FATIGUE FRACTURE AND AGEING

STRUCTURES

FATIGUE ASSESSMENT
FOR
STEEL STRUCTURE (IS: 800 – 2007)
Arijit Guha
Senior Manager (Civil & Structural)

Institute for Steel Development & Growth

1

INTRODUCTION
Modes of Failure of Steel Structures

• Yielding or excessive plastic deformation.

• Elastic or inelastic buckling or instability.
• Fatigue fracture due to repeated cyclic
loading.
• Brittle fracture.

1
 INTRODUCTION
 The term FATIGUE is inherently associated with
structures which experience variation in stress and
strain in their cross section due to loads which
occur intermittently or simply speaking due to
Cyclic Loading.
 These load may occur on a regular or fixed pattern
like Vibratory loads or irregular pattern like moving
vehicular loads on roads and rail bridges.
 The static loads on the structure induces a constant
stress in the structure.
 The variable loads on the other hand induces
stresses which occur with the application of the
loads and which goes away with the removal of the
3
loads.

DEFINITION OF FATIGUE STRESS

The additional stress in a structure

or structural member due to the
intermittently occurring variable
(Cyclic) load is called Fatigue
Stress

2
 INTRODUCTION
 The term FATIGUE applies to changes in
properties which occur in a material due to the
repeated application of stresses or strains.
 These fatigue problems are extremely critical in
terms of safety and cost.
 It is not widely recognised in the engineering
community that fatigue cracking and failures are
far more common in steel structures.
 In effect, anything subjected to repeated loading,
arising, for example, from waves, wind, live
loading, pressure or temperature fluctuations,
vibration, etc., is potentially at risk from fatigue 5

INTRODUCTION
Definition of Fatigue Fracture
Process of progressive localised permanent
structural change occurring in a material
subjected to conditions, which produce
fluctuating stresses and strains at some
point or points and which may culminate in
cracks or complete fracture after a
sufficient number of fluctuations - ASTM E206-62T

3
 INTRODUCTION

 Effect of fatigue ----

 Minor – which leads to crack which
are repairable
 Major – which leads to ultimate
failure of the structure

INTRODUCTION
 Aim of Design against Fatigue –
 To ensure, with an acceptable level of
probability, that its performance is
satisfactory during its entire design life, such
that the structure is unlikely to fail or require
repair of the damage caused by fatigue
 Weak Link causing Fatigue Failure ---
 Bolted and welded connections

4
 INTRODUCTION

 Major failure location in a member

o Junction between the web and the bottom
flange in case of welded I-section,

o Welded joints between rolled section

bottom flange and additional flange plates
connected to the bottom flange

FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR OF
STRUCTURAL DETAILS
• Structural Member
– Tension, welding, cover plate, splices, stiffeners
• Riveted Connections
– Stress concentration, steel strength, details, rivet
tension
• Bolted Connections
– Bearing/ friction, prying effect, eccentricity
• Welded Connections
– In the weld metal
– In the line of fusion
– In the heat affected zone
– At the toe edge of the weld.

5
 INTRODUCTION
• IS: 800 – 2007 on Fatigue---
 Over the years Fatigue Design for all welded
construction has been done based on
stipulations laid down in IS: 1024 – 1979.

 Before the publication of IS: 800 – 2007,

steel design has been based on the old
Allowable Stress Design Method

11

INTRODUCTION

• IS: 800 – 2007 on Fatigue---

 The recently published IS: 800 – 2007 has
addressed design of Steel Structure in the
modern Limit states method of Design.

 It has categorically dedicated one full

chapter to Fatigue design relevant to steel
construction.
12

6
 INTRODUCTION
 Limit State Method ----
 The probability of operating
conditions not reaching failure
conditions forms the basis of “Limit
States Design”
 “Limit States" are the various
conditions in which a structure would
be considered to have failed to fulfill
the purpose for which it was built 13

INTRODUCTION
 Limit State Method (Contd.) ---
 “Ultimate Limit States” --- Catastrophic states, which
require a larger reliability in order to reduce the
probability of its occurrence to a very low level.
 “Serviceability Limit State" --- Refers to the limits on
acceptable performance of the structure
 Two Limit States as illustrated below (Table – 1) ---
Ultimate Limit State Serviceability Limit State
Strength (yield, buckling) Deflection
Stability against overturning and Vibration
sway Fatigue checks (including
Fracture due to fatigue repairable damage due to
Brittle Fracture fatigue)
Corrosion 14

7
 INTRODUCTION
 Limit State Method (Contd.) ----
 It is evident from the above Table, fatigue
may lead to both ultimate fracture or to
repairable fatigue damages.

 Though this Limit States Method (LSM) has

been in practice for long since 1970’s in
most of the developed countries, only
recently it has been considered for
adoption in India. 15

Necessity for Fatigue Assessment

 Any structure or member subjected to static loads
has constant stress level
 Structure or member subjected to dynamic or moving
loads experience variable stresses with reversal of
load direction due to application and subsequent
removal of the moving load. This Leads to fatigue.
 Fatigue mainly occurs in the tensile zone due to
 increase and decrease of tensile stress due to moving
loads.
 occurrence of alternate tensile and compressive tress
at a section due to moving loads like continuous
bridge girders 16

8
 Necessity for Fatigue Assessment
To Summarize, fatigue assessment is required for
building structures, bridges, gantries etc for the
following cases
 Members supporting lifting appliances or rolling
loads.
 Members subjected to repeated stress cycles from
vibrating machinery.
 Members subjected to wind-induced oscillations.
 Members subjected to crowd-induced oscillations

17

Fatigue Assessment by IS: 1024 – 1979

 IS: 1024 – 1979 (Code for fatigue assessment of
welded structure subjected to dynamic or moving
loads)
 Code is based on Allowable Stress Design Method.
 The code has not been revised for the last 26 years.
 As per general norm this code caters to various
constructional details namely from “Class A” to
“Class G”.
 The basic concept of fatigue assessment is the
“Stress ratio” concept.
 According to this code, working stresses needs to be
reduced, where necessary, to allow for the effects of
18
fatigue

9
 Fatigue Assessment by IS: 1024 – 1979
 Allowance for fatigue also requires to be made for
combination of stresses due to dead, live, impact,
and centrifugal forces, including secondary effects
due to eccentricity of connections and off-joint
loading in latticed structures

(a) Industrial roof structure (b) Bridge structure

Fig -1
19

Fatigue Assessment by IS: 1024 – 1979

 Stresses due to wind, temperature, longitudinal
and nosing force and secondary stresses may be
ignored in considering fatigue

Design Approach as per IS: 1024 – 1979

 For various detail class, there are limiting values of
fmax, corresponding to different design Stress
Ratios, (fmin / fmax) and N (i.e., number of stress
cycles for the entire design period)
 These limiting values corresponding to various
loading classes (i.e. from Class ‘A’ to class ‘G’ have
been tabulated in the code.
20

10
 Fatigue Assessment by IS: 1024 – 1979

Design Approach as per IS: 1024 – 1979

(Contd.)
 The actual fmax is kept within the permissible
value (i.e. permissible fmax) as obtained from the
tables.
 The above code also stipulates equivalent stress fe
both for combination cases involving shear plus
bending and shear plus bending and bearing
 fe needs to be checked against values obtained
from the above tables
21

Fatigue Assessment by IS: 1024 – 1979

Design Approach as per IS: 1024 – 1979

 For Shear and Bending -----

f bt
2
 3 fq
2
 or f bc
2
 3 fq
2

 For Shear, Bending and Bearing ---

f bt
2 2
 fb  fbt . fb  3 f q
2
 or
f bc
2 2
 fb  fbc. fb  3 f q
2

Where,
fbt tensile bending stress
fbc compressive bending stress
fq bearing stress
22

11
 Stress Ratio and Stress Range

R = Smin / Smax

S
tr Se
e
ss Se = Alternating stress amplitude
Smax Sr = Stress range
Sr Sm Sm =Mean stress
One load cycle
Smin
Smax =Maximum stress

Time Smin =Minimum stress

Fig - 2

23

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

Modern Approach to fatigue Assessment

replaces “Stress Ratio” concept by
“Stress Range” concept.

 Stress Range is expressed as fmax – fmin

24

12
Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
 Stress Range is checked against a permissible
set of limits which depend on the nature of the
element, the nature of the joint at which
fatigue is being assessed and the nature of the
fatigue stress.
 Broadly Speaking ----
o fmin ---- Corresponds to stress under static
loads.
o fmax ---- corresponds to the total stress on the
structure including dynamic or rolling
loads 25

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR
(a) Stress range
(b) Stress concentration
(c) Rate of cyclic loading
(d) Residual stresses
(e) Size
(f) Geometry
(g) Environment
(h) Temperature
(i) Previous stress history

26

13
Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
 FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR
 Stress Concentration



>

Stress concentration 
m n m n

Hole Notch

 

Fig. 3 Stress concentrations in the presence of notches and holes

27

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

 FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR


Fatigue crack -

Crack Applied cyclic stress

length

Crack length 3
2
 1

Number of cycles

Fig.4 Crack growth and fatigue failure under cyclic load

28

14
Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
 FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR
 Residual Stress (Compressive)

Fig – 5 Residual stress

29

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

 FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR
 Size Effect

e P

Fig – 6 Size Effect

30

15
Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
Effect of Geometry

e P

e P

(a) (b)

Fig – 7 Effect of Geometry

31

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

 FACTORS INFLUENCING FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR
 The fatigue failure is due to progressive propagation of flaws in
steel under cyclic loading
 Presence of a hole in a plate or simply the presence of a notch in
the plate causes Stress concentration
 Stress concentrations are not serious for ductile steel
 Steel members subjected to static loads
 Stress gets distributed to adjacent elements
 Repeated application of moving loads causes higher stress
reversal at the openings and notches causing early fatigue cracks
 The fatigue failure occurs after four different stages, namely:
• Crack initiation at points of stress concentration
• Crack growth
• Crack propagation
• Final rupture

32

16
Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
• Approach of International Codes – (British Code)
BS: 5400 Part-10 has dealt extensively with Fatigue.
 It deals separately with each and every possible loading
case on a bridge girder for trains of moving loads.
 Various connection detail categories designated by the
alphabet B, C, D, E, F, F2, S, W and G have been indicated.
 the permissible stress range for a given value of N, (i.e.
probable number of occurrence of the fatigue stress during
the design life of the structure) is given in the form of
straight lines in a curve called the S-N Curve.
 The actual stress range is compared with this permissible
stress range.

33

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

 Basic Guidelines for fatigue detailing as per British
Code---
 Best fatigue behavior of joints is achieved by ensuring that the
structure is so detailed that the elements may deform in their
intended ways without introducing secondary deformations
and stresses due to local restraints
 Stresses may also be reduced, and hence fatigue life
increased by increased thickness of parent metal or weld
 To avoid joint eccentricity
 Avoid welds near free edges
 Performance is adversely affected by concentrations of stress
at holes, openings and re-entrant corners

34

17
 Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment
 The BS codes highlights the following conditions which
needs to be included for fatigue stress calculation
– Shear lag, restrained torsion and distortion, transverse
stresses and flange curvature
– Effective width of steel plates
– Cracking of concrete in composite elements
– Stresses in triangulated skeletal structures due to load
applications away from joints, member eccentricities at
joints and rigidity of joints.

 The factors generally ignored by BS codes for fatigue

stress calculations are residual stresses, eccentricities
necessarily arising in standard detail, and plate buckling.
35

Modern Approach to Fatigue Assessment

 Approach of International Codes –(AASHTO)---
 AASHTO deals with fatigue similarly to BS codes
 The details have been classified by designating alphabets like
A, B, B’, C, D, E & E’.
 The basic criterion that needs to be fulfilled for load-induced
fatigue is as given below

Y.(Df ) = (Df )n
• Y Load factor for fatigue load combination as specified in the
code
• (Df ) Force effect, live load stress range due to the passage of the
fatigue load
• (Df ) n Nominal fatigue resistance, which depends on the detail
category and the number of stress cycles within the design
life of the structure (Obtained from S-N Curve)
36

18
Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 - 2007

A simple Approach adopted in line with

Eurocodes but similar to other international
codes.

Different details (of members and

connections) are classified under different
fatigue class

37

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 - 2007

The permissible design stress range or the

fatigue strength corresponding to various
number of cycles, are given for each fatigue
class.

The fatigue strength of a particular detail

category has been defined in the code as the
permissible stress range corresponding to
the number of cycles of the moving loads it
is required to withstand.
38

19
Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 - 2007

 The relationship between the permissible stress

range or fatigue strength for both normal stress
and shear stress have been represented by “S-N”
curve shown in Fig – 22 and 23 respectively
 The standard S-N curves for each detail category,
which have been tabulated in the code, are given
for the following conditions.
 The detail is located in a redundant load path,
wherein local failure at that detail alone will not
lead to overall collapse of the structure.

39

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 - 2007

 The nominal stress history at the local point in

the detail is estimated / evaluated by a
conventional method without taking into
account the local stress concentration effects
due to the detail.
 The load cycles are not highly irregular.
 The details are accessible for and subject to,
regular inspection.
 The transverse fillet or butt weld connects plates
of thickness not greater than 25 mm.
 The values obtained from the standard S-N curve
are modified by a capacity reduction factor r ,
when the connected plates are above 25mm. 40

20
Fig – 8 S – N Curve for Normal Stress 41

Fig – 9 S – N Curve for Shear Stress

42

21
Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007

 As shown above in Fig – 8 & 9, all details which are

tabulated in the code are indicated by a number
 The number represents the fatigue strength for that detail
category
 Fatigue Strength is nothing but the permissible stress
range for the detail category corresponding to 5 x 106
cycles of repetitions of the moving load or simply
speaking NSC = 5 x 106 cycles
 Fig-8 indicates that for direct stress curve changes its
slope at NSC = 5 x 106 cycles but Fig-9 (Shear Stress)
shows no change in slope
43

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007

 The fatigue strength of the standard detail for the normal
or shear fatigue stress range is given as,
 For Normal Stress Range
when N SC  5  10 6 ; f f  f fn 3 5  10 6 / N SC
when 5  10 6  N SC  10 8 ; f f  f fn 5 5  10 6 / N SC
 For Shear Stress Range

 f  fn 5 5  10 6 / N SC

– ff, , f = design normal and shear fatigue stress range of the

detail, respectively, for life cycle of NSC
– ffn, , fn = normal and shear fatigue strength of the detail for 5
x106 cycles
44

22
 Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007
 For Constant stress range, the actual normal and shear
stress range f and  at a point of the structure subjected
to NSC cycles in life shall satisfy.
f  f fd   r f f /  mft
   fd   r  f /  mft

• r = correction factor
• mf = partial safety factor against fatigue failure
given in Table 2 below
• ff , f = normal and shear fatigue strength ranges for
the actual life cycle, NSC, obtained from Eqns.
indicated earlier
45

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007

Table – 2 Partial safety factors for fatigue Strength (mft)

Consequence of failure
Inspection and Access
Fail-safe Non-fail-safe

Periodic inspection and

maintenance, accessibility to 1.00 1.25
detail is good

Periodic inspection and

maintenance, poor accessibility 1.15 1.35
for detail

46

23
 MODIFICATION FACTORS

• Weld in plates thicker than 25 mm

t = (25/tp)0.25  1.0

47

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007

 Fail-safe structural component/details ------ Where
local failure of one component does not result in the
failure of the structure due to availability of alternate
load path (redundant system).
 Non-fail-safe structural component/detail ---- Where
local failure of one component leads rapidly to failure
of the structure due to its non-redundant nature.
 Certain limitations that need to be adhered to while
making fatigue assessment, so that the structure
does not attain Ultimate Limit State
 The (absolute) maximum value of the normal and shear
stresses shall never exceed the elastic limit (fy, y) for the
material under cyclic loading.
 The maximum stress range shall not exceed 1.5 fy for normal
stresses and for the shear stresses under any circumstance
48

24
Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007
 Stress Evaluation of structure -----
 Design Stresses of a structure determined by Elastic
analysis to obtain stress resultant
 Local Stresses obtained by conventional analysis
 The normal and shear stresses are determined
considering all design actions on the members, but
excluding stress concentration due to the geometry of the
detail.
 The stress concentration, however, not characteristic of
the detail are accounted for in the stress calculation

49

Fatigue Assessment by proposed IS:800 – 2007

 Low Fatigue -----
 Assessment not required for a member, connection
or detail, when the normal and shear design stress
ranges, f, satisfy the equation given by,
f  27 /  mft
 Or if the actual number of stress cycles, NSC,
3
 27 /  mft 
satisfies N SC  5 X 10 
6 
  f 
 fft 
f is the actual fatigue stress range for the detail
fft is the partial safety factors for load which is generally taken as unity
unless and otherwise there is any uncertainty in the estimation of the
applied load
mft is the partial safety factor for strength 50

25
 Conclusions
The “Stress Ratio” Concept as per IS: 1024 –
1979 is outdated
It does not give an idea directly about the
fatigue stress which is basically the stress in
the structure due to the moving imposed load
The “Stress Range” concept is more rational
as it deals only with the stress causing
fatigue and no other stresses
To give a direct comparison between the two
concept, an example can be referred to:
51

Conclusions
 Case – 1 ----
Let the stress due to all static load in one detail = X1
Let the stress in the detail due to moving loads = Y
Therefore fmin = X1 and fmax = X1 + Y
Therefore “Stress Ratio” for Fatigue Assessment,
S1 = fmin / fmax = X1 / (X1 + Y)
“Stress Range” for Fatigue Assessment,
S2 = fmax - fmin = (X1 + Y) - X1 = Y
 Case – 2 ----
Let the stress due to all static load in a second detail = X2
Let the stress in the detail due to moving loads = Y
Therefore fmin = X2 and fmax = X2 + Y
Therefore “Stress Ratio” for Fatigue Assessment,
S1 = fmin / fmax = X2 / (X2 + Y)
“Stress Range” for Fatigue Assessment,
S2 = fmax - fmin = (X2 + Y) – X2 = Y 52

26
 Conclusions
 Now, if X1 < X2 ; S1 will be les than S2 and
if X1 > X2 ; S1 will be greater than S2
 “Stress Ratio” Concept ------
1. For same fatigue stress Y, the two details will have
different “Stress Ratio” and hence different
permissible maximum stress for given value of N
(Number of Cycles)
2. In effect this concept gives importance to static
loads also (X1 and X2) as they contribute to Stress
ratio

53

Conclusions
 “Stress Range” Concept ------
1. Both the details have same fatigue stress and are checked
against the same fatigue strength obtained from the S-N curve
for the above given value of N (Number of Cycles)
2. Therefore in this concept only the fatigue stresses (i.e. the
stresses due to the moving loads are given the actual due
weightage, and static loads do not play any significant role
 IS: 800 -2007
o Deals in Stress Range concept in tune with th present international
practice
o With the publication of this code , th design structure subjected to
fatigue loads against fatigue failure will undergo the changes a
described above
o IS: 1024 – 1979 will automatically will automatically get
superceded
54

27
55

28