Fatigue crack propagation behavior of high-strength steel under variable amplitude loading

A Novel Methodology for Calculating Crack Opening Stress under Tension‐Compression Cyclic Load

“…Compared with the plastic zone size 3.2619μm, according to equation (2), the error of numerical result is 6.8%, and, compared with the fatigue crack growth life 380192cycles from [39], the error of the novel expression result is 5%. Moreover, the crack opening stress calculated by Schijve formula is 0.45, and the error of the novel expression result is 8.3%.…”

“…Herein, the calculations are conducted under the same conditions as in [39]. e crack opening stress is compared with the result of Schijve formula [40]; and the calculation results are shown in Table 3.…”

Thermomechanical and isothermal fatigue crack propagation testing method for 316LN austenitic stainless steel

“…In TMF test, the utilization of induction coil for temperature heating to achieve a rapid temperature variation rate makes it difficult to measure the crack length because the specimen is surrounded by the coil. The most common crack growth measurement method is to take interval photos of the crack growth area through a charge coupled device (CCD) camera, by which the crack length data can be obtained directly 18–22 . However, the coil will block the lens field of view.…”

“…The most common crack growth measurement method is to take interval photos of the crack growth area through a charge coupled device (CCD) camera, by which the crack length data can be obtained directly. [18][19][20][21][22] However, the coil will block the lens field of view. Even if the crack propagation area is completely exposed by customizing special coils, the CCD camera must keep a sufficient distance to prevent the interfere of electromagnetic signals.…”

Fatigue characterization analysis of a submerged fishing farm platform through spectral-based fracture mechanics

“…The experimental study is usually considered the most reliable method in characterizing the fatigue properties of materials and crack growth mechanism of structures. Sufficient work has been done to gain more insight into the fatigue crack growth (FCG) behavior of ship and offshore engineering materials (Tu et al, 2021;Sumi, 2005;Lu et al, 2019;He et al, 2020) and welded structural details (Kim et al, 2010;Dong et al, 2021;Sedmak et al, 2021;Tanaka et al, 2014). Although an experimental investigation is essential in the evaluation of fatigue performance, the application is considerably restricted because of the high cost of testing, complex preprocessing steps, and huge challenge of speed detection.…”