International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Fatigue

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijfatigue

Experimental evaluation of fatigue life and fatigue crack growth in a tension

bolt–nut threaded connection
I. Korin a,⇑, J. Perez Ipiña b
a
UN Comahue/IT Prof. Jorge A. Sabato/CONICET-San Antonio Internacional, Grupo Mecánica de Fractura, UN Comahue, Buenos Aires 1200, Neuquén (CP8300), Argentina
b
UN Comahue/CONICET, Grupo Mecánica de Fractura, UN Comahue, Buenos Aires 1200, Neuquén (CP8300), Argentina

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Threaded components are structural elements that play an important role in the integrity of an efficient
Received 18 March 2010 engineering design. The assessment of their fatigue and fracture behaviors under real load conditions
Received in revised form 13 July 2010 becomes many times extremely complex. This is because of the experimental difficulties involved in
Accepted 3 August 2010
the laboratory simulation of the ‘‘nut–bolt” interaction. As a consequence, crack initiation and crack
Available online 6 August 2010
growth data are scant.
This paper proposes an experimental method that overcomes these difficulties allowing an analysis of
Keywords:
the behavior of the coupling under a state of tensile cyclic loading.
Fatigue failure
Fatigue crack growth
The method enables to study the stages of initiation and crack growth. In the first, the crack nucleation
Threaded connection period over different test conditions can be determined. In the second, the crack size as a function of the
Stress intensity multiplication factor thread stiffness is estimated. Moreover, knowing the Paris’s constants C and m for the tested material, the
dimensionless stress intensity factor Y(a/d) acting in the assembly was also estimated. Tests were con-
ducted on M12  1.75 threaded rods, with a load ratio R = 0 and the obtained results demonstrated
the suitability of the method.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction where r1 is the far away tension and a is a crack characteristic

Threaded joints play an important role in the integrity and
durability of a reliable engineering design. Their performance is
critical in several industries such as aeronautical, nuclear, and oil
drilling, and therefore is of great interest to understand their re-
sponse when they are subjected to cyclic loading. However, the fa-
tigue behavior of a nut-loaded bolt is difficult to evaluate due to
complexity of the stress distribution over the joint. Such complex-
ity is inherent to the system and is basically related to three
causes: the nonuniform load distribution between the teeth of bolt
and nut [1,2], the stress concentration generated by the teeth [3]
and the stress field distortion caused by the probable existence
of residual stresses (e.g. manufacturing process as cold rolling
and/or load history) [4,5].
Several papers related to fatigue crack growth in threaded joints
[6] are focused on the multiplication factor Y (also named dimen-
sionless stress intensity factor) which is employed to calculate the
stress intensity factor K by means of the well-known relation given
by the linear elastic fracture mechanics:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
K ¼ ðr1 p  aÞY;
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +54 299 4490355.
E-mail address: ikorin@uncoma.edu.ar (I. Korin).
dimension. In Eq. (1) all the complexities discussed before are con-
templated in the multiplication factor Y which used to be depicted
as a function of the normalized crack size a/d (i.e. Y = f(a/d)), where
d is the inner diameter of the thread. Performing a literature review
referred to this subject, it was found that the experimental evalua-
tion becomes complex and therefore most of the papers are mainly
based on theoretical analysis [7,8]. Results based on experimental
data are found in limited works [9] where the usually named
James–Anderson approach is mostly employed [10,11].
This technique, assuming that the crack growth was controlled
by the Paris law (Eq. (2)), allows to determine the Y factor by mea-
suring the crack growth rate generated by a load (Dr), as Eq. (3)
shows:
da
¼ C  DK m ; ð2Þ
dn
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
da
¼ C½ðDr p  aÞYm : ð3Þ
dn
It can be seen from Eq. (3) that the only unknown is the multi-
ð1Þ plier factor Y, as the Paris constants C and m are either known to
the material under study, or can be estimated by testing specimens
for which its Y function is known (such as compact tension
specimens C(T)) [12].

0142-1123/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2010.08.003
 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175 167

Nut Nuts
Fatigue test
tightening

+P

Load on the
Specimen
threaded
(threaded rod) rod

Cylinder t
Load by the
machine

-P
Nut Load on the
cylinder

Fig. 1. Experimental device and scheme of loads involved.

Using marks generated on the fracture surface within a certain iod under different test conditions can be determined. In the sec-
number of cycles allows the approximate determination of Y for a ond, the crack size as a function of the applied load cycles ‘‘a = f
given load and various a values. The marks, that require careful (N)” is obtained. Moreover, an experimental estimation of the mul-
control of test parameters, can be generated by modifying the tiplication factor Y(a/d) values, even for crack sizes as small as a/
amplitude of the applied fatigue cycle (i.e. keeping constant the d = 0.005, have been obtained.
maximum load and increasing the minimum load) [13]. The length
between the generated marks must be measured by any appropri- 2. Materials and methods
ate technique, which generally is scanning electron microscopy.
It should be mentioned that although the James–Anderson 2.1. The experimental device
technique is widely used when making empirical estimations
[14], it is an uphill task from the experimental point of view. In The experimental design was aimed to assess the fatigue perfor-
particular, for very small crack sizes such as a/d < 0.1 the technique mance of threaded components subjected to uniaxial tensile loads,
is practically inapplicable [15]. where the maximum tensile load is imposed by tightening the
An experimental method to study the behavior of bolt–nut nuts. In order to do this, a device consisting of a pair of nuts, a
threaded connections under a state of cyclic tensile loading and cylinder and a thread rod as the specimen was used (see Fig. 1
that overcomes the difficulties discussed in the preceding para- and Table 1 for constructive details). The maximum fatigue load
graphs is proposed in this paper. The experimental procedure em- (PmF) in the specimen is set by tightening the nuts. This action also
ploys a device which has already proven its suitability for testing produces a compression load in the cylinder. Then, the fatigue load
threaded joints [16]. Such device enables to study both the stages cycle on the specimen is imposed by placing the device between
of initiation and crack growth. In the first, the crack nucleation per- the compression plates of the fatigue testing machine and applying
an adequate compressive load cycle of constant amplitude. Fig. 1
shows the particular case for R = 0, which was the load ratio
Table 1
employed for all the tests in this work. The load path applied by
Constructive characteristics of the components employed in the devices.
the machine is indicated in doted line, while the loads on the spec-
Component Internal External Length Material imen and the cylinder are in full lines. This load ratio, R = 0, is only
diameter dimension
a particular case, and other ratios can be easily achieved by tight-
(mm) (mm)
ening the nuts to the maximum desire load and setting a proper
Cylinder 13 25.4 35 Aluminum
load in the fatigue machine. Fig. 2 shows pictures of the device
Upper nut M12  1.75 25 30 Steel (AISI 1045)
Lower nut M12  1.75 25 30 Steel (AISI 1045) before assembling (left) and mounted between the compression
plates of the testing machine (right). Note that the strain in the

Specimen
(threaded rod)

Nut

Cylinder

Nut

Fig. 2. Experimental device before assembling (left), and mounted between the compression plates of the testing machine (right).
168 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175

Table 2 where DlTR and DlC are the changes in length, and kTR and kC are the
Properties of the threaded rods employed to build the specimens. stiffness of the threaded rod and the cylinder respectively. Operat-
Threaded rod Pitch Internal External rYS rR HRB ing, the load experienced by the rod can be expressed as:
(threads/ diameter diameter (MPa) (MPa)
mm) (mm) (mm) kC
DlTR ¼ DlC ; ð8Þ
M12  1.75 1.75 9.88 12 595 601 91
K TR
where DlC is given by:
0
DlC ¼ eC  lC ; ð9Þ
cylinder is measured by means of a couple of strain gages, which
were bonded on opposite sides of the cylinder in order to verify and the rigidity of each component can be well approximated by
the uniform load around the circumference of the cylinder and k = A*E/l0, where A is the cross section, E is the Young modulus
threaded rod. In this way, the maximum difference between the and l0 is the original length.
strain readings was limited up to 5% of the average strain.
The characteristics of the thread rods employed to build the 2.3. Fatigue load setting
specimens are summarized in Table 2.
Once the maximum load of the fatigue test PmF (i.e. the load in
2.2. Maximum load setting by tightening the nuts the threaded rod obtained by tightening the nuts, PTR = PmF) was

A notable feature of the experimental device is that all the loads

involved can be related to the strain on the cylinder. A better
understanding of the system can be attained analyzing the springs
PM PM
representation shown in Fig. 3.
When tightening the nuts, a reduction in the cylinder length to-
gether an increase in the threaded rod length take place, and con-
sequently a tension load on the threaded rod (PTR) and a
compressive load on the cylinder (PC) are generated. They are equal
and opposite:
PC kC
PTR ¼ PC : ð4Þ
Both loads can be related to the strain experienced by the cylin-
der using the following equation: PM
PC 1
eC ¼ ; ð5Þ
AC EC kTR
where eC is the strain measured in the cylinder, AC is its cross area
and EC the Young module of the material employed for its construc-
tion. Introducing Eq. (4) in Eq. (5) and rearranging the terms:
PTR
PTR ¼ eC  EC  AC : ð6Þ
x1
Thus, the desired maximum load on the threaded rod can be im-
posed measuring and controlling the strain in the cylinder as the
nuts are tightened and inferring the load in the rod by means of
Eq. (6). Writing also the force balance depicted in Eq. (4) in terms (-) (+)
of the system stiffness:
0 X
DlTR  kTR ¼ DlC  kC ; ð7Þ
Fig. 4. Spring model employed to analyze the required load profile by the machine.

Testing machine
Threaded rod
ΔPTR +P Cylinder

x1 ΔPM
t +x
ΔlTR ΔlC ΔlC ΔlTR
ΔPC

PTR PTR

PC PC t -P t

Fig. 3. Spring model employed to analyze the loads related to the nut tightening. Fig. 5. Schematic representation of Eqs. (10), (11) and (13).
 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175 169

Cycles
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
0 1x10 2x10 3x10 4x10 5x10 6x10 7x10 8x10
0

-1300
-1400
beginning of
-1500
crack growth
ε [μs]

-1600
Specimen
-1700 failure
-1800
-1900 Stage I Stage II

Fig. 6. Record of the cylinder mean strain covering the whole test until failure.

set, the load cycle applied by the machine has to be set in order to subtracting the nucleation period from total cycles. Table 3 shows
attain the desired load amplitude over the specimen. The spring the estimation of both stages obtained for three load conditions,
model of Fig. 4 allows to calculate the required load values. employing five specimens at each level. All test were carried out
When compressive load PM is applied by the machine, the loads up to the failure, where the final crack size is almost as the rod
on the threaded rod and the cylinder can be written as: diameter.
The estimation of the amount of crack growth is also based on
PTR ¼ kTR ðDlTR  x1 Þ; ð10Þ
the measurement of the cylinder’s strain, although some extra cal-
culation is required. The springs model shown in Fig. 7 is helpful in
PC ¼ kC ðDlC þ x1 Þ; ð11Þ
order to facilitate the analysis of the system.
where x1 is the length reduction of the system due to the applied Performing a force balance similar to the one used in the spring
load. Performing a force balance in the spring model of Fig. 4, model of Fig. 4, the same result as Eq. (12) may be written,
results: although this time, as the crack grows the acting loads in the
threaded rod and in the cylinder are influenced by the relaxation
PM þ PTR  PC ¼ 0: ð12Þ
Dx that experiences the system:
Introducing Eq. (10) and Eq. (11) in Eq. (12):
a
PM þ kTR ðDlTR  DxÞ  kC ðDlC þ DxÞ ¼ 0; ð15Þ
PM ¼ ðkC  DlC  kTR  DlTR Þ þ x1 ðkC þ kTR Þ: ð13Þ
a
If a load ratio R = 0 is going to be applied to the specimen (as it where Dx = x1  x2 and kTR represents the stiffness of the cracked
was the case in this work), the minimum load in the threaded rod threaded rod, which is related to the crack size a.
during the test should be zero. Eq. (10) shows that this occurs for Eq. (14), is represented in Fig. 8 for a better understanding.
x1 = DlTR, that is, the compressive force imposed by the machine Fig. 8a shows the change in the system from the initial condition
should compensate the deformation generated in the threaded without crack in the rod (full line) to one with an arbitrary crack
rod during the nuts adjustment. Thus the maximum load that length (dotted line). The loads imposed when tightening the nuts
the machine should perform is given by:
PM ¼ kC ðDlTR þ DlC Þ: ð14Þ Table 3
Results of the nucleation period evaluation.
Eqs. (10), (11) and (13) are represented in Fig. 5 for a better under-
standing, where the load cycles of each component are also Specimen PmF (kN) R Cycles stage I Cycles stage II Total cycles
depicted. 1 29.8 0 4.04E + 05 1.42E + 05 5.47E + 05
2 29.8 0 5.65E + 05 7.22E + 04 6.37E + 05
3 29.8 0 5.36E + 05 7.87E + 04 6.14E + 05
3. Results 4 29.8 0 4.23E + 05 1.16E + 05 5.42E + 05
5 29.8 0 5.11E + 05 1.03E + 05 6.15E + 05
3.1. Estimation of the crack initiation time and crack growth analysis Average 4.88E + 05 1.02E + 05 5.91E + 05
Std. Dev. 7.06E + 04 2.86E + 04 4.36E + 04
Once the required parameters were set and the test is running, Var. Coef. 0.145 0.279 0.074
if the involved loads are high enough, after certain amount of cy-
6 32 0 1.75E + 05 6.46E + 04 2.39E + 05
cles a crack will begin to grow in the first engaged tooth between
7 32 0 2.21E + 05 9.68E + 04 3.18E + 05
the rod and one of the two nuts (i.e., the highest stressed area [17]) 8 32 0 1.84E + 05 7.17E + 04 2.56E + 05
This growth leads to a loss of stiffness in the threaded rod, gener- 9 32 0 1.27E + 05 6.06E + 04 1.87E + 05
ating a relaxation of the nuts–rod–cylinder system denoted by a 10 32 0 1.84E + 05 8.35E + 04 2.67E + 05
decrement in the mean strain measured on the cylinder, as Fig. 6 Average 1.78E + 05 7.54E + 04 2.53E + 05
shows. Std. Dev. 3.39E + 04 1.48E + 04 4.73E + 04
Var. Coef. 0.190 0.196 0.187
Two stages can be clearly distinguished: stage I corresponds to
the crack nucleation period, where no change in cylinder’s mean 11 34.5 0 2.11E + 05 8.96E + 04 3.01E + 05
deformation is observed; and stage II corresponds to the crack 12 34.5 0 1.36E + 05 6.85E + 04 2.05E + 05
growth period, where the mean strain decreases as the crack 13 34.5 0 1.09E + 05 6.14E + 04 1.70E + 05
grows. 14 34.5 0 1.52E + 05 8.29E + 04 2.35E + 05
15 34.5 0 1.66E + 05 6.93E + 04 2.35E + 05
The estimation of the nucleation period is very straightforward
and only requires to quantify the number of cycles of stage I. A 0.2% Average 1.55E + 05 7.44E + 04 2.29E + 05
Std. Dev. 3.81E + 04 1.15E + 04 4.83E + 04
reduction in the measured mean strain was taken as cutoff criteria
Var. Coef. 0.246 0.155 0.210
in this paper. Then, the crack growth period is easily obtained by
170 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175

0 X constant in the cylinder, while the minimum compressive load de-

(-) (+) creases. Therefore, the load ratio diminishes up to zero as the crack
grows, while the amplitude load increases. This is shown in Fig. 9
x1 where the mean strain measured on the cylinder and the theoret-
x2
ical mean strain – far from the crack – on the threaded rod during a
PC whole test are depicted. For a better understanding, both cyclic
kC strains are schematically mounted over the mean values.
a
The stiffness kTR can be calculated from Eq. (14) as a function of
the parameters of the test:
PM a kC ðDlC þ DxÞ  PM
kTR ¼ ; ð16Þ
DlTR  Dx
kTR
where DlTR and DlC are the length variation in the rod and the cyl-
inder due to the tightening of the nuts, and the relaxation Dx is re-
lated to the strain measured on the cylinder by:
0
Dx ¼ eC  lC  DlC : ð17Þ
Δx PTR
The stiffness variation in the threaded rod as the crack grows is
obtained combining Eqs. (15) and (16), starting from the recorded
mean strain measured on the cylinder (Fig. 6), as is shown in
Fig. 10.
Because there is an univocal relationship between crack size
and the threaded rod stiffness (for a given crack aspect ratio), the
crack length a = f(n) can be obtained from the data shown in
Fig. 10. This relationship was estimated in this work by means of
an experimental arrangement which tested several specimens
where the crack grew up to various sizes and for which the stiff-
ness was calculated using Eq. (15). Fig. 11a shows the obtained re-
sults and the equation used to fit the data. The crack lengths were
measured from high-resolution images taken by an optical scanner
[18], considering the characteristic dimension ‘‘a” as shown in the
Fig. 7. Spring model employed to analyze the crack growth.
picture of Fig. 11b.
Thus, using the fitted curve of Fig. 11, the crack growth during
-PTR and PC- decrease to P0TR and P 0C due to the loss of stiffness in the the test can be estimated from the data corresponding to Figs. 6
rod (note that both the maximum loads in the rod and in the cyl- and 10, as shown in Fig. 12. Fig. 13 shows results of the estimated
inder are equal and opposite). The final state (Fig. 8b) is reached crack growth (only stage II) obtained in several specimens, to-
when the threaded rod collapses, these maximum loads become gether the actual final crack size measured once the test was
null, and the whole load applied by the machine is supported by finished.
the cylinder.
A deeper analysis of Fig. 8 shows that the whole test is carried 3.2. Estimation of the multiplication factor Y(a/d)
out at constant load ratio R = 0 in the threaded rod and, as the crack
grows, the mean load decreases up to 0 when no more ligament After the relation a = f(n) is obtained, the multiplication factor
left. Instead, only the maximum compressive fatigue load keeps Y(a/d) is estimated rearranging Eq. (3):

Testing machine
(a) Threaded rod
(b)
Cylinder
+P +P
PTR PTR
P’TR
x2 x1 x2 x1
-x +x -x +x
P’C

PC PC

-P -P

Fig. 8. Schematic representation of Eq. (14).

 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175 171

Mean strain on threaded rod Mean strain on cylinder

+ε Instantaneous strain on threaded rod Instantaneous strain on cylinder

Nuts
tigh-
tening

-ε

Fig. 9. Schematic strains on the cylinder and threaded rod.

500 Stage I Stage II

400
k TR [kN/mm]

300

200
a

100

0
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
0 1x10 2x10 3x10 4x10 5x10 6x10 7x10 8x10
Cycles

Fig. 10. Estimation of the threaded rod stiffness variation, from the strain measured on the cylinder.

1.0 (a)
Experimental data
0.9
Polynomial fit
0.8 Finite element analysis
0.7
0.6
0.5
a/d

0.4
0.3
2
Y =1.00047-0.01478 X+2.31895E-4 X
0.2 3 4 5
-1.99814E-6 X +9.91615E-9 X -2.8451E-11 X
0.1 6
+4.37295E-14 X -2.78152E-17 X
7

0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500
kTR(a/d) [kN/mm]

Fig. 11. (a) Experimental relationship between kTR and a. (b) Crack length a considered for the analysis.

1
da m
ðdn Þ pared in Fig. 15 with several solutions found by other authors
Yða=dÞ ¼ 1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð18Þ [9,14,20,21] using the finite element method.
C ðDr p  aÞ
m

3.3. Multiplication factor Y(a/d) validity analysis

The diameter of the employed threaded rods precludes to per-
form standardized test to obtain the Paris constants C and m neces-
sary in Eq. (17). Therefore, they were extracted from literature [19]
where, for the tested material, C = 16.5  109 (mm/cycle)/MPa3
and m = 3. Fig. 14 shows the obtained results for several specimens,
all of them tested at the same load conditions (the employed C and
m parameters are also indicated). Some of these results are com-
Eq. (17), based on the Paris law, must fulfill their requirements:
DK > DKth, small scale yielding and long crack behavior.
3.3.1. Limit for small a/d ratio
For tiny values of a/d, small scale yielding conditions might be
violated. Eq. (18) verifies the condition rp  0.02 a [22]:
172 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175

1.0 Stage I Stage II

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
a/d
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
0 1x10 2x10 3x10 4x10 5x10 6x10 7x10 8x10
Cycles

Fig. 12. Crack growth estimation.

Estimated crack growth On the other hand, the Kitagawa and Takahashi approach was
Actual final crack size employed to analyze the limit between short and long crack behav-
1.0 ior, [22]. Considering again data obtained from Ref. [23] for the
tested material, the critical length resulted l0 = 142 lm, as is shown
0.9 in Fig. 16. For the employed threaded rod size M12  1.75, this crit-
0.8 ical length gives a ratio a/d = 0.014.

0.7
3.3.2. Limit for large a/d ratio
0.6 For a crack length too long, the condition ‘‘remaining ligament”
>0.02 rp could be violated. Eq. (19) verifies this relation for a/d < 0.6
a/d

0.5
considering plain strain state for the tested conditions. The esti-
0.4 mated lower and upper limits are shown in Fig. 17.
0.3  2
n K
da> : ð20Þ
0.2 0:02 rY
0.1

0.0 4. Discussion
5 5 5 5 5
2x10 3x10 4x10 5x10 6x10
Cycles The simplicity of the experimental design allows to perform a
Fig. 13. Estimated crack growth in several specimens.
large number of tests in a reliable way and at very low cost per test.
Besides, the method enables to study the nut-load effect, which is
rarely contemplated in other experimental studies or numerical
 2
n K analysis.
a> ; ð19Þ Both stages, crack initiation as well as crack growth can be
0:02 rY
clearly differentiated and analyzed. The ability of the method to
where n = 1/(2p) for plane stress and n = 1/(6p) for plane strain. K accurately identify the crack growth initiation must be highlighted.
was adopted in this work as the stress intensity threshold, A reduction of 0.2% in the cylinder mean strain was taken in this
DKth = 4.2 MPa(m)0.5 for the employed material [23]. Results work as an arbitrary cutoff to establish the beginning of crack
showed that, for the employed threaded rod size M12  1.75, the growth. Deeper studies can be performed to improve this point.
small scale yielding condition is achieved for a/d > 0.04 (plane stress It was possible to relate the measured strain with the crack
state) or a/d > 0.013 (plane strain state). The actual situation in the length by means of analyzing the stiffness variation of the system.
rod is between plane stress and plane strain conditions, probably As Fig. 13 shows, very good estimations of the crack size were
nearer to plane stress state for very small and very large a/d ratios. obtained. This result, in addition to its great practical importance,

(a) 4.0 (b) 4.0

3.5 -9 3 3.5 Specimen 3 , σmF /σY = 0.6
C = 16.5x10 (mm/cycle)/MPa
3.0 m=3 Specimen 11, σmF /σY = 0.6
3.0
Specimen 10, σmF /σY = 0.6
2.5 2.5 Specimen 15, σmF /σY = 0.6
Y (a/d)
Y (a/d)

2.0 2.0 Specimen 14, σmF /σY = 0.6

Specimen 29, σmF /σY = 0.6
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
a/d a/d

Fig. 14. Estimation of the multiplication factor Y(a/d), over the whole range (a), and detail for a/d < 0.05 (b).
 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175 173

(a) 4.0 (b) 4.0

3.5 3.5
Mettu et al. - ref.[9]
3.0 3.0 Liu - ref.[14]
James & Mills - ref.[20]
2.5 2.5 de Koning et al. - ref.[21]

Y (a/d)
Y (a/d) 2.0
Experimental estimation
2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
a/d a/d

Fig. 15. Obtained Y(a/d) results, compared to other author solutions, over the whole range (a), and detail for a/d < 0.2 (b).

enough data points, seven specimens were employed to construct

1000
Δσth=200 MPa Fig. 11a. The scatter observed in this graph may be attributed to
the experimental measurement technique, and principally to the
ΔK th = 4.2 MPa(m)1/2
use of several specimens, in which there were some variations in
Δσth=Δσ0 the aspect ratio between specimens with similar crack lengths.
As a preliminary approximation, an 8th order polynomial function
Δσth [MPa]

Δσ was used to relate the stiffness with the crack size on the entire
100
th =Δ range of a/d. Besides, a finite element analysis was performed in or-
K
th /(π der to corroborate the experimental result, finding a curve with
a) 1/2
similar profile, although deviated in some degree from the experi-
mental data. The numerical analysis was performed in very simple
l0 = 142μm way using 3D elements, and only the threaded rod was modeled in
several scenarios (i.e. different crack sizes and the same applied
10
10 100 1000 10000 load). Fig. 18 shows a detail of the generated mesh and result of
a [μm] displacement obtained with the performed FEA. This point can be
improved through more specific studies, either numerical [24] or
Fig. 16. Critical length separating short crack behavior and long crack behavior. experimentally.
Referred to the estimation of the multiplication factor Y(a/d),
the overlapping symbols in Fig. 14 indicates that the same overall
allowed to estimate the multiplication factor Y(a/d), by using a var- curve was obtained with all specimens. However, a wide scatter
iation of the James–Anderson technique, although in this case was found for a/d ratios near to 0 (see Fig. 14b), which is strongly
some scatter for low values of the a/d ratio was found, as Fig. 14 dependent on the sensitivity of the equipment employed to mea-
shows. sure the strain in the cylinder. To improve this point, it should be
The relationship between a/d and the system’s stiffness was used an equipment capable to discriminate small strain variation
obtained experimentally by using marks generated on the crack associated to the beginning of the crack growth. Anyway, this
front in the way already described. With the intention of obtaining scatter was not considered as an important factor in this stage of

Short Large
crack crack
behavior behavior

Lower limit (plane strain)

4.0

3.5
Lower limit
3.0 (plane stress)

2.5
Y (a/d)

2.0 Linear elastic fracture mechanics

1.5
Upper limit
1.0
(plane
0.5
strain)

0.0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80

a/d
Fig. 17. Validity range of the Y(a/d) estimated solution.
174 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175
Fig. 18. Detail of the generated mesh and result of displacement obtained with the performed FEA.
(a)
Bolt
Instrumented
thick washer
Plates
Nut
Fig. 19. Theoretical implementation of the proposed method in damage prognosis applications.
the study, as the applicability analysis based in linear elastic frac-
ture mechanics hypothesis showed that the solution is valid
around 0.04 < a/d < 0.6, where the scatter is less significative. For
the tested specimens, the limit for small a/d ratio is imposed by
small scale yielding (likely near to plane stress conditions) instead
of short crack behavior. The limit for large a/d ratio is also deter-
mined by small scale yielding, although in this case, under plane
strain state as a/d = 0.6. Due to the plastic radius cannot be normal-
ized, this validity range depends strongly on the size of the speci-
men, being wider for larger the specimen.
As Fig. 15 shows, the obtained results were contrasted with sev-
eral solutions proposed in the bibliography. It was found a signifi-
cant similarity with the curves proposed by Mettu et al. [9] and de
Koning et al. [21] for the range 0.1 < a/d < 0.4. When a/d < 0.1 the
estimated solution of Y(a/d) is slightly smaller than those proposed
in the bibliography (except in the case of the model proposed by
Mettu et al. [9], where residuals stresses were considered and
therefore significant departure is expectable). For a/d > 0.45 the
estimated solution of Y(a/d) is substantially smaller than those pro-
posed in the bibliography.
(b)
Possible location of instrumented
thick washers
Both results, the crack length a = f(n) and the dimensionless
stress intensity factor Y(a/d) are very promising due to their prac-
tical significance; the crack length may be used to evaluate the
damage of the joint, whereas the Y(a/d) may be used to estimate
the critical crack length and the fatigue remaining life by integrat-
ing the Paris law.
The employed method can be used with research purposes to
characterize the behavior of threaded rods or also it can be applied
to evaluate the structural health of the joint in real time and also in
damage prognosis analysis [25]. By way of illustration, two appli-
cation examples are shown in Fig. 19; a typical plate joint
(Fig. 19a) and an implementation over a tubular joint as those used
in oil drilling application (Fig. 19b).
5. Conclusions
A method for fatigue testing of threaded joints is presented. It
allows to perform tests in a very simple way, although retaining
all the complexities of real joints.
 I. Korin, J. Perez Ipiña / International Journal of Fatigue 33 (2011) 166–175
The crack initiation period can be separated from the crack
growth one and accounted with accuracy.
The crack length can be determined from the loss of stiffness of
the system, and good correlation was found with experimental
data.
The dimensionless stress intensity factor Y(a/d) of the bolt–nut
connection can be estimated and good correlation was found with
bibliographic data. The validity range of the found solution is quite
wide, although it depends on the size of the employed specimen.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thanks to CONICET and San Antonio Inter-
national S.A. for their permanent support.
References
[1] Goodier J. The distribution of load in threads of screws. J Appl Mech Trans
ASME 62; 1940, p. A10–A16.
[2] D’Eramo M, Cappa P. An experimental validation of load distribution in screw
threads. Exp Mech 1991;31:70–5.
[3] Pilkey W. Peterson’s stress concentration factors. 2nd Ed. New York: Wiley;
1997. [ISBN: 978-0-471-53849-3]
[4] Fetullazade E et al. Effects of the machining conditions on the strain hardening
and the residual stresses at the roots of screw threads. Mater Des
2009;31(4):2025–31.
[5] Bradley N. Influence of cold rolling threads before or after heat treatment on
the fatigue resistance of high strength fine thread bolts for multiple preload
conditions. In: Toor P, editor. ASTM STP 1487 structural integrity of fastener.
West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2007, p. 98–112.
[6] Oster M, Mills W. Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Cracks in Threaded
Fasteners. In: Toor P, editor. ASTM STP 1391 structural integrity of fasteners,
vol. 2. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2000, p. 85–101.
[7] Olsen K. Fatigue crack growth analyses of aerospace threaded fasteners – Part
I: State-of-practice bolt crack growth analyses method. In: Toor P, editor. ASTM
STP 1487 structural integrity of fastener. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM
International; 2007, p. 125–40.
[8] Toribio J et al. Stress intensity factor solutions for a cracked bolt under tension,
bending and residual stress loading. Eng Fract Mech 1991;39(2):359–71.
175
[9] Mettu S, et al. Stress intensity factor solutions for fasteners in NASGRO 3.0. In:
Toor P, editor. ASTM STP 1391 structural integrity of fasteners, vol. 2. West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2000, p. 133–9.
[10] James L, Anderson W. A simple procedure for stress intensity calibration. Eng
Fract Mech 1969;1:565–8.
[11] Shen H, Guo W. Modified James–Anderson method for stress intensity factors
of three-dimensional cracked bodies. Int J Fatigue 2005;27:624–8.
[12] ASTM E647. Standard test method for measurement of fatigue crack growth
rates. West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States: ASTM
International; 2008.
[13] Ragazzo C et al. A method for generating fatigue marker bands using a
constant Kmax test procedure. J Test Eval 1995;23:19–26.
[14] Liu A. Behavior of fatigue cracks in a tension bolt. In: Toor P, editor. ASTM STP
1236 structural integrity of fasteners. Philadelphia, PA: ASTM International;
1995, p. 126–40.
[15] Olsen K. Fatigue crack growth analyses of aerospace threaded fasteners – part
III: experimental crack growth behavior. In: Toor P, editor. ASTM STP 1487
structural integrity of fastener. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International;
2007, p. 17–28.
[16] Korin I, Perez Ipiña J. Controlled residual stresses introduction to improve
fatigue resistance of rotary shouldered connections used in oil drilling
industry. Int J Press Ves Pip; [submitted for publication].
[17] Hetenyi M. The distribution of stress in threaded connections. Exp Stress Anal
1943;5(2):147–56.
[18] Korin I, Larrainzar C, Perez Ipiña J. Crack length and stable crack extension
measurements from images acquired by means of a conventional flatbed
scanner. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 2008;30:876–84.
[19] Barsom J. Fracture and fatigue control in structures – ASTM manual. 3rd ed.
West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 1999.
[20] James L, Mills W. Review and synthesis of stress intensity factor solutions
applicable to cracks in bolts. Eng Fract Mech 1988;30:641–54.
[21] de Koning A. Assessment of 3D stress intensity factors distributions for nut
supported thread rods and bolt/nut assemblies. National Aerospase Laboratory
(NLR), under contract with the European Space Agency (ESA) at ESTEC, NLR CR
96692L; 1996.
[22] Perez Ipiña J. In: Alsina, editor. Mecánica de fractura. 1st ed. Argentina: Buenos
Aires; 2004.
[23] Lampman S, et al., editors. Fatigue and fracture. ASM Handbook, vol. 19.
Materials Park, OH 44073-0002: ASM International; 2002.
[24] Shih Y, Chen J. Analysis of fatigue crack growth on a cracked shaft. Int J Fatigue
1997;19:477485.
[25] Inman D, et al., editors. Damage prognosis. The Atrium, Southern Gate,
Chichester, West Sussex PO19 (SQ) (England): John Wiley & Sons Ltd.;
2005.