Study of the size effect for non-alloy steels S235JR, S355J2+C and acid-resistant steel

1.4301
Tomasz Tomaszewski, and Przemysaw Strzelecki

Citation: AIP Conference Proceedings 1780, 020008 (2016); doi: 10.1063/1.4965940

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4965940
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apc/1780/1
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

Application of Weibull distribution to describe S-N curve with using small number specimens
AIP Conference Proceedings 1780, 020007 (2016); 10.1063/1.4965939
 Study of the Size Effect for Non-Alloy Steels S235JR,
S355J2+C and Acid-Resistant Steel 1.4301
Tomasz Tomaszewski1, a) and Przemysaw Strzelecki1, b)
1
University of Science and Technology in Bydgoszcz, al. Prof. S. Kaliskiego 7, 85-791 Bydgoszcz, Poland
a)
tomaszewski@utp.edu.pl
b)
p.strzelecki@utp.edu.pl

Abstract. A change in the dimensions of a specimen vs. the reference size can affect fatigue properties of a material. This
phenomenon is referred to as the size effect. The study concerned checked how this effect can influence non-alloy
steels S235JR, S355J2+C and acid-resistant steel 1.4301. Two specimen sizes and two load types were tested. Selected
models of the size effect were verified to estimate fatigue strength for a cross-sectional area other than the one obtained
experimentally.

INTRODUCTION
Failing to address the size effect in engineering computations can lead to major size estimation errors. It is
particularly important for non-homogeneous materials [3].
The size effect is a complex phenomenon depending on material structure, specimen shape, load type and
component manufacturing processes [6]. As a consequence, we do not have any generic analytical or numerical
models for estimating the effect. The magnitude of influence of the size effect on fatigue properties depends on
material type and its local structural features (grain size, micro-cracks, inclusions, discontinuities, dislocations and
other flaws) [2].
Generally, it is assumed that fatigue resistance of a material is reversely proportional to the object size. This
change is typically non-linear, observed up to a certain cut-off value [9]. See Fig. 1 for a schematic representation of
this relation (the O labels stand for cut-off values of change in K and So).
Coefficient of cross-section size, K

Ko
smaller standard real-life
specimen specimen object

Son So
Cross-sectional area, So
FIGURE 1. Schematic presentation of relation between coefficient of cross-sectional area K and the cross-sectional area of the
object; own study based on [9]

Fatigue Failure and Fracture Mechanics XXVI

AIP Conf. Proc. 1780, 020008-1020008-8; doi: 10.1063/1.4965940
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1442-6/$30.00

020008-1
 The study aimed to check consequences of the size effect for selected construction materials (acid-resistant steel
1.4301 and non-alloy steels S235JR, S355J2+C). Its monotonic and fatigue tests tested 2 specimen sizes and 2
specimen shapes. The fatigue tests were carried out within the high-cycle fatigue range using axial load (R = -1) and
rotary bending.

SIZE EFFECT
The size effect materializes as an increase in fatigue strength/life following reduction of the cross-sectional area
of the object. This claim applies to geometrically similar specimens made of the same material. Maintaining
consistent parameters of specimen production is a requirement. -N characteristic for geometrically similar
specimens stay parallel within the high-cycle fatigue range ( = const; Fig. 2). The cross-sectional area
coefficient K, defined as the quotient of strengths of the test and reference specimens, determines the magnitude of
fatigue strength difference.

F
F

loga
Son a,m
Som a,n 1
m
1
n

F 1/4 N logN
F

FIGURE 2. High-cycle fatigue characteristic for specimens with different cross-sectional area [3]

Paper [5] proposes a division of the size effect according to the following three criteria: statistical, geometrical
and technological.
The statistical size effect is based on statistical distribution of defects (heterogeneity, inclusions, cracks, material
flaws) per material surface unit. The crack originates from the unit containing the most dangerous defect. The larger
specimen surface, the more likely cracking initiation and connecting cracks. This results in a higher probability of
initiation of cracks in larger specimen.
The geometrical size effect is related to non-linear distribution of stress with high stress concentration (notched
specimens) or load type (bending, torsional). The gradient of stress in the notch is smaller in reference specimen
than in smaller specimen. For large differences, this is correlated to a change in the material properties.
The technological size effect addresses the process of production of the object (e.g., surface roughness, top layer
thickness, residual stress, micro-structure changes). For an object produced by a sophisticated process (e.g., welded
joints), this can contribute to a modification of the material properties depending on specimen size.

Statistical Approach Model

The statistical theory of the weakest link using the Weibull distribution of probability of destruction is the
generally known model of size effect seen from the statistical point of view [14]. Fatigue life tests use the function
of two-dimensional distribution of probability of destruction depending on the number of cycles (P(logN)). Fatigue
life at a given stress level features a certain scatter, the distribution of which is described on the logarithmic scale [8]
and expressed by the following relation:

log ( N ) m
P ( N ) = 1 exp (1)
log ( N 0 )

020008-2
where:
N0 reference fatigue life (probability 0.63) for a specific stress level,
m distribution shape coefficient corresponding to a fatigue life scatter bandwidth N.

If the distribution of results obtained for the tested material can be described with relation (1), then, it is possible
to relate results for specimens with different cross-sectional areas. It is assumed that the distribution shape parameter
m and scale N0 are material constants independent of the specimen size and stress distribution. For identical
probability of destruction and stress distribution and for two different specimen sizes, the following relation can be
applied:

1
N 2 S o1 m (2)
=
N1 S o 2

where:
N1 fatigue life for a specimen with known cross-sectional area So1,
N2 estimated fatigue life for a specimen with determined cross-sectional area So2.

Geometrical Approach Model

The effect of non-uniform distribution of stress and specimen size on the fatigue properties of a material is
described using the volumetric method. The method addresses the local concentration of stress for objects of
different size. The model is based on a highly stressed volume (Vn%), for which the probability of initiation of a
crack or of enlargement of an existing flaw is higher. Quantity Vn% is defined as the volume of material exposed to at
least n% of the maximum stress (n% = n% max). The percentage of the whole specimen volume takes the value of
approx. 95% [6] or 90% [9].
The model determines fatigue strength depending on specimen size and applied load type. Highly stressed
volume of the notched specimen is determined based on the distribution of maximum stress on the notch root
(Fig. 3). For specimens subjected to pure bending (Fig. 4a) or rotary bending (Fig. 4b), volume Vn% is the area more
distant from the bending axis than at least n%.

max
n%
n

F F
d

Vn%
d

FIGURE 3. Stress distribution in the notch tip taking account of highly stressed volume; own study based on [6]
max
Vn% Vn%
n% r
r

M. M.
-max
(a) (b)
FIGURE 4. Stress distribution and highly stressed volume in the round specimen during: a) pure bending, b) rotary bending [4]

This method describes the correlation of fatigue strength and volume Vn%. It is described in the form of a linear
relation between the logarithm of local stress amplitude and the logarithm of highly stressed volume (Fig. 5). In its
basic form, the model is expressed as [6]:

020008-3
 a = AVn%v (3)

where:
A, v parameters dependent on the material,
Vn% highly stressed volume for n = 95, 90.

For any relation Vn%, equation (3) can be noted as follows:

v
a,1 Vn%,1 (4)
=
a, 2 Vn%,2

where:
a,1, a,2 fatigue strength of specimen for volume Vn%,1, Vn%,2.

Other Model
The monofractal approach assuming material structure damage is the main law describing consequences of the
size effect. The cross-sectional area of an object shows material weakening resulting from heterogeneity, cracks and
other flaws. Damage to a ligament of a heterogeneous solid object is modeled by gaps of sets of fractals analogical
to the mathematical Cantor set. The system contains dimensions smaller than the total area. New mechanical
properties are derived from physical dimensions depending on fractal dimension [3].
Application of the monofractal approach within the high-cycle fatigue range is based on the Basquin equation.
Assuming that -N characteristic are parallel for specimens of different size and the parameter of constant C depends
on dimension D, the following relation can be derived [3]:

d f
D
C B = C A A (5)
DB

where:
DA, DB characteristic dimensions for geometrically similar specimens A and B assuming DB > DA,
CA, CB constant parameters of a -N characteristic,
df slope of a curve.

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Sensitivity of a material to the size effect was studied for acid-resistant steel 1.4301 and for non-alloy steels
S235JR, S355J2+C. For steel S355J2+C, the study attempted to verify the influence of the geometric size effect
within the scope of studies on the effect of stress gradient occurring in the rotary bending test. The specimens were
made from a drawn bar with 10 mm diameter.
The tests were performed on a specimen with a cross-sectional area conforming to most of the material fatigue
standards [1, 7] and on a smaller specimen (So = = 3.1; 3.5 mm2). The purpose of testing smaller specimens ensued
from described in paper [11] benefits from testing minispecimens. The specimens featured constant form theoretical
stress concentration factor k. Production process parameters were fixed. See Fig. 5 and Table 1 for geometries of
round specimens used in the fatigue tests. Fig. 6 compiles -N characteristic within the high-cycle fatigue range for
axial loading (R = -1) and for rotary bending.

020008-4
 100
50

Od 0.05
O10

Ra 1.25

R
TABLE 1. Dimensions of the round specimens [13]
d mm R mm So mm2
5 25 19.6

O9
O9

2 12.5 3.1
30 8

FIGURE 5. Geometry of the round specimen for fatigue testing made

of steel S355J2+C [13], cut from a drawn bar with 10 mm diameter

600 600
2 2
So = 19.6 mm So = 19.6 mm
2 2
So = 3.1 mm So = 3.1 mm
Stress amplitude, a MPa

Stress amplitude, a MPa

500 500

400 400

Load: Load:
tension-compression, rotary bending,
R = -1, f = 7 Hz f = 28.5 Hz
300 300 300

3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Number of cycles, N cycles Number of cycles, N cycles

(a) (b)
FIGURE 6. Fatigue characteristic for steel S355J2+C determined by: a) tension-compression (R = -1), b) rotary bending

The statistical size effect (for axial loads) was tested for non-alloy steel S235JR and for acid-resistant steel
1.4301. The flat specimens (Fig. 7, Table 2) were made from 4 mm thick plate. As in the case of the round
specimens, two specimen sizes were tested. Fig. 8 compiles -N characteristic within the high-cycle fatigue range
for steels S235JR and 1.4301.
Experimental points for the proposed -N characteristic were approximated to the form of linear regression in bi-
logarithmic scale and to the form of the Basquin equation (Table 3). The tests aimed to identify materials sensitive
to the size effect. The minimum number of points for the initial tests was set at 7 [10].
The mutual relation of the courses of each of the straight lines was evaluated statistically using the test of
parallelism of slopes (a). The test was performed for -N characteristic, for a specimen with cross-sectional area
So = 19.6; 28 mm2. It was demonstrated that all the straight lines in each of the diagrams are parallel one to another.

l
w1 0.05
R

Ra 0.32

TABLE 2. Dimensions of the flat specimens

t mm w1 mm R mm l mm So mm2
t 4 7 25 100 28
w2

1.4 2.5 18 35 3.5

FIGURE 7. Geometry of the flat specimen for fatigue
testing made of steel 1.4301 and S235JR, cut from
4 mm thick plate

020008-5
 300 280
2 2
So = 28 mm So = 28 mm
2
250 So = 3.5 mm So = 3.5 mm
2

Stress amplitude, a MPa

260
Stress amplitude, a MPa

200
240

150
220
Load: Load:
tension-compression, tension-compression,
R = -1, f = 7 Hz R = -1, f = 7 Hz
100 200 200

3 4 5 6 7 3 4 5 6 7
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Number of cycles, N cycles Number of cycles, N cycles
(a) (b)
FIGURE 8. Fatigue characteristic for steel: a) S235JR, b) 1.4301
TABLE 3. Fatigue characteristic parameters for various specimen sizes
Linear regression line Basquin relation
Correlation
Material Type of load So mm2 loga = a logN + b C = N(a)
coefficient, R2
a b C
Rotary 3.1 -0.1276 3.2761 5.561025 7.86 0.956
bending 19.6 -0.1008 3.1601 2.261031 9.92 0.901
S355J2+C
Axial load, 3.1 -0.1003 3.0981 7.961030 9.97 0.989
R = -1 19.6 -0.0755 2.9869 3.461039 13.24 0.970
Axial load, 3.5 -0.1103 2.8520 7.241025 9.07 0.965
S235JR
R = -1 28 -0.1173 2.8808 3.571024 8.53 0.967
Axial load, 3.5 -0.0476 2.651 5.611055 21.03 0.895
1.4301
R = -1 28 -0.0399 2.578 2.781064 25.00 0.983

The coefficient of cross-sectional area size K (KS minispecimens tensile strength (So = 3.1; 3.5 mm2) to the
tensile strength of the specimen with cross-sectional area So = 19.6; 28 mm2; KHC minispecimens fatigue strength
(So = 3.1; 3.5 mm2) to fatigue strength of the specimen with cross-sectional area So = 19.6; 28 mm2) was used as a
measure of material sensitivity to change of the cross-sectional area. See Table 4 for calculated values of coefficient
K.
High consistency of fatigue life values obtained for specimens of different cross-sectional areas (ranging from
3.1 to 19.6 mm2) was observed for steels S355J2+C and S235JR. This conclusion applies to the both load types (for
steel S355J2+C). The values of coefficient K close to 1 are the proof.
For acid-resistant steel 1.4301, results of fatigue property testing with axial load were varied. The size effect is
evident, which is suggested by the high value of coefficient K (1.086).
TABLE 4. Compilation of values of cross-sectional area coefficient K within the material variability range, load type
Material Type of load So mm2 KS KHC
3.1 - 0.974
Rotary bending
19.6* - 1
S355J2+C
Axial load, 3.1 1.014 0.976
R = -1 19.6* 1 1
Axial load, 3.5 1.008 1.012
S235JR
R = -1 28* 1 1
Axial load, 3.5 1.069 1.086
1.4301
R = -1 28* 1 1
*equivalent point A in Fig. 1

020008-6
 VERIFICATION OF SELECTED ANALYTICAL MODELS
Selected size effect models were used for estimating fatigue strength for other than the original cross-sectional
area of the specimen (used in the study). Due to the differences in results for the tension-compression load
(statistical effect size), the verification used model based on the weakest link theory and on the monofractal
approach. The acid-resistant steel 1.4301 was studied because this material was sensitive to the size effect (Fig. 8b).
Computations were done based on the fatigue characteristic obtained for the minispecimen (So = 3.5 mm2).
Fatigue strength of the object with cross-sectional area So = 28 mm2 was determined based on this -N characteristic.
The regression line provided by experimental testing of specimen So = 28 mm2 was used as the reference
characteristic. The standard deviation of remainders (mean estimation error) and the coefficient of remainder
variability were used to determine the degree of matching between the estimated straight lines (based on models)
and the experimental data for the reference specimen.
See Fig. 9 and Table 5 for results of the experimental tests and results provided by the implemented selected size
effect models. Paper [12] presents a method for implementing the studied models for aluminium alloy AW-6063.

300
steel 1.4301
2
280 Experimental points - So = 3.5 mm2
3
Stress amplitude, a MPa

1 2
4 Experimental points - So = 28 mm
260
5 1 Linear regression line - So = 3.5 mm2

240 4 Linear regression line - So = 28 mm2

2 Analytical - Weakest link theory
220 3 Analytical - Coefficient KS
Load:
tension-compression, 5 Analytical - Monofractal approach
R = -1, f = 7 Hz
200
103 10
4
10
5
10
6
10
7

Number of cycles, N cycles

FIGURE 9. Fatigue characteristic determined based on experimental tests and analytical models
TABLE 5. Values of parameters of the linear regression line, standard error of the estimate and coefficient of residual variation
Linear regression line Standard error of Coefficient of
Data loga = a logN + b the estimate for a residual variation
a b Se MPa Ve%
Minispecimen So = 3.5 mm2 -0.0476 2.651 3.3 1.3
Specimen So = 28 mm2 -0.0399 2.577 2.0 0.8
Weakest link theory -0.0561 2.678 16.9 7.0
Monofractal approach -0.0435 2.578 10.2 4.2
Coefficient KS from monotonic test -0.0476 2.622 6.4 2.6

All the models in use enable setting off the base -N characteristic in the right direction, which means that they
estimate smaller values of strength. It is consistent with the results of the experimental tests.
The model based on the weakest link theory uses statistical distribution parameters. The small number of
measurements performed at a given stress amplitude level and the failure to address material constants translates
directly into accuracy of results that are biased by an error of 7%.
For the monofractal approach, it is necessary to determine the mean value of the fractal dimension based on
documented experimental test results (for at least two different cross-sectional areas) for the given group of
materials. The remainder variability coefficient is approx. 4.2%. The estimated fatigue strength values are on the
safe side (below the regression line for the experimental points).

020008-7
 The easiest to use among the analytical models verified is the weakest link model, the application of which
requires determination of just parameters of distribution of experimental data for -N characteristic.
The parallel offset of the -N characteristic by the KS coefficient is biased by a small error of 2.6%. The bias
requires further verification for other construction material groups.

SUMMARY
Fatigue properties of construction steels S355J2+C and S235JR were insensitive to change in the cross-sectional
area within the 3.1 19.6 mm2 and 3.5 28 mm2 ranges, respectively.
The initial tests of acid-resistant steel 1.4301 identified dependence of fatigue strength and tensile strength on
cross-sectional area. Coefficient K (KS = 1.069, KHC = 1.086) was used to describe the result discrepancy.
Completed studies of verification from the point of view of fatigue strength demonstrated that the fatigue
characteristic obtained within the high-cycle range were correct for all the size effect models studied. The smallest
mean estimation error determined for stress amplitude was obtained for the monofractal model.
Given the insensitivity of material S355J2+C (in the axial loading and rotary bending tests) to the size effect, the
model based on highly stressed volume was not studied. Accuracy of implementation of this model will be verified
in further papers by the authors.

REFERENCES
1. ASTM E466. Standard practice for conducting force controlled constant amplitude axial fatigue tests of
metallic materials.
2. Z. P. Baant, Size effect in blunt fracture concrete, rock, metal, in Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE
110 (1984), pp. 518-535.
3. A. Carpinteri, A. Spagnoli, S. Vantadori, Size effect in S-N curves: A fractal approach to finite-life fatigue
strength, in International Journal of Fatigue 31 (2009), pp. 927-933.
4. H. P. Gaenser, Some notes on gradient, volumetric and weakest link concepts in fatigue, in Computational
Materials Science 44 (2008), pp. 230-239.
5. K. H. Kloos, A. Buch, D. Zankov, Pure geometrical size effect in fatigue tests with constant stress amplitude
and in programme tests, in Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik 12 (1981), pp. 40-50.
6. R. Kuguel, A relation between the theoretical stress concentration factor and the fatigue notch factor deduced
from the concept of highly stressed volume, in Proc. ASTM 61 (1961), pp. 732-748.
7. PN-74/H-04327 The study of metal fatigue. The test of axial tension - compression at constant cycle of
external loads [in Polish].
8. J. Schijve, Fatigue of Structures and Materials, in Springer (2009).
9. C. M. Sonsino, G. Fischer, Local assessment concepts for the structural life of complex loaded components,
in Materialwissenschaft und Werkstofftechnik 36 (2005), pp. 632-641.
10. P. Strzelecki, J. Sempruch, K. Nowicki, Comparing guidelines concerning construction of the S-N curve
within limited fatigue life range, in Polish Maritime Research 22/3 (2015), pp. 67-74.
11. T. Tomaszewski, J. Sempruch, Verification of the fatigue test method applied with the use of mini specimen,
in Key Engineering Materials 598 (2014), pp. 243-248.
12. T. Tomaszewski, J. Sempruch, T. Pitkowski, Verification of selected models of size effect based on high-
cycle fatigue testing on mini specimens made of EN AW-6063 aluminum alloy, in Journal of Theoretical and
Applied Mechanics 52(4) (2014), pp. 883-894.
13. T. Tomaszewski, P. Strzelecki, J. Sempruch, Geometric size effect in relation to the fatigue life of S355J2+C
steel under variable bending conditions, in Engineering Mechanics (2016), pp. 554-557.
14. W. Weibull, A statistical representation of fatigue failures in solids, in Transaction of the Royal Institute of
Technology 27 (1949).

020008-8