.L. (1994), A general criterion for high cycle multiaxial fatigue failure, Fatigue of
Engineering Materials, vol. 17, No. 12, 1475-1485.
Ellyin F., Kujawski D. (1984), "Plastic strain energy in fatigue failure", Journal of Pressure Vessel
Technology, Trans. ASME, 106, 342-7.

Transactions, SMiRT-23
Manchester, United Kingdom - August 10-14, 2015
Division III (Applied Computation Simulation and Animation)

Ellyin F. and Kujawski D. (1986), "An energy based fatigue failure criterion, in Microstructure and
Mechanical Behavior of Materials", Vol. II (eds H. Gu and J. He), EMAS, West Midlands, UK, pp
541-600.
Fatemi A, Socie D F (1988), A critical plane approach to multiaxial fatigue damage including out-ofphase loading, Fatigue Fracture of Engineering Materials Structures, Vol. 11, No. 3, 149-165.
Glinka, G., Wang, G., and Plumtree, A. (1995), Mean Stress Effects in Multiaxial Fatigue, Fatigue
Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., 18, pp. 755764.
Gupta S. K., Arora P., Goyal S., Bhasin V., Vaze K. K., Kushwaha H. S., " Recent Developments in
Multiaxial Fatigue and Cyclic Ratcheting of Nuclear Power Plant Components" , 37th MPA
Seminar, MPA, University of Stuttgart Germany, Paper-6, pg. 6.1-6.30, October , 2011
Gupta S.K., Fesich T. M., Schuler X., Bhasin V., Vaze K. K. and Roos E., " A critical plane based model
for fatigue assessment under fixed and rotating principal direction loading" , 21th International
Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT-21) , Div-II: Paper ID# 624,
PP. 1-11, New Delhi India , November , 2011
Jing Li (2009) , "A new multiaxial fatigue damage model for various metallic materials under the
combination of tension and torsion loadings" , International Journal of Fatigue , 31, 776-781.
Jun Feng and Peter Titus (2007), "Proposed Method for Evaluating Multiaxial Fatigue in ITER", Plasma
Science and Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
Kandil, F. A., Brown, M. W., and Miller, K. J. (1982), Biaxial Low-Cycle Fatigue Fracture of 316
Stainless Steel at Elevated Temperatures, The Metals Society, London, 280, pp. 203210.
Mayer H., Satrk H. L., Ambrose S. (2000), "Review of Fatigue Design Procedures for pressure vessels",
International Journal of Pressure Vessel and Piping, 77 (2000), 775-781.
Ninic D. (2006), A stress-based multiaxial high cycle fatigue damage criterion, International Journal of
Fatigue, 28, 103-113.
Papadopoulos I.V. (2001), Long life fatigue under multiaxial loading, International Journal of Fatigue,
(23) 2001, 839-849.
Papadopoulos I.V. (1997), A comparative study of multiaxial high cycle fatigue criteria for metals,
International Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 19, No. 3, 219-235.
Sivaprasad S., Bar H.N., Gupta S.K., Arora Punit, Bhasin V., Tarafder S. (2014), "A comparative
assessment of cyclic deformation behaviour in SA333 Gr.6 steel using solid, hollow specimens
under axial and shear strain paths", International Journal of Fatigue 61, 7686.
Smith R. N., Watson, P., and Topper, T. H. (1970), "A Stress Strain Function for the Fatigue of Metals,"
Journal of Materials, Vol. 5, No. 4, , pp. 767-778.
Socie D F (1987), Multiaxial Fatigue Damage Models, Journal of Engineering Materials and
Technology.
Xiaoshan Liu, Guoqui He, Xiangqun Ding, Defeng Mo, Weihua Zhang (2009), Fatigue behavior and
dislocation substructures for 6063 aluminum alloy under nonproportional loadings, International
Journal of Fatigue, 31, 11901195.
Yanyao Jiang, Hertel O., Wormwald M. (2007), "An experimental evaluation of three critical plane
multiaxial fatigue criteria" , International Journal of Fatigue , 29, 1490-1502.