2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0142-1123(02)00148-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiaxial cycle counting for critical plane methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
51
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
51
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Small cracks can nucleate and growth on a "critical" plane where the maximum shear strain is attained; therefore the multi-axial damage assessment can be reduced to an uni-axial equivalent problem. Nevertheless normal stresses and shear strains can occur out of phase [23] and this makes cycle counting more difficult; moreover the orientation of the critical plane is generally unknown so, even if a proper counting algorithm is available, the damage assessment procedure must be repeated for several candidate critical orientations. Improved multi-axial cycle counting algorithms have been proposed [23]- [24] in order to cope with the effects mentioned above.…”
Section: Rainflow Counting For Random Loadingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Small cracks can nucleate and growth on a "critical" plane where the maximum shear strain is attained; therefore the multi-axial damage assessment can be reduced to an uni-axial equivalent problem. Nevertheless normal stresses and shear strains can occur out of phase [23] and this makes cycle counting more difficult; moreover the orientation of the critical plane is generally unknown so, even if a proper counting algorithm is available, the damage assessment procedure must be repeated for several candidate critical orientations. Improved multi-axial cycle counting algorithms have been proposed [23]- [24] in order to cope with the effects mentioned above.…”
Section: Rainflow Counting For Random Loadingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless normal stresses and shear strains can occur out of phase [23] and this makes cycle counting more difficult; moreover the orientation of the critical plane is generally unknown so, even if a proper counting algorithm is available, the damage assessment procedure must be repeated for several candidate critical orientations. Improved multi-axial cycle counting algorithms have been proposed [23]- [24] in order to cope with the effects mentioned above. In this paper the critical plane cycle counting is not considered because a scalar stress measure is introduced via a spectral representation of the von Mises stress; this allows reducing the multi-axial cycle counting to the much simpler random uni-axial scenario discussed above.…”
Section: Rainflow Counting For Random Loadingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Shear-based damage models require a uniaxial rainflow count applied to the shear strain A (or stress A) acting on the candidate plane, while tensile-based damage models must count the normal strain (or stress ) perpendicular to such plane. The other stress and strain components can be regarded as auxiliary channels [7], which will provide the additional parameters needed by each multiaxial fatigue damage model, such as mean or maximum stresses.…”
Section: Critical Plane Rainflowmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that, in addition to the use of either the stress ratio R min/ max or the mean m ( max min)/2 the main difference among the critical plane implementations of Liu's energy model is that the main rainflow channel is either for Case A Mode I tensile cracks, A for Case A Mode II shear cracks, or B for Case B Mode III shear cracks. A very efficient uniaxial rainflow algorithm that is capable of dealing with auxiliary channels has been proposed in [7]. It is based on the four-point rainflow algorithm [14], which is able to count very long histories in real time as the peaks and valleys are entered as input, without requiring an a priori knowledge of the entire load history.…”
Section: Critical Plane Rainflowmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Owing to the high costs associated with fatigue failures, since the beginning of the last century a tremendous effort has been made by the international scientific community to devise appropriate engineering tools suitable for estimating fatigue damage under complex loading paths. If attention is focused on the low/medium-cycle fatigue regime, examination of the state of the art [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] suggests that, so far, this intractable design problem has being addressed mainly by trying to extend the use of wellknown constant amplitude (CA) multiaxial fatigue criteria to those situations involving multiaxial VA load histories. In this context, among the methods which have been employed so far, certainly the SWT parameter [8,9], Brown & Miller's criterion [10,11], and Fatemi & Socie's critical plane approach [12,13] deserve to be mentioned explicitly.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%