Investigation into Tangential Force and Axial Stress Effects on Fretting Fatigue Behavior

[+] Author and Article Information
Hyukjae Lee

School of Advanced Materials Engineering,  Andong National University, Andong, Gyungbuk 760-749, South Korea

Shankar Mall1

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics,  Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT∕ENY), Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-7765


Author to whom correspondence should be addressed at AFIT∕ENY, Bldg. 640, 2950 Hobson Way, Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7765; email: Shankar.Mall@afit.edu

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 128(2), 202-209 (Jun 15, 2005) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2172624 History: Received June 03, 2004; Revised June 15, 2005

Fretting fatigue behavior of a titanium alloy was investigated using a dual actuator test setup which was capable to apply the pad displacement independent of the applied cyclic load on specimen. Fretting fatigue tests were conducted using this setup with a phase difference between cyclic load on the specimen and tangential force on the fretting pad with cylinder-on-flat contact configuration under partial slip condition. Two axial stress ratios were used. The relative slip range and tangential force range were related to each other and this relationship was not influenced by phase difference, axial stress ratio, and contact load under the partial slip condition. Change in the phase difference caused the change in relative slip as well as tangential force for a given applied pad displacement and axial load. However, there was no effect of phase difference on fretting fatigue life at a given relative slip level. Fretting fatigue tests with a fully reversed axial stress showed longer fatigue life than tension-tension counterparts at a given relative slip, tangential force range, and axial stress range. Finite element analysis was conducted by including the complete load history effects, which showed that stress distribution on the contact surface stabilized after the first fatigue cycle. Unlike relative slip and∕or tangential force range, a critical plane-based parameter appears to take into account the stress ratio effects to characterize fretting fatigue behavior.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Fretting fatigue test apparatus

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Schematic of applied cyclic load (shown in the upper part of the figure) and pad displacement with different phase differences (PD=phase difference)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Longitudinal tensile stress distributions on the contact surface for stress ratios of 0.03 and −1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

MSSR parameter versus fretting fatigue life. SR=Stress ratio

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of (a) specimen and (b) pad

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Schematic of extensometer setup for relative slip measurement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Measured relative slip between pad and specimen for three phase differences (ACL=applied cyclic load)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Tangential force for three phase differences

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Tangential force range (ΔQ) versus relative slip range (Δδ) under various fretting test conditions. Five different values of phase differences (0, 45, 90, 135, and 180deg) and two stress ratios (0.03 and −1) were employed. SR=Stress ratio, PD=Phase difference, w∕=with, and w∕o=without.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Tangential force range (ΔQ) versus fretting fatigue life (Nf). Arrow indicates specimens did not fail up to fatigue limit (i.e., 1,000,000cycles)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Relative slip range (Δδ) versus fretting fatigue life (Nf)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Longitudinal tensile (Sxx) and shear (Sxy) stresses distribution on the contact surface when the maximum applied load of 550MPa was applied (B in Figure 6). The x axis is normalized by the contact half-width a. Phase difference was 0deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Longitudinal tensile stress distribution on the contact surface at instances A, B, C, and D in Fig. 6. The maximum applied cyclic load was 550MPa with a stress ratio of 0.03 and phase difference of 0deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Shear stress distributions on the contact surface for stress ratios of 0.03 and −1




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In