Materials pp 159-166 | Cite as

Long-Crack Fatigue Thresholds and Short Crack Simulation at Liquid Helium Temperature

  • R. L. Tobler
  • J. R. Berger
  • A. Bussiba
Part of the Advances in Cryogenic Engineering book series (ACRE, volume 38)


A short crack simulation (SCS) test is used to characterize the near—threshold fatigue crack growth behavior of stainless steels at 4 K. The test methodology holds the maximum stress intensity factor constant while increasing the minimum stress intensity factor, thus raising the stress ratio from 0.1 at the start to about 0.8 at the end of the test. The resulting fatigue crack growth rate measurements are unaffected by crack closure, and the intrinsic threshold is directly obtained without a correction factor. Merits of the test procedure are described.


Stress Intensity Factor Crack Growth Rate Fatigue Crack Growth Crack Closure Fatigue Crack Propagation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    P.K. Liaw and W.A. Logsdon, Fatigue Crack Growth Threshold at Cryogenic Temperatures: A Review, Eng. Fract. Mech. 22:585–594 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R.L. Tobler, Near-threshold Fatigue Crack Growth Behavior of AISI 316 Stainless Steel, Adv. Cryo. Eng. Maters. 32:321–327 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.L. Tobler and Y.W. Cheng, Automatic Near-threshold Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Measurements at Liquid Helium Temperature, Int. J. Fat. 7:191–197 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Z. Mei, J.W. Chan, and J.W. Morris, Jr., The Effect of Temperature on Fatigue Crack Propagation in 310 Austenitic Stainless Steel, Adv. Cryo. Eng. Maters. 36A:1241–1247 (1990).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Z. Mei and J.W. Morris, Jr., Influence of Deformation Induced Martensite on the Fatigue Crack Propagation in 304-Type Steels, Metall. Trans. 21A: 3137–3152 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Doker, V. Bachman, and G. Marci, A Comparison of Different Methods of Determination of the Threshold for Fatigue Crack Propagation, in: “Fatigue Thresholds”, J. Backlund, A. Blom, and C.J. Beevers, eds., EMAS Ltd., United Kingdom, 45 (1982).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.A. Herman, A Reevaluation of Fatigue Threshold Test Methods, in: “Fatigue 87”, EMAS, Ltd., United Kingdom, 2:819 (1987).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W.A. Herman, R.W. Hertzberg, and R. Jaccard, A Simplified Laboratory Approach for the Prediction of Short Crack Behavior, Fat. Fract. Eng. Maters. Struct. 11:303 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. Bussiba, R.L. Tobler, and J. Berger, Superconductor Conduits: Fatigue Crack Growth Rate and Near-Threshold Behavior of Three Alloys, this volume.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Suresh and R.O. Ritchie, in: Fatigue Crack Growth Threshold: Concepts, D.L. Davidson and S. Suresh, eds., TMS-AIME Warrendale, PA, 227–261 (1984).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. L. Tobler
    • 1
  • J. R. Berger
    • 1
  • A. Bussiba
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Materials Reliability DivisionNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyBoulderUSA
  2. 2.Nuclear Research Center-NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael

Personalised recommendations