Fatigue calculation for transient proportional and non-proportional multiaxial vibrational stress for component optimisation based on the Modified Mohr-Mises-Hypothesis

Mertens, Hans-Joachim; Kamieth, René; Liebich, Robert

doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.105643

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The paper reports on a comparison of six recently introduced multiaxial fatigue strength estimation criteria-the KP criterion by Khalij et al [36], the WS criterion by Wang et al [43], the Böhme criterion [46], the MDC criterion by Margetin et al [48], the MMMH criterion by Mertens et al [51], and the Yankin criterion [53]. To refer to their quality, the complete FatLim data set [32] and the abbreviated AMSD25 data set [31] were used for validation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was previously commented in this paper that the original formulation of the MMMH criterion (Equation ( 25)) from Mertens et al [51] does not provide acceptable results due to inappropriately mastered mean stress effect. Its reformulated version M3HW from Equation (26) will be documented here.…”

Section: Mertens Criterion Mmmh and The Derived M3hw Formulationmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The MMMH (Modified Mises-Mohr Hypothesis) is the invariant based criterion published by Mertens et al [49][50][51]. With the aim of considering also non-proportional stresses in fatigue analysis, it features a sign determination.…”

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of an unnotched specimen loaded within the high-cycle fatigue regime, the calculation of the equivalent mean stress stated in [51] is simplified to:…”

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where σ 1 is the maximum principal stress and σ 3 is the minimum principal stress. Using the following expressions, the mean stress effect is considered according to [51] to calculate the amplitude of the reduced fatigue strength s −1,red :…”

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Benchmarking Newer Multiaxial Fatigue Strength Criteria on Data Sets of Various Sizes

Papuga

Nesládek

Hasse

et al. 2022

Metals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a comparison of six recently introduced multiaxial fatigue strength estimation criteria to four methods, the large-scope validation of which has already been published. The results obtained for each newer method are analyzed and discussed. From the newer methods, only the criterion by Böhme reaches an estimation quality similar to the best performing criteria. The validation was performed on the FatLim data sets, but the primary focus of the paper is set to analyzing the validation on a smaller AMSD25 data set derived from it. The comparison shows that the application of AMSD25 for validation practice allows users to reduce the number of evaluated test cases, while generally preserving the worst cases showing the weaknesses of various estimation methods.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mertens Criterion Mmmh and The Derived M3hw Formulationmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of an unnotched specimen loaded within the high-cycle fatigue regime, the calculation of the equivalent mean stress stated in [51] is simplified to:…”

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mertens' Criterion Mmmh and The Derived Formula M3hwmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations