Equivalence of four-point and three-point rainflow cycle counting algorithms

Two forms of the rainflow cycle counting algorithm for fatigue damage prediction are shown to be equivalent, namely the three-point algorithm as presented by Bannantine et al. [Bannantine JA, Comer JJ, Handrock JL. Fundamentals of metal fatigue analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1990], a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of fatigue 2008-03, Vol.30 (3), p.547-559
Main Authors: McInnes, C.H., Meehan, P.A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Applied sciences
Cliffs
Counting
Cycle counting methods
Damage
Equivalence
Exact sciences and technology
Fatigue
Fatigue (materials)
Fatigue analysis
Fatigue failure
INT
Load histories
Mechanical properties and methods of testing. Rheology. Fracture mechanics. Tribology
Metals. Metallurgy
Proving
Rainflow method
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Two forms of the rainflow cycle counting algorithm for fatigue damage prediction are shown to be equivalent, namely the three-point algorithm as presented by Bannantine et al. [Bannantine JA, Comer JJ, Handrock JL. Fundamentals of metal fatigue analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1990], and the four-point algorithm as presented by Amzallag et al. [Amzallag C, Gerey JP, Robert JL, Bahuaud J. Standardization of the rainflow counting method for fatigue analysis. Int J Fatigue 1994;16:287–293]. While it can be demonstrated by example that the same result is obtained by the two algorithms, no generalised proof of their equivalence has previously been presented. The proof is built on several identified properties of the four-point algorithm, including that certain modifications to the stress series being analysed do not alter the outcome.
ISSN:0142-1123
1879-3452
DOI:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2007.03.006