Issue 42

R. Pawliczek et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 42 (2017) 30-39; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.42.04 32 Figure 2 : Description of the stable hysteresis loop [7]. The parameters on the Fig. 2 are as follow: ε max , σ max – maximum strain and stress at point A respectively, ε min , σ min – minimum strain and stress at point B respectively, ε m , σ m – mean strain and stress in the point respectively, ε a , σ a – amplitude of strain and stress in the point respectively, ε Apl , ε Ael – plastic strain and elastic strain at point A respectively. For situation presented in Fig. 2 the most conservative case exists. All calculations are performed for known strain history ε(t) registered during the test, so all strain parameters in Fig. 2 are available. Take into account geometry of the stress-strain relation based on the presented assumptions and using standard Ramberg-Osgood formula for its mathematical description, the strain amplitude ε a can be expressed as: 1 max max n a E K              (1) where: σ max – maximum stress at point A, E – Young modulus, K’ = K’(ε m ) - cyclic strength coefficient, n’ = n’(ε m ) – cyclic fatigue exponent. Assuming additionally, that cyclic strength coefficient and cyclic fatigue exponent values depend on the actual value of the mean strain, it should be noted, that coefficients K’ and n’ are defined for actual mean strain ε m [8]. Eq. (1) allows calculating stress at point A. Considering, that ε m +ε a = ε Apl +ε Ael and σ max =σ a +σ m (Fig. 2) max m a m a Apl Apl E E E              (2) where stress amplitude σ a is unknown. From hysteresis loop and Ramberg-Osgood relationship, we can use the amplitudes of elastic ε ael and plastic ε apl strains: a a ael apl apl E          (3) Substituting elastic part in Eq.(2) using Eq.(3), after transformation, the mean stress σ m can be calculated from the following formula: m m apl Apl E        (4) A (  max ,  max )  a  a  m  m  a  Apl  Ael   B (  min ,  min )