Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Behavior of A36 Steel using ASTM Load-Reduction and Compression Precracking Test Methods

Newman, J. C.; Ziegler, B.; Shaw, J. W.; Cordes, T. S.; Lingenfelser, D. J.

doi:10.1520/stp154620120004

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model agreed fairly well in the early stages of crack growth for 0.33 < c/w < 0.55, but over estimated the crack-opening ratio by about 10% for 0.55 < c/w < 0.8. It has been observed that low R and high R fatigue crack growth rate data on a ΔK-rate basis are merging for deep cracks in bend-type specimens, 29 indicating a lack of crack closure (plane strain conditions). Solanki et al 30 have found that under pure plane strain conditions on a bend-type specimen under R = 0 loading, crack closure would not occur, but using the same model for a tension-type specimen, crack closure was observed at a fairly high level.…”

Section: Constant-amplitude Loading Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fatigue crack growth in 7249‐T76511 aluminium alloy under constant‐amplitude and spectrum loading

Newman

Walker

Liu

2014

Fatigue Fract Eng Mat Struct

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fatigue crack growth tests were conducted on compact, C(T), specimens made of 7249‐T76511 aluminium alloy. These tests were conducted to generate crack growth rate data from threshold to near fracture over a wide range of load ratios (R). Four methods were used to generate near threshold data: (1) ASTM E‐647 load reduction (LR), (2) compression pre‐cracking constant‐amplitude (CPCA), (3) compression pre‐cracking LR, and (4) constant crack mouth opening displacement LR method. A crack closure analysis was used to develop an effective stress‐intensity factor range against rate relation using a constraint factor (α = 1.85). Simulated aircraft wing spectrum tests were conducted on middle crack tension, M(T), specimens using a modified full‐scale fatigue test spectrum. The tests were used to develop the constraint‐loss regime (plane strain to plane stress; α = 1.85 to 1.15) behaviour. Comparisons were made between the spectrum tests and calculations made with the FASTRAN life prediction code; and the calculated crack growth lives were generally with ±10% of the test results.

show abstract

Section: Constant-amplitude Loading Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%