...
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Fatigue >Comparison of fatigue failure criterion in flexural fatigue test
【24h】

Comparison of fatigue failure criterion in flexural fatigue test

机译:弯曲疲劳试验中疲劳破坏准则的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This study compares traditional stiffness and energy based fatigue failure criteria with the fatigue failure criterion based on the viscoelastic continuum damage (VECD) approach. In traditional approach, fatigue failure is defined as the number of cycles at which the stiffness of a material reduces by 50% (N_(f50)). In energy based approach, fatigue failure is defined by the number of cycles at the maximum energy ratio or Rowe's maximum stiffness defined by stiffness multiplied by the corresponding number of the cycle (E * N). In VECD approach, fatigue failure is defined by the number of loading cycles at the inflection point of the normalized pseudostiffness (C) versus damage variable (S) curve. It is shown that a correlation exits between traditional criteria and VECD criteria. It is shown that maximum energy ratio or Rowe's maximum stiffness based fatigue life is higher than the traditional fatigue life (N_(f50))- This indicates the traditional approach is conservative. A strong correlation of fatigue was observed between the VECD fatigue criterion and energy ratio based fatigue criteria. However, the fatigue life by VECD approach is always less than the fatigue life by energy ratio or Rowe's maximum stiffness.
机译:这项研究将传统的基于刚度和能量的疲劳破坏标准与基于粘弹性连续介质损伤(VECD)方法的疲劳破坏标准进行了比较。在传统方法中,疲劳失效定义为材料刚度降低50%(N_(f50))的循环次数。在基于能量的方法中,疲劳失效是由最大能量比下的循环数或由刚度乘以相应的循环数(E * N)定义的Rowe最大刚度来定义的。在VECD方法中,疲劳失效是由归一化的伪刚度(C)对损伤变量(S)曲线的拐点处的加载循环数定义的。结果表明,传统标准和VECD标准之间存在相关性。结果表明,基于最大能量比或基于Rowe最大刚度的疲劳寿命高于传统疲劳寿命(N_(f50))-这表明传统方法是保守的。在VECD疲劳标准和基于能量比的疲劳标准之间观察到疲劳的强烈相关性。但是,通过VECD方法的疲劳寿命始终小于通过能量比或Rowe最大刚度的疲劳寿命。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号