A computational lifetime prediction of a thermal shock experiment. Part II: Discussion on difference fatigue criteria

S. Amiable; S. Chapuliot; Andrei Constantinescu; A. Fissolo

doi:10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x

A computational lifetime prediction of a thermal shock experiment. Part II: Discussion on difference fatigue criteria

S. Amiable
, S. Chapuliot
, Andrei Constantinescu
, A. Fissolo

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The SPLASH experiment has been designed in 1985 by the CEA to simulate thermal fatigue due to cooling shocks on steel specimens and is similar to the device reported by Marsh in Ref. [1]. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the application of different fatigue criteria in this case. The fatigue criteria: dissipated energy, Manson Coffin, Park and Nelson, dissipated energy with a pressure term, are determined for the experiment using results from FEM computations presented in the first part of the paper (Part I)² and compared with results from uniaxial and multiaxial experiments from literature. The work emphasizes the evolution of the triaxiality ratio during the loading cycle.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	219-227
Number of pages	9
Journal	Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures
Volume	29
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x
Publication status	Published - 1 Mar 2006
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

304L stainless steel
Finite element
Low-cycle fatigue
Plasticity
Thermal fatigue
Thermal shock

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x

Cite this

@article{a7e81f5d210f41b897be40b26989f8a2,

title = "A computational lifetime prediction of a thermal shock experiment. Part II: Discussion on difference fatigue criteria",

abstract = "The SPLASH experiment has been designed in 1985 by the CEA to simulate thermal fatigue due to cooling shocks on steel specimens and is similar to the device reported by Marsh in Ref. [1]. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the application of different fatigue criteria in this case. The fatigue criteria: dissipated energy, Manson Coffin, Park and Nelson, dissipated energy with a pressure term, are determined for the experiment using results from FEM computations presented in the first part of the paper (Part I)2 and compared with results from uniaxial and multiaxial experiments from literature. The work emphasizes the evolution of the triaxiality ratio during the loading cycle.",

keywords = "304L stainless steel, Finite element, Low-cycle fatigue, Plasticity, Thermal fatigue, Thermal shock",

author = "S. Amiable and S. Chapuliot and Andrei Constantinescu and A. Fissolo",

year = "2006",

month = mar,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x",

language = "English",

volume = "29",

pages = "219--227",

journal = "Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures",

issn = "8756-758X",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A computational lifetime prediction of a thermal shock experiment. Part II

T2 - Discussion on difference fatigue criteria

AU - Amiable, S.

AU - Chapuliot, S.

AU - Constantinescu, Andrei

AU - Fissolo, A.

PY - 2006/3/1

Y1 - 2006/3/1

N2 - The SPLASH experiment has been designed in 1985 by the CEA to simulate thermal fatigue due to cooling shocks on steel specimens and is similar to the device reported by Marsh in Ref. [1]. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the application of different fatigue criteria in this case. The fatigue criteria: dissipated energy, Manson Coffin, Park and Nelson, dissipated energy with a pressure term, are determined for the experiment using results from FEM computations presented in the first part of the paper (Part I)2 and compared with results from uniaxial and multiaxial experiments from literature. The work emphasizes the evolution of the triaxiality ratio during the loading cycle.

AB - The SPLASH experiment has been designed in 1985 by the CEA to simulate thermal fatigue due to cooling shocks on steel specimens and is similar to the device reported by Marsh in Ref. [1]. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the application of different fatigue criteria in this case. The fatigue criteria: dissipated energy, Manson Coffin, Park and Nelson, dissipated energy with a pressure term, are determined for the experiment using results from FEM computations presented in the first part of the paper (Part I)2 and compared with results from uniaxial and multiaxial experiments from literature. The work emphasizes the evolution of the triaxiality ratio during the loading cycle.

KW - 304L stainless steel

KW - Finite element

KW - Low-cycle fatigue

KW - Plasticity

KW - Thermal fatigue

KW - Thermal shock

U2 - 10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1460-2695.2006.0983.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:33644762950

SN - 8756-758X

VL - 29

SP - 219

EP - 227

JO - Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures

JF - Fatigue and Fracture of Engineering Materials and Structures

IS - 3

ER -

A computational lifetime prediction of a thermal shock experiment. Part II: Discussion on difference fatigue criteria

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this