SURFACE J1099

REV.
JUN1998
VEHICLE
400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001
INFORMATION Issued 1975-02
REPORT Revised 1998-06

Superseding J1099 FEB75

Submitted for recognition as an American National Standard

(R) Technical Report on Low Cycle Fatigue Properties

Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Materials

Foreword—Designing a component to avoid fatigue failure is one of the more important, yet difficult, tasks an
engineer faces. Many factors are involved and the relationships between these factors are developed largely
through empiricism. Fatigue failure is caused by repeated loading with the number of loading cycles to failure
being dependent upon the load range.

Designing to avoid fatigue failure requires knowledge of the following:

a. The expected load-time history (the local strain-time and stress-time history at the most critical locations).
b. The geometry of the component and areas of stress concentration (geometrical, metallurgical, surface
finish, manufacturing variability, etc.)
c. The nature of the environment in which the component is operated (wet, dry, corrosive, temperature, etc.)
d. The properties of the material as it exists in the finished component at the most critically stressed locations
(“inherent” fatigue properties, residual stress effects, surface effects, sensitivity to corrosion, “cleanliness,”
variability, etc.)

Variability in fatigue life is another aspect of fatigue life evaluation and prediction that must be considered. This
often calls for statistical analysis. Circumstances dictate the degree of sophistication required in all aspects of an
evaluation or prediction.

1. Scope—Information that provides design guidance in avoiding fatigue failures is outlined in this SAE
Information Report. Of necessity, this report is brief, but it does provide a basis for approaching complex
fatigue problems. Information presented here can be used in preliminary design estimates of fatigue life, the
selection of materials and the analysis of service load and/or strain data. The data presented are for the "low
cycle" or strain-controlled methods for predicting fatigue behavior. Note that these methods may not be
appropriate for materials with internal defects, such as cast irons, which exhibit different tension and
compression stress-strain behavior.

SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely
voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of the user.”

SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be reaffirmed, revised, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions.

QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS DOCUMENT: (724) 772-8512 FAX: (724) 776-0243

TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER; (724) 776-4970 FAX: (724) 776-0790
SAE WEB ADDRESS http://www.sae.org

Copyright 1998 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A.
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

2. References

2.1 Applicable Publications—The following publications form a part of the specification to the extent specified
herein. Unless otherwise indicated, the latest revision of SAE publications shall apply.

1. Mitchell, M. R., Fundamentals of Modern Fatigue Analysis for Design, ASM, Vol. 19, Fatigue and
Fracture, 1997.
2. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Metals—Mechanical Testing: Elevated and Low Temperature Tests;
Metallography, Standard E 606-80, "Constant-Amplitude Low-Cycle Fatigure Testing," Vol. 3.01,
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1996.
3. Dowling, N.E., Mechanical Behavior of Materials; Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and
Fatigue, Prentice-Hall, 1993.
4. Chernenkoff, R.A., Editor, Fatigue Research and Applications, SP-1009, Society of Automotive
Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1993.
5. Rice, R. C., Editor, Fatigue Design Handbook (A-10), 1988, Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400
Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.
6. Boardman, B. E., Crack Initiation Fatigue-Data, Analysis, Trends and Estimation, Proceeding of the
SAE Fatigue Conference, P109, Society for Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1982.
7. Wetzel, R. M., Editor, Fatigue Under Complex Loadings: Analysis and Experiments, AE-6, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1977.
8. Bannantine, J., Comer, J., and Handrock, J., Fundamentals of Metal Fatigue Analysis, Prentice-Hall,
1989.
9. Multiaxial Fatigue; Analysis and Experiments, AE-14, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale,
PA, 1989.
10. Fuchs, H. O. and Stephens, R. I., Metal Fatigue in Engineering, John Wiley and Sons, 1980.
11. Bridgeman, P. W., Transactions of ASM, American Society for Metals, Vol. 32, p. 553, 1944; (also
Dieter, G. E. Mechanical Metallurgy, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1961, New York, NY, pp. 250-254.
12. Raske, D. T. and Morrow, JoDean, "Mechanics of Materials in Low Cycle Fatigue Testing, Manual on
Low Cycle Fatigue Testing," ASTM STP 465, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1969, pp. 1-
25.
13. Landgraf, R. W., Morrow, JoDean, and Endo, T., "Determination of the Cyclic Stress-Strain Curve,"
Journal of Materials, ASTM, Vol. 4, No. 1, March 1969, pp. 176-188.
14. Gallagher, J. P., "What the Designer Should Know About Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals," Paper
710151 presented at SAE Automotive Engineering Congress, Detroit, January 1971.
15. Sinclair, G. M., "What the Designer Should Know About Fracture Mechanics Testing," Paper 710152
presented at SAE Automotive Engineering Congress, January 1971.
16. Ripling, E. J., "How Fracture Mechanics Can Help the Designer," Paper 710153 presented at SAE
Automotive Engineering Congress, Detroit, January 1971.
17. Campbell, J. E., Berry, W. E., and Fedderson, C. E., "Damage Tolerant Design Handbook," MCIC HB-
01, Metal and Ceramics Information Center, Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH.
18. Jaske, C. E., Fedderson, C. E., Davies, K. B., Rice, R. C., "Analysis of Fatigue, Fatigue Crack
Propagation and Fracture Data," NASA CR-132332, Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus, OH,
November 1973.
19. Moore, T. D., "Structural Alloys Handbook," Mechanical Properties Data Center, BelFour Stulen, Inc.,
Traverse City, MI.
20. Wolf, J., Brown, W. F., Jr., "Aerospace Structural Metals Handbook," Vol. 1-4, Mechanical Properties
Data Center, BelFour Stulen, Inc., Traverse City, MI.
21. Raske, D. T., "Review of Methods for Relating the Fatigue Notch Factor to the Theoretical Stresss
Concentration Factor, Simulation of the Fatigue Behavior of the Notch Root in Spectrum Loaded
Notched Members," Chapter II, TAM Report No. 333--Department of Theoretical and Applied
Mechanics, University of Illinois, Urbana, January 1970.
22. Topper, T. H., Wetzel, R. M. and Morrow, JoDean, "Neuber’s Rule Applied to Fatigue of Notched
Specimens," Journal of Materials, ASTM, Vol. 4, No. 1, March 1969, pp. 200-209.

-2-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

23. Tucker, L. E., "A Procedure for Designing Against Fatigue Failure of Notched Parts," SAE Paper No.
720265, Society of Automotive Engineers, New York, NY 10001.
24. Dowling, N. E., "Fatigue Failure Predictions for Complicated Stress-Strain Histories," J. Materials,
ASTM, March 1972; (see also: Fatigue Failure Predictions for Complicated Stress-Strain Histories.
TAM Report No. 337, Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Dept., University of Illinois, Urbana, 1970.
25. Morrow, JoDean, "Cyclic Plastic Strain Energy and Fatigue of Metals," Internal Friction, Damping, and
Cyclic Plasticity, ASTM STP 378, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1965, pp 45-87.
26. Miller, G. A., and Reemsnyder, H. S., "Strain-Cycle Fatigue of Sheet and Plate Steels I: Test Method
Development and Data Presentation," SAE Paper No. 830175, 1983.
27. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Metals—Mechanical Testing; Elevated and Low Temperature Tests;
Metallography, Standard E 739-91, "Statistical Analysis of Linear or Linearized Stress-Life and Strain-
Life Fatigue Data," Vol. 3.01, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
1995.

3. Material Property Tables—Tables 2 to 4 list the monotonic and cyclic stress-strain properties and the fatigue
properties for selected materials. These tables are preceded by a brief introduction, definitions, discussion,
and Table 1 which lists the abbreviations used in this document.

The majority of the properties listed in the Tables have been contributed by members of the SAE Fatigue,
Design, and Evaluation Committee and are the property of SAE International, Warrendale, PA, 15096.
Researchers are encouraged to contribute their data and may do so by contacting the Fatigue Design and
Evaluation Committee through the SAE.

For several materials commonly used in the as-received condition, there are numerous data sets available.
These have been reported as a single value or a range and are identified as to which data were involved. As
defined, these properties are from specimens tested in ambient environments and, therefore, do not include
such influences as environmental effects (wet or corrosive conditions, elevated temperature, etc.), surface
roughness effects, mean stress effects, notch effects, etc.

There are many procedures for using this information for design purposes. They are too lengthy to be included
in this report; however, there are a number of publications which discuss these procedures. Several key
references [1-27] that discuss fatigue properties, methods for determining fatigue properties, and illustrate the
use of these data for making design decision are listed in Section 2.

4. Monotonic Stress-Strain Properties

4.1 Monotonic stress-strain properties are generally determined by testing a smooth polished specimen under
axial loading. The load, diameter and/or strain on the uniform test section is measured during the test in order
to determine the materials stress-strain response as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. Properties, most of which
are discrete points on the stress-strain curve, can be defined to describe the behavior of a material.

4.2 Ultimate Tensile Strength (Su)—The engineering stress at maximum load. In a ductile material, it occurs at
the onset of necking in the specimen.

S u = P max ⁄ A o (Eq. 1)

where:

Pmax = maximum load

Ao = original cross sectional area

-3-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

4.3 True Fracture Strength (σf)—The "true" tensile stress required to cause fracture.

σ f = Pf ⁄ A f (Eq. 2)

where:

Pf = load at failure
Af = minimum cross sectional area after failure

The value σf must be corrected for the effect of triaxial stress present due to necking. One such correction
suggested by Bridgeman [11] is illustrated in Figure 3. In this figure, the ratio of the corrected value to the
uncorrected value (σf/(Pf/Af)) is plotted against true tensile strain.

4.4 Tensile Yield Strength (Sys, σ ys)—The stress to cause a specified amount of inelastic strain, usually 0.2%. It
is usually determined by constructing a line of slope E (modulus of elasticity) through 0.2% strain and zero
stress. The stress where the constructed line intercepts the stress-strain curve is taken as the yield strength.

4.5 Percentage Reduction of Area (% RA)—The percentage of reduction in cross sectional area after fracture.

%RA = 100 ( A o – A f ⁄ A o ) (Eq. 3)

4.6 True Fracture Ductibility (ε f)—The “true” plastic strain after fracture.

ε f = ln (Ao ⁄ A f ) = ln ( 100 ⁄ ( 100 – %RA ) ) (Eq. 4)

4.7 Monotonic Strain Hardening Exponent (n)—The power to which the "true" plastic strain must be raised to be
directly proportional to the "true" stress. It is generally taken as the slope of log σ versus log εp plot as shown
in Figure 2.
n
σ = K εp (Eq. 5)

4.8 Monotonic Strength Coefficient (K)—The “true” stress at a “true” plastic strain of unity as shown in Figure 2.
If the value of the true fracture ductility is less than 1.0, it is necessary to extrapolate. (see Equation 5).

4.8.1 Monotonic tension properties of a material can be classed into two groups, engineering stress-strain
properties and “true” stress-strain properties. Engineering properties are associated with the original cross
sectional area of the test specimen, and “true” values relate to actual area while the specimen is under load.
The difference between “true” and engineering values is insignificant in the low strain region, less than or
equal to 2% strain.

4.8.2 Until the test bar begins to locally neck, some simple relationships exist between engineering and “true”
stress-strain values. Equation 6 gives the relationship between engineering and true strain.

ε = ln ( 1 + e ) (Eq. 6)

where:

ε = “true” strain
e = engineering strain

-4-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

Similarly, Equation 7 relates true stress to engineering stress.

σ = S( 1 + e) (Eq. 7)

where:

σ = “true” stress
S = engineering stress

These relationships do not apply after onset of necking.

4.8.2.1 A more detailed discussion and derivation of monotonic stress-strain properties can be found in ASTM
STP 465 [12]. Figures 1 and 2 graphically illustrate a majority of these properties.

5. Cyclic Stress-Strain Properties

5.1 Cyclic stress-strain properties are determined by testing smooth polished specimens under axial cyclic strain
control conditions. The cyclic stress-strain curve is defined as the locus of tips of stable “true” stress-strain
hysteresis loops each obtained from a constant amplitude test specimen. A typical stable hysteresis loop is
illustrated in Figure 4 and a set of stable loops with a cyclic stress-strain curve down through the loop tips is
illustrated in Figure 5. As illustrated, the height of the loop from tip-to-tip is defined as the stress range. For
completely reversed testing, one-half of the stress range is generally equal to the stress amplitude while one-
half of the width from tip-to-tip is defined as the strain amplitude. Plastic strain amplitude is found by
subtracting the elastic strain amplitude from the strain amplitude as indicated in Equations 8, 9, and 10.

∆ε p ⁄ 2 = ∆ε ⁄ 2 – ∆ε e ⁄ 2 (Eq. 8)

According to Hooke’s law,

∆ε e ⁄ 2 = ∆σ ⁄ 2 E (Eq. 9)

where:

E = modulus of elasticity

∆ε p ⁄ 2 = ∆ε ⁄ 2 – ∆σ ⁄ 2 E (Eq. 10)

5.2 A more complete discussion of the cyclic stress-strain curve and other methods of obtaining the curve are
given in STP 465 [12] and [4].

5.3 Cyclic Yield Strength (0.2% σ ys)—The stress to cause 0.2% inelastic strain as measured on a cyclic stress-
strain curve. It is usually determined by constructing a line parallel to the slope of the cyclic stress-strain curve
at zero stress through 0.2% strain. The stress where the constructed line intercepts the cyclic stress-strain
curve is taken as the 0.2% cyclic yield strength.

5.4 Cyclic Strain Hardening Exponent (n′)—The power to which “true” plastic strain amplitude must be raised to
be directly proportional to “true” stress amplitude. It is taken as the slope of the log ∆σ/2 versus log ∆εp/2 plot,
where ∆σ/2 and ∆εp/2 are measured from cyclically stable hysteresis loops.
n′
( ∆σ ) ⁄ 2 = K ′ ( ∆ε p ⁄ 2 ) (Eq. 11)

where:

∆εp/2 = “true” plastic strain amplitude

-5-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

The line defined by this equation is illustrated in Figure 6.

5.5 Cyclic Strength Coefficient (K′ )—The “true” stress at a “true” plastic strain of unity in Equation 11. It may be
necessary to extrapolate as indicated in Figure 6.

5.5.1 Stress-strain response of some materials can change significantly when subjected to inelastic strains such
as can occur nominally or at notch roots due to cyclic loading. When fatigue failure occurs, particularly low
cycle fatigue, such inelastic straining is present. Hence, the cyclic stress-strain curve best represents the
materials stress-strain response rather than the monotonic stress-strain curve.

5.5.2 In many field test situations, it may be desirable to convert measured strains to stress in order to estimate
fatigue life. The cyclic stress-strain curve can be described with an equation using the cyclic properties.
Equation 10 can be rewritten by rearranging the terms as shown in Equation 12.

∆ε ⁄ 2 = ∆σ ⁄ 2E + ∆ε p ⁄ 2 (Eq. 12)

Rearranging the terms in Equation 11 indicates the relationship between plastic strain amplitude and stress
amplitude.
1 ⁄ n′
∆ε p ⁄ 2 = ( ∆σ ⁄ 2K ′ ) (Eq. 13)

Substituting Equation 13 into Equation 12 yields an equation relating cyclic strain amplitude to cyclic stress
amplitude in terms of the previously defined properties and the modulus of elasticity.
1 ⁄ n′
∆ε ⁄ 2 = ∆σ ⁄ 2 E + ( ∆σ ⁄ 2K ′ ) (Eq. 14)

5.5.3 For a more detailed discussion see STP 465 [12].

6. Fatigue Properties

6.1 Fatigue resistance of materials can be described in terms of the number of constant amplitude stress or strain
reversals required to cause failure. The properties defined in this section are determined on smooth polished
axial specimens tested under strain control. Stress amplitude, elastic and plastic strain amplitude and total
strain amplitude can each be plotted against reversals to failure. The plot of log “true” plastic strain amplitude
and log "true" stress amplitude versus log reversals to failure are typically straight lines as illustrated in Figures
7 and 8. The intercept at one reversal and the slope of these straight lines can be described as fatigue
parameters.

6.2 Fatigue Ductility Exponent (c)—The power to which the life in reversals, 2Nf, is raised to be directly
proportional to the “true” plastic strain amplitude. It is taken as the slope of the log (∆εp/2) versus log (2Nf) plot.

6.3 Fatigue Ductility Coefficient (εf′)—The “true” plastic strain required to cause failure in one reversal. It is
taken as the intercept of the log (∆εp/2) versus log (2Nf) plot at 2Nf = 1.

6.4 Fatigue Strength Exponent (b)—The power to which life in reversals must be raised to be directly
proportional to “true” stress amplitude. It is taken as the slope of the log (∆σ/2) versus log (2Nf) plot.

6.5 Fatigue Strength Coefficient (σ ′ f)—The “true” stress required to cause failure in one reversal. It is taken as
the intercept of the log (∆σ/2) versus log (2Nf) plot at 2Nf = 1.

6.6 Transition Fatigue Life (2Nt)—The life where elastic and plastic components of the total strain are equal. It is
the life at which the plastic and elastic strain-life lines cross.

-6-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

6.7 A materials resistance to strain cycling can be considered as the summation of the elastic and plastic
resistance as indicated by Equation 15.

∆ε ⁄ 2 = ( ∆ε e ⁄ 2 ) + ( ∆ε p ⁄ 2 ) (Eq. 15)

An equation of the “true” plastic strain-life relationship can be written in terms of the previous fatigue properties
(Figure 8).
c
∆ε p ⁄ 2 = ε f ′ ( 2N f ) (Eq. 16)

where 2Nf is reversals to failure. The “true” elastic strain-life relationship is simply the stress-life relationship
divided by the modulus of elasticity (Figure 7).
b
∆ε e ⁄ 2 = ( σ f ´ ⁄ E ) ( 2N f ) (Eq. 17)

Substituting Equations 16 and 17 into Equation 15 gives an equation between “true” strain amplitude and
reversals to failure in terms of the fatigue parameters.
b c
∆ε ⁄ 2 = ( σ f ′ ⁄ E ) ( 2N f ) + ε f ′ ( 2N f ) (Eq. 18)

Equation 18 is illustrated in Figure 9.

Specimen failure may be defined several ways. Current definitions include complete separation, a change in
hysteresis loop shape, and one of several percentage drop in stress. For several materials, the choice can
effect the results. ASTM E 606 [2] should be consulted for current practice.

Sample geometry may have an effect on the fatigue results due to differences in surface residual stress,
surface condition, gage length, and shape. Consult ASTM E 606 [2] for current practice.

A statistical treatment of these properties can be useful when making comparisons between materials or
between many of the variables within a material grade. Numerous attempts have been made to describe these
properties such that statistical lower limits for a specification could be determined. As yet, this has been
somewhat less than successful. A more complete treatment of the procedures and sources of potential error
may be found in ASTM E 739.

Estimating these fatigue properties, in the absence of test data, is not recommended: but, it is recognized that
there will be times when the practitioner will require data and none will be available. As a first estimate, one
might consider using data from a similar material in a similar condition at the same hardness or strength. A
summary of estimating procedures and their use in included in Reference 6.

-7-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 1—ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Full-Term
HR Hot-Rolled
CC Continuous Casting
IC Ingot Casting
SH Sheet
CR Cold Rolled
CD Cold Drawn
MOD Modified
BA Batch Annealed
GA Galvannealed
HT Heat Treated
HDG Hot-Dip Galvanized
ANN Annealed
Norm. Normalized
Q&T Quenched & Tempered
As-rec. As Received
UTS Ultimate Tensile Strength
RA % Reduction in Area
K Strength Coefficient
n Strain Hardening Exponent
E Modulus of Elasticity
σf ′ Fatigue Strength Coefficient
b Fatigue Strength Exponent
εf ′ Fatigue Ductility Coefficient
C Fatigue Ductility Exponent
K Cyclic Strength Coefficient
n Cyclic Strain Hardening Exponent

-8-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2A—STEEL—MONOTONIC PROPERTIES

Material Test Yield—0.2% UTS RA K E
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) (MPa) % (MPa) n (GPa)
1004 HR,CC As-rec. 287 378
1004 HR,CC 472 490

1005 HR,IC As-rec. 226 321

1005 HR,IC As-rec. 234 356
1005 HR,IC As-rec. 245 323
1005 HR,IC As-rec. 267 359

1008 HR,CC As-rec. 252 363

1008 HR,CC As-rec. 273 399
1008 HR,CC 381 392
1008 HR,CC 424 433
1008 HR,SH As-rec. 86 234 331 77.5 0.190 207
1008 HR,SH As-rec. 90 255 365 77.9 0.184 203

1010 HR,SH As-rec. 200 331 80.4 534 0.185 203

1010 HR,SH As-rec. 203
1010 HR,SH 203

1015 HR,SH Norm. 80 228 414 68 207

1020 HR,SH As-rec. 109 262 441 61.8 738 0.190 203
1020 CR,SH As-rec. 108 255 393 64 400 0.072 186

1025 HR,SH As-rec. 306 547 62.6 1142 0.281 207

1035 HR,Bar As-rec. 443 641

1035 HR,Bar As-rec. 448 623

1040 CD,Bar As-rec. 637 759

10V40 HR,Bar As-rec. 572 802

1045 CD Annealed 225 517 752 44

1045 Q&T 500 1689 1827 51 0.047 207
1045 HR,Bar Q&T 595 1862 2241 41 0.071 207
1045 HR,Bar Norm. 192 424 718 48
1045 HR,Bar HT 277 620 942 39
1045 HR,Bar HT 336 787 1322 21
1045 HR,Bar HT 410 865 1516 6
1045 HR,Bar HT 563 1636 2297 18
1045 HR,Bar HT 500 1729 1956 38.3 2352 0.041 207
1045 HR,Bar HT 390 1275 1344 59 0.044 207

10B21 HT 318 999 1048 67.6 1295 0.054 197

10B21 HT 255 806 834 203
10B22 HT 255 806 834 203

15B27 HT 250 772 847 69 0.075 203

-9-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2A—STEEL—MONOTONIC PROPERTIES

Material Test Yield—0.2% UTS RA K E
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) (MPa) % (MPa) n (GPa)
15B27 HT 264 854 916 66.5 0.065 203

94B30 HT 285 799 896 63 1378 0.062 200

HF 50 HR As-rec. 342 416
HF 50 HR As-rec. 359 442
HF 50 HR As-rec. 361 441
HF 50 HR As-rec. 375 461
HF 50 HR As-rec. 383 448
HF 50 HR As-rec. 385 448
HF 50 HR As-rec. 403 479
HF 50 HR As-rec. 417 492
HF 50 HR As-rec. 428 474

HF 60 HR As-rec. 416 481

HF 60 HR As-rec. 431 479
HF 60 HR As-rec. 434 525
HF 60 HR As-rec. 456 534
HF 60 HR As-rec. 459 533
HF 60 HR As-rec. 466 558

HF 70 HR As-rec. 505 570

HF 70 HR As-rec. 521 628

HF 80 HR As-rec. 557 617

HF 80 HR As-rec. 569 697
HF 80 HR As-rec. 579 756
HF 80 HR As-rec. 580 654
HF 80 HR As-rec. 581 645
HF 80 HR As-rec. 585 635
HF 80 HR As-rec. 596 657
HF 80 HR As-rec. 605 681
HF 80 HR As-rec. 642 719
HF 80 HR 710 711

DDQ+ CR,BA As-rec. 152 306

DQSK CR,BA As-rec. 171 307

HF 40 CR,BA As-rec. 279 370

HF 50 CR,BA As-rec. 357 490

HF 50 CR,BA As-rec. 439 496

50Y60T CR,CA As-rec. 417 554

80Y90T CR,CA As-rec. 603 747

DDQ+ GA As-rec. 140 292

DDQ+ HDG As-rec. 179 303
DDQ HA As-rec. 150 279
DQSK HDG As-rec. 185 321

-10-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2A—STEEL—MONOTONIC PROPERTIES

Material Test Yield—0.2% UTS RA K E
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) (MPa) % (MPa) n (GPa)
CQ HDG As-rec. 314 352

HF 60 HDG As-rec. 424 501

4130 HT 366 1358 1427 54.7 200

4130 HT 259 778 896 67.3 221

4140 HT 293 848 938 1303 0.094 207

4140 HT 475 1895 2033 20.0 200

4142 HT 400 1447 1551 47.0 0.032 200

4142 HT 450 1860 1929 37.0 0.016 200
4142 HT 380 1378 1413 48.0 0.051 207
4142 HT 670 1619 2446 6.0 0.136 200
4142 HT 450 1584 1757 42.0 0.043 207
4142 HT 475 1722 1929 35.0 0.048 207

4340 HT 409 1371 1468 38.1 200

4340 HT 275 834 1048 190
4340 HR 243 634 827 43.4 193
4340 HT 1102 1171 56 1358 0.036 207

5160 HT 430 1488 1584 39.7 1941 0.0463 203

5160 MOD 1565 1755

51V45 1871 2108

52100 HT 519 1922 2912 11.2 207

Cast Steel

0030 Cast 137 303 496 46 207

0050A Cast 192 415 787 19 209
Cast 174 402 583 26 209
Cast 206 542 702 211
8630 Cast 305 985 1144 29 207

-11-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2B—STEEL CYCLIC PROPERTIES

Material Test σ f′ K′′ Data
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) b ε f′ c (MPa) n′′ Points
1004 HR,CC As-rec. 1159 –0.142 1.300 –0.649 781-x 0.180-x
1004 HR,CC 1019 –0.124 1.450 –0.701 561-x 0.180-x

1005 HR,IC As-rec. 888 –0.137 0.280 –0.505 1208-x 0.260-x

1005 HR,IC As-rec. 878 –0.129 0.460 –0.536 834-x 0.200-x
1005 HR,IC As-rec. 1024 –0.151 0.290 –0.509 1254-x 0.270-x
1005 HR,IC As-rec. 776 –0.126 0.240 –0.466 626-x 0.170-x

1008 HR,CC As-rec. 1225 –0.143 0.350 –0.522 1706-x 0.240-x

1008 HR,CC As-rec. 1016 –0.136 0.210 –0.473 958-x 0.220-x
1008 HR,CC 2012 –0.195 1.050 687-x 0.160-x
1008 HR,CC 1069 –0.126 0.940 605-x 0.130-x
1008 HR,SH As-rec. 86 1124 –0.172 0.460 –0.543 1443-c 0.318-c 16
1008 HR,SH As-rec. 90 1007 –0.159 0.500 –0.054 1234-c 0.290-c 51

1010 HR,SH As-rec. 499 –0.100 0.104 –0.408 867-c 0.244-c 18

1010 HR,SH As-rec. 634 –0.109 0.145 –0.426 1040-c 0.256-c 39
1010 HR,SH 888 –0.148 0.408 –0.521 1145-c 0.284-c 51

1015 HR,SH Norm. 80 884 –0.124 0.729 –0.581 945-c 0.213-c 31

1020 HR,SH As-rec. 109 1384 –0.156 0.337 –0.485 1962-c 0.321-c 12
1020 CR,SH As-rec. 108 697 –0.116 0.136 –0.405 1233-c 0.286-c 8

1025 HR,SH As-rec. 934 –0.107 0.590 –0.520 1042-c 0.207-c 9

1035 HR,Bar As-rec. 2034 –0.172 3.670 –0.860 865-x 0.140-x

1035 HR,Bar As-rec. 1491 –0.152 1.560 –0.729 838-x 0.090-x

1040 CD,Bar As-rec. 1311 –0.103 0.848 –0.612 915-x 0.131-x

10V40 HR,Bar As-rec. 1287 –0.092 0.316 –0.577 1371-x 0.150-x

1045 CD Annealed 225 916 –0.079 0.486 –0.520 1022-c 0.152-c

1045 Q&T 500 2661 –0.093 0.196 –0.643 3371-c 0.145-c 9
1045 HR,Bar Q&T 595 3294 –0.104 0.220 –0.868 3947-c 0.120-c 9
1045 HR,Bar Norm. 192 1439 –0.127 0.525 –0.522 1401-c 0.212-c
1045 HR,Bar HT 277 2906 –0.161 0.786 –0.579 1770-c 0.191-c
1045 HR,Bar HT 336 3403 –0.151 0.458 –0.560 2066-c 0.165-c
1045 HR,Bar HT 410 4385 –0.167 0.491 –0.491 3048-c 0.208-c
1045 HR,Bar HT 563 5813 –0.154 1.379 –1.082 3083-c 0.075-c
1045 HR,Bar HT 500 2636 –0.086 0.210 –0.551 3366-c 0.157-c 9
1045 HR,Bar HT 390 1785 –0.086 1.207 –0.825 1751-c 0.104-c 10

10B21 HT 318 1204 –0.063 3.709 –0.832 1089-c 0.076-c 8

10B21 HT 255 922 –0.063 2.377 –0.753 858-c 0.083-c 11
10B22 HT 255 841 –0.043 1.928 –0.738 809-c 0.058-c 11
NOTE— x = experimental—from raw data
c = calculated—K′ = σf′/(εf′)n¢—n′ = b/c

-12-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2B—STEEL CYCLIC PROPERTIES

Material Test σ f′ K′′ Data
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) b ε f′ c (MPa) n′′ Points
15B27 HT 250 938 –0.057 1.689 –0.784 903-c 0.072-c 6
15B27 HT 264 1062 –0.059 1.575 –0.782 1026-c 0.075-c 6

HF 50 HR As-rec. 112 –0.117 0.940 –0.676 694-x 0.132-x

HF 50 HR As-rec. 686 –0.074 0.337 –0.540 761-x 0.129-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 732 –0.09 1.384 –0.703 684-x 0.124-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 889 –0.055 0.345 –0.563 632-x 0.092-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 959 –0.102 3.189 –0.794 745-x 0.116-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 1088 –0.116 2.828 –0.790 785-x 0.127-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 1000 –0.102 0.563 –0.622 1014-x 0.151-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 1218 –0.118 1.932 –0.771 1056-x 0.147-x
HF 50 HR As-rec. 1378 –0.143 3.091 –0.807 694-x 0.110-x

HF 60 HR As-rec. 895 –0.091 0.967 –0.750 687-x 0.094-x

HF 60 HR As-rec. 1113 –0.109 0.754 –0.670 1029-x 0.143-x
HF 60 HR As-rec. 1074 –0.105 0.429 –0.598 1152-x 0.163-x
HF 60 HR As-rec. 913 –0.091 0.226 –0.552 1134-x 0.161-x
HF 60 HR As-rec. 744 –0.063 0.451 –0.598 792-x 0.103-x
HF 60 HR As-rec. 976 –0.88 1.007 –0.705 876-x 0.106-x

HF 70 HR As-rec. 1461 –0.123 6.052 –0.904 937-x 0.101-x

HF 70 HR As-rec. 1230 –0.104 4.202 –0.843 1251-x 0.173-x

HF 80 HR As-rec. 1239 –0.108 1.053 –0.771 1125-x 0.122-x

HF 80 HR As-rec. 1428 –0.105 1.816 –0.861 1287-x 0.118-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 2126 –0.152 3.217 –0.934 1389-x 0.133-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1145 –0.091 1.104 –0.717 1091-x 0.124-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1451 –0.113 5.289 –0.958 1122-x 0.170-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1379 –0.112 1.979 –0.820 984-x 0.100-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1512 –0.119 2.214 –0.826 981-x 0.096-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1818 –0.134 1.641 –0.830 1387-x 0.139-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 2008 –0.131 7.185 –0.985 1285-x 0.115-x
HF 80 HR As-rec. 1704 –0.118 0.764 –0.670 1061-x 0.117-x

DDQ+ CR,BA As-rec. 607 –0.116 0.125 –0.437 832-x 0.234-x

DQSK CR,BA As-rec. 591 –0.105 0.155 –0.450 694-x 0.196-x
HF 40 CR,BA As-rec. 753 –0.103 0.222 –0.477 596-x 0.134-x
HF 50 CR,BA As-rec. 536 –0.047 4.118 –0.883 481-x 0.049-x
HF 50 CR,BA As-rec. 571 –0.057 2.046 –0.787 516-x 0.64-x

50Y60T CR,CA As-rec. 912 –0.095 0.127 –0.366 935-x 0.174-x

80Y90T CR,CA As-rec. 2744 –0.173 0.448 –0.548 2221-x 0.267-x

DDQ+ GA As-rec. 430 –0.083 0.066 –0.430 641-x 0.201-x

DDQ+ HDG As-rec. 564 –0.103 0.122 –0.428 635-x 0.178-x
DDQ HA As-rec. 545 –0.102 0.082 –0.388 1143-x 0.289-x
DQSK HDG As-rec. 875 –0.134 0.142 –0.418 824-x 0.214-x
CQ HDG As-rec. 561 –0.089 15.240 –0.956 419-x 0.088-x
NOTE— x = experimental—from raw data
c = calculated—K′ = σf′/(εf′)n¢—n′ = b/c

-13-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 2B—STEEL CYCLIC PROPERTIES

Material Test σ f′ K′′ Data
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) b ε f′ c (MPa) n′′ Points
HF 60 HDG As-rec. 572 –0.053 20.116 –0.810 531-x 0.068-x

4130 HT 366 1655 –0.076 0.803 –0.672 1696-c 0.114-c 14

4130 HT 259 1261 –0.077 0.985 –0.648 1264-c 0.119-c 21

4140 HT 293 1163 –0.062 2.360 –0.765 1084-c 0.082-c 18

4140 HT 475 1832 –0.070 0.400 –0.867 1974-c 0.081-c 10

4142 HT 400 1787 –0.084 1.195 –0.859 1756-c 0.098-c 10

4142 HT 450 2079 –0.086 2.620 –0.972 1910-c 0.088-c 9
4142 HT 380 2143 –0.094 0.637 –0.761 2266-c 0.124-c 8
4142 HT 670 2549 –0.078 0.003 –0.436 7119-c 0.179-c 10
4142 HT 450 1937 –0.076 0.706 –0.869 1997-c 0.088-c 10
4142 HT 475 2161 –0.081 0.331 –0.854 2399-c 0.094-c 7

4340 HT 409 1879 –0.859 0.640 –0.636 1996-c 0.135-c 14

4340 HT 275 1276 –0.075 1.224 –0.714 1249-c 0.105-c 6
4340 HR 243 1198 –0.095 0.522 –0.563 1337-c 0.168-c 11
4340 HT 1165 –0.058 5.492 –0.850 1037-c 0.069-c 10

5160 HT 430 2054 –0.081 1.571 –0.821 1964-c 0.099-c 24

5160 MOD 3553 –0.125 11.532 –1.095 2065x 0.089-x

51V45 4585 –0.150 35.560 –1.442 2799-x 0.090-x

52100 HT 519 2709 –0.096 0.243 –0.642 3348-c 0.150-c 16

Cast Steel

0030 Cast 137 655 –0.083 0.280 –0.552 738-c 0.136-c

0050A Cast 192 1338 –0.127 0.300 –0.569 1165-c 0.171-c
Cast 174 869 –0.101 0.150 –0.514 896-c 0.141-c
Cast 206 1117 –0.101 0.780 –0.729 786-c 0.960-c
8630 Cast 305 1936 –0.121 0.420 –0.693 1502-c 0.122-c
NOTE— x = experimental—from raw data
c = calculated—K′ = σf′/(εf′)n¢—n′ = b/c

-14-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 3A—STAINLESS STEEL AND LIGHT NONFERROUS ALLOYS—

MONOTONIC PROPERTIES
Material Test Yield—0.2% UTS RA K E
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) (MPa) % (MPa) n (GPa)
Stainless Steel
304 CD 327 744 951 68.8 172
304 ANN As-rec. 276 572 190
310 ANN As-rec. 230 592 144
310 ANN 142 221 641 63.5 193

Aluminum

1100 T6 26 97 87.6 69
2014 T6 255 461 510 25 69
5086 217 72
5182 O 116 279 60 318 0.119 75
5456 H311 95 234 400 34.6 69
6009 T4 103 226 60 256 0.112 74
6009 T6 259 301 59 351 0.03 66

A356 T6 Cast 93 229 283 5.7 388 0.083 70

A356 T6 Cast 93 224 266 3 397 0.087 70
A356 T6 Cast 89 181 268 8.5 69

Cast Aluminum MMC

A356 T6 Cast 280 318 3 585 0.107 102

Cast Magnesium

AZ91E T6 Cast 142 318 12.8 639 0.137 45

-15-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 3B—STAINLESS STEEL AND LIGHT NONFERROUS ALLOYS—

CYCLIC PROPERTIES
Material Test σ f′ K′′ Data
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) b ε f′ c (MPa) n′′ Points
Stainless Steel
304 CD 327 2047 –0.112 0.554 –0.635 2270-x 0.176-c 11
304 ANN As-rec. 1267 –0.139 0.174 –0.415 2275-c 0.334-c 8
310 ANN As-rec. 1036 –0.140 0.334 –0.465 1442-c 0.302-c 8
310 ANN 142 1660 –0.155 0.553 –0.553 1960-c 0.281-c 15

Aluminum

1100 T6 26 166 –0.096 1.643 –0.669 154-c 0.144-c 12

2014 T6 255 1008 –0.114 1.418 –0.870 963-c 0.132-c 12
5086 491 –0.081 0.118 –0.578 662-c 0.139-c 7
5182 O 768 –0.114 0.293 –0.592 974-c 0.193-c 10
5456 H311 95 826 –0.115 1.076 –0.797 817-c 0.145-c 11
6009 T4 571 –0.983 0.924 –0.794 577-c 0.124-c 11
6009 T6 588 –0.957 0.561 –0.746 633-c 0.128-c 12

A356 T6 Cast 93 594 –0.124 0.027 –0.530 379-x 0.043-c

A356 T6 Cast 93 502 –0.119 0.017 –0.544 383-x 0.050-c
A356 T6 Cast 89 491 –0.087 0.063 –0.540 372-x 0.044-c

Cast Aluminum MMC

A356 T6 Cast 520 –0.104 0.019 –0.717 925-c 0.155-c

Cast Magnesium

AZ91E T6 Cast 831 –0.148 0.089 –0.451 552-c 0.184-c

NOTE— x = experimental—from raw data
c = calculated—K′ = σf′/(εf′)n′—n′ = b/c

-16-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

TABLE 4A—MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS—

MONOTONIC PROPERTIES—LIMITED DATA
Caution—no long life data points
Material Test Yield—0.2% UTS RA K E
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) (MPa) % (MPa) n (GPa)
1005 HR 86 236 356 81.2 617 0.214 207
1005 HR 86 245 323 68.9 536 0.191 207
1005 HR 86 225 321 73.4 549 0.207 207
1005 HR 86 267 359 70.2 602 0.19 207

1045 HT 450 1515 1584 55 0.041 207

4340 HT 350 1178 1240 57 1580 0.066 193

Maraging HT 405 1482 1515 67 0.03 186

Maraging HT 460 1791 1860 56 0.02 186
Maraging HT 1903 1982 190
Maraging HT 480 1929 1998 55 0.015 179

Copper 30 207 114

Incon 713 HT 336 813 1045 207

Incon 713 HT 344 788 928 207
Incon 718 Aged 1110 1304 204

Caution—no long life data points—102 to 105 data only

TABLE 4B—MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS—

CYCLIC PROPERTIES—LIMITED DATA
Material Test σ f′ K′′ Data
Material Condition Condition BHN (MPa) b ε f′ c (MPa) n′′ Points
1005 HR 86 832 –0.122 0.450 –0.534 999-c 0.229-c 12
1005 HR 86 872 –0.134 0.271 –0.503 1234-c 0.266-c 7
1005 HR 86 829 –0.129 0.246 –0.492 1199-c 0.263-c 7
1005 HR 86 483 –0.079 0.215 –0.450 631-c 0.174-c 15

1045 HT 450 1728 –0.060 0.934 –0.819 1737-c 0.073-c 9

4340 HT 350 1917 –0.099 1.122 –0.720 1887-x 0.137-x 8

Maraging HT 405 2156 –0.083 0.417 –0.682 2399-c 0.122-c 7

Maraging HT 460 2851 –0.094 2.627 –0.992 2602-c 0.095-c 7
Maraging HT 2742 –0.087 10.188 –1.006 2245-c 0.086-c 7
Maraging HT 480 3113 –0.102 2.331 –0.968 2847-c 0.106-c 9

Copper 564 –0.141 0.483 –0.535 683-c 0.263-c 6

Incon 713 HT 336 1319 –0.075 0.052 –0.560 1962-c 0.134-c 5

Incon 713 HT 344 1294 –0.065 0.034 –0.521 1969-c 0.124-c 5
Incon 718 Aged 2295 –0.100 3.637 –0.894 1986-c 0.112-c 12

Caution—no long life data points—102 to 105 data only

NOTE— x = experimental—from raw data
c = calculated—K′ = σf′/(εf′)n′—n′ = b/c

-17-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 1—ENGINEERING AND "TRUE" STRESS-STRAIN PLOT

-18-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 2—"TRUE" STRESS-PLASTIC STRAIN PLOT

-19-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 3—RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BRIDGEMEN CORRECTION FACTOR, σf/(P/A)

AND "TRUE" TENSILE STRAIN

-20-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 4—STABLE STRESS-STRAIN HYSTERESIS LOOP

-21-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 5—CYCLIC STRESS-STRAIN CURVE DRAWN

THROUGH STABLE LOOP TIPS

-22-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 6—CYCLIC STRESS-PLASTIC STRAIN PLOT

-23-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 7—STRESS AMPLITUDE VERSUS REVERSALS TO FAILURE

-24-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 8—PLASTIC STRAIN AMPLITUDE VERSUS REVERSALS TO FAILURE

-25-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

FIGURE 9—STRAIN AMPLITUDE VERSUS REVERSALS TO FAILURE

-26-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

7. Notes

7.1 Marginal Indicia—The change bar (l) located in the left margin is for the convenience of the user in locating
areas where technical revisions have been made to the previous issue of the report. An (R) symbol to the left
of the document title indicates a complete revision of the report.

PREPARED BY THE SAE FATIGUE DESIGN AND EVALUATION STEERING COMMITTEE

-27-
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

Rationale—Not applicable.

Relationship of SAE Standard to ISO Standard—Not applicable.

Application—Information that provides design guidance in avoiding fatigue failures is outlined in this SAE
Information Report. Of necessity, it is brief, but it does provide a basis for approaching complex fatigue
problems. Information presented here can be used in preliminary design estimates of fatigue life, the
selection of materials and the analysis of service load and/or strain data. The data presented are for the
"low cycle" or strain-controlled methods for predicting fatigue behavior. Note that these methods may not
be appropriate for materials with internal defects, such as cast irons, which exhibit different tension and
compression stress-strain behavior.

Reference Section

Mitchell, M. R., Fundamentals of Modern Fatigue Analysis for Design, ASM, Vol. 19, Fatigue and
Fracture, 1997.

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Metals—Mechanical Testing: Elevated and Low Temperature Tests;
Metallography, Standard E 606-80, "Constant-Amplitude Low-Cycle Fatigure Testing,"
Vol. 3.01, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1996.

Dowling, N.E., Mechanical Behavior of Materials; Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and
Fatigue, Prentice-Hall, 1993.

Chernenkoff, R.A., Editor, Fatigue Research and Applications, SP-1009, Society of Automotive
Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1993.

Rice, R. C., Editor, Fatigue Design Handbook (A-10), 1988, Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400
Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001.

Boardman, B. E., Crack Initiation Fatigue-Data, Analysis, Trends and Estimation, Proceeding of the SAE
Fatigue Conference, P109, Society for Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1982.

Wetzel, R. M., Editor, Fatigue Under Complex Loadings: Analysis and Experiments, AE-6, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1977.

Bannantine, J., Comer, J., and Handrock, J., Fundamentals of Metal Fatigue Analysis, Prentice-Hall,
1989.

Multiaxial Fatigue; Analysis and Experiments, AE-14, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA,
1989.

Fuchs, H. O. and Stephens, R. I., Metal Fatigue in Engineering, John Wiley and Sons, 1980.

Bridgeman, P. W., Transactions of ASM, American Society for Metals, Vol. 32, p. 553, 1944; (also Dieter,
G. E. Mechanical Metallurgy, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1961, New York, NY, pp. 250-
254.

Raske, D. T. and Morrow, JoDean, "Mechanics of Materials in Low Cycle Fatigue Testing, Manual on Low
Cycle Fatigue Testing," ASTM STP 465, American Society for Testing and Materials,
1969, pp. 1-25.

Landgraf, R. W., Morrow, JoDean, and Endo, T., "Determination of the Cyclic Stress-Strain Curve,"
Journal of Materials, ASTM, Vol. 4, No. 1, March 1969, pp. 176-188.
 SAE J1099 Revised JUN1998

Gallagher, J. P., "What the Designer Should Know About Fracture Mechanics Fundamentals," Paper
710151 presented at SAE Automotive Engineering Congress, Detroit, January, 1971.

Sinclair, G. M., "What the Designer Should Know About Fracture Mechanics Testing," Paper 710152
presented at SAE Automotive Engineering Congress, January, 1971.

Ripling, E. J., "How Fracture Mechanics Can Help the Designer," Paper 710153 presented at SAE
Automotive Engineering Congress, Detroit, January, 1971.

Campbell, J. E., Berry, W. E., and Fedderson, C. E., "Damage Tolerant Design Handbook," MCIC HB-01,
Metal and Ceramics Information Center, Battelle Columbus Laboratories, Columbus,
OH.

Jaske, C. E., Fedderson, C. E., Davies, K. B., Rice, R. C., "Analysis of Fatigue, Fatigue Crack
Propagation and Fracture Data," NASA CR-132332, Battelle Columbus Laboratories,
Columbus, OH, November 1973.

Moore, T. D., "Structural Alloys Handbook," Mechanical Properties Data Center, BelFour Stulen, Inc.,
Traverse City, MI.

Wolf, J., Brown, W. F., Jr., "Aerospace Structural Metals Handbook," Vol. 1-4, Mechanical Properties
Data Center, BelFour Stulen, Inc., Traverse City, MI.

Raske, D. T., "Review of Methods for Relating the Fatigue Notch Factor to the Theoretical Stresss
Concentration Factor, Simulation of the Fatigue Behavior of the Notch Root in Spectrum
Loaded Notched Members," Chapter II, TAM Report No. 333--Department of Theoretical
and Applied Mechanics, University of Illinois, Urbana, January 1970.

Topper, T. H., Wetzel, R. M. and Morrow, JoDean, "Neuber’s Rule Applied to Fatigue of Notched
Specimens," Journal of Materials, ASTM, Vol. 4, No. 1, March 1969, pp. 200-209.

Tucker, L. E., "A Procedure for Designing Against Fatigue Failure of Notched Parts," SAE Paper No.
720265, Society of Automotive Engineers, New York, NY 10001.

Dowling, N. E., "Fatigue Failure Predictions for Complicated Stress-Strain Histories," J. Materials, ASTM,
March 1972; (see also: Fatigue Failure Predictions for Complicated Stress-Strain
Histories. TAM Report No. 337, Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Dept., University of
Illinois, Urbana, 1970.

Morrow, JoDean, "Cyclic Plastic Strain Energy and Fatigue of Metals," Internal Friction, Damping, and
Cyclic Plasticity, ASTM STP 378, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1965, pp
45-87.

Miller, G. A., and Reemsnyder, H. S., "Strain-Cycle Fatigue of Sheet and Plate Steels I: Test Method
Development and Data Presentation," SAE Paper No. 830175, 1983.

Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Metals—Mechanical Testing; Elevated and Low Temperature Tests;
Metallography, Standard E 739-91, "Statistical Analysis of Linear or Linearized Stress-
Life and Strain Life Fatigue Data," Vol. 3.01, American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, 1995.

Developed by the SAE Fatigue Design and Evaluation Steering Committee