None of the procedures for cycle-counting defined in the ASTM document with designation E1049-85 (Reapproved 2017) [1] are generally applicable to non-proportional, multi-axial Fatigue. In addition, as the concepts of amplitude and mean stress are defined per cycle, their values are dependent (or co-define) the cycle counting method. This poses an obvious problem to the analysis of non-proportional, multi-axial fatigue damage, as lifetime is, not in all but in many cases, an amplitude and mean stress dependent material property. Most of the newer cycle counting methods developed till date are at least inspired by the works of Wang & Brown [2] and of Bannantine & Socie [3], both of which are themselves still frequently used. Being built inspired by counting methods developed for uniaxial cycling, all of the approaches to date known to this author are limited in a way that is very well phrased by Anes et al [4], whom, on page 79 of their article, write that (quote): The damage criterion is the base stone to set up random fatigue. The damage parameter must capture the fatigue damage behavior to allow set up a cycle counting method and an accumulation model. Challenging this statement, a new cycle counting procedure is presented that is completely independent of the damage criterion, and universally works from the simplest uniaxial experiment, to the most complex, variable amplitude and frequency, non-proportional multiaxial fatigue loading. The definition of this new cycle counting concept is surprisingly simple. Despite of its simplicity, the new cycle counting procedure has different advantages when compared to the procedures known to date. Its standalone definition, allows it to be combined with any damage criterion. It does not require periodicity of the loading cycle, and can therefore be straightforwardly used to analyze variable frequency and amplitude, multiaxial fatigue loading.
Effects of Mean Stress and Prestrain on Fatigue-Damage Summation
