Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics

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

A fatigue life prediction method distinguishing fracture modes for Ni-based

single crystal superalloys considering porosity defect
Wen Jiang a, Weixing Yao a, b, *, Piao Li a, Peng Luo a
a
State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China
b
Key Laboratory of Fundamental Science for National Defense Advanced Design Technology of Flight Vehicle, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Nanjing 210016, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Microporosity is one of the most common defects in nickel base single crystal (N-SC) superalloys, which is a great
Nickel-base single crystal superalloy threat to fatigue performance. In this paper, nine porosity-related fatigue damage parameters for N-SC super­
Porosity defect alloys were selected by referring to those parameters originally proposed for casting and 3D printing metal
Damage parameter
materials as well as the critical plane damage parameters commonly used in N-SC superalloys. According to the
Fracture mode
Fatigue life
plastic constitutive model of single crystals, a crystal plastic finite element (CPFE) model was established to
evaluate these different fatigue damage parameters, and the parameters of CPFE were calibrated by the low cycle
fatigue (LCF) hysteresis loop obtained from the fatigue test. The evaluation results showed that the geometric
mean of stress–strain concentration factor (GCF) kg was a satisfactory parameter to quantify the effect of porosity
defects on fatigue. Inspired by the discovery and considering the slip systems characteristics of N-SC superalloys,
the geometric mean of resolved stress–strain concentration factor (GRCF) krg on slip systems was proposed, and it
was found that the max(krg , kg ) could be used to predict the fracture modes of N-SC superalloys. Based on the max
(krg , kg ), a porosity-related fatigue life prediction method which can distinguish the fracture modes was put
forward. The prediction results showed that the fracture mode prediction results were consistent with the test
results, and the life prediction results were also improved compared with the GCF parameter.

1. Introduction
Nickel based single crystal (N-SC) superalloy is an important mate­
rial for turbine blades of advanced aero-engine and gas turbine. Due to
the elimination of fragile grain boundaries, N-SC superalloys have
higher high-temperature strength, better creep and fatigue properties
than polycrystalline materials [1]. However, solidification defects and
microstructure inhomogeneity are the two main threats to the fatigue
properties of N-SC materials. Especially, the porosity defect has been the
focus of recent researches, which can significantly reduce the fatigue
performance of materials [2,3]. How to quantitatively evaluate the ef­
fect of porosity defects on fatigue damage and how to establish an
effective fatigue life model are the keys to the industrial application of
N-SC superalloys.
At present, many studies have been carried out on the effect of
porosity defects on the fatigue performance of N-SC superalloys. Steuer
et al. [4] conducted low cycle fatigue (LCF) tests of AM1 N-SC superalloy
at different temperatures, and found from the test results that the fatigue
cracks initiated from pore defects at 750◦ C, while the fatigue cracks
were more likely to initiate from surface oxide layer at 950◦ C. A fatigue
indicator parameter (FIP) was also proposed to predict the fatigue life,
and the predicted results were in good agreement with the test results.
Cervellon and his co-workers [5,6] carried out the very high cycle fa­
tigue (VHCF) tests of CMSX-4N-SC superalloy at high temperature, and
the results showed that most of the specimens initiated cracks from the
porosities, and the size of porosity was the main factor to control the
VHCF life. They found that the FIP parameter proposed by Steuer can
also be also used to predict the VHCF life of N-SC superalloy. When
conducting the VHCF test of directionally solidified crystal DZ4 at high
temperature, Nie [7] also obtained the same conclusion as Cervellon did.
Ormastroni et al. [8] recently carried out the low cycle fatigue (LCF)
tests, high cycle fatigue (HCF) tests and VHCF tests of a newly developed
third generation N-SC superalloy CMSX-4 plus. The test results showed
that the fatigue cracks in LCF and VHCF specimens all initiated from

* Corresponding author at: State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing
210016, China.
E-mail address: wxyao@nuaa.edu.cn (W. Yao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102883
Received 17 August 2020; Received in revised form 22 November 2020; Accepted 21 December 2020
Available online 28 December 2020
0167-8442/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Table 1
Nominal chemical composition of CMSX-4 Plus superalloy (in wt. pct.).
Element Ni Cr Mo Co W Re Al Ti Hf Ta

Wt.Pct. Bal. 3.5 0.6 10.0 6.0 4.8 5.7 0.85 0.1 8.0

porosity defects, while those in HCF specimens could initiate both from
Table 2
the surface oxide layer and void defects. Remy and his coworkers [9]
Nomenclature of tested material with respect to heat treatment applied on
regarded the void defects in N-SC superalloys as microcracks, and
CMSX-4 Plus.
simulated the microcracks through small-scale sharp notches. Based on
the single crystal (SC) constitutive model and fracture mechanics, a LCF Nomenclature Solution Heat Treatment

life prediction model was established. Liu et al. [2] studied the influence STD (industrial solution 1313 C/2h + 1318 C/2h + 1324 C/2h +
◦ ◦ ◦

of pore defects on the crack behavior of N-SC superalloys through ex­ treatment) 1329 C/2h + 1335 C/6h/AQ
◦ ◦

periments and numerical simulations. The test results showed that the HT1 1340 C/15h/AQ
◦

size, magnitude, distribution, spacing length, surficial precipitates, and HT2 1330 C/15h/AQ
◦

the orientation angle of pores all had influence on the crack behavior. HT3 1340 C/15h + 1360 C/5min/AQ
◦ ◦

The numerical results showed that the microcracks in Laves bands were
induced by stress concentration of micropore. In order to study the effect
of porosity defects on the fatigue life of N-SC, Bourbita and Remy [10]
used a small notch to simulate the pore defect. The notch depth (0.25
mm) was smaller than the primary dendrite size, and the notch radius
(0.050 mm) was slightly smaller than the secondary dendrite size. Then
combining the critical distance and the energy density mode, a fatigue
life prediction model was proposed, and the prediction results were in
good agreement with the experimental results. From the above re­
searches, it can be seen that the porosity defect is the main reason for the
fatigue fracture of N-SC superalloys, and its influence must be consid­
ered in fatigue life prediction.
The fatigue fracture modes of nickel base single crystal superalloys
include crystallographic fracture mode and opening fracture mode
(mode I facture). The fracture modes are largely dependent on tem­
perature and frequency. The crystallographic fracture usually occurs at
low temperature and high frequency conditions [11–15]. Suzuki et al.
[11] and He et al. [12] found that the fracture modes were crystallo­
graphic at low temperature below 600◦ C, mixed fracture mode at me­
dium temperature between 600◦ C and 700◦ C, and amorphous opening
mode fracture at high temperature above 700◦ C. This is because when
the temperature is low, the strength of the strengthening phase is low,
and the dislocation will cut the matrix phase and the strengthening
phase, resulting in uneven deformation. When the temperature rises, the
strength of the strengthening phase gradually increases, and the dislo­
cation movement begins to change into climbing and cross-slip, even by-
passing the strengthening phase, so that the macro deformation tends to
be uniform [13]. Ormastroni and his coworkers [8] also observed that
the LCF specimens showed crystallographic fracture mode, and the
VHCF specimens showed opening fracture mode. However, these two
fracture modes appeared alternately at the HCF stage. Nowadays, re­
searches on N-SC fracture modes focus on experimental qualitative
investigation, and there is no relevant literature focusing on the pre­
diction method.
Four ranking strategies [16] have been proposed to estimate the
potential impact of pore defects on metal materials (such as casting
aluminum alloy, 3D printing alloy, etc.): 1) Size of maximum pore, 2)
Maximum stress intensity factor (SIF), 3) Relative SIF, 4) Geometric
mean of stress–strain concentration factor. For N-SC alloys, the slip
system parameters have a greater impact on its fatigue damage.
Therefore, the slip system plane is generally regarded as the critical
plane, and the critical plane damage parameters are used to predict fa­
tigue life [17,18]. In this paper, referring to the porosity-related damage
parameters of casting and 3D printing metal materials and the critical
plane damage parameters of N-SC superalloys, nine porosity-related
fatigue damage parameters of N-SC superalloys were evaluated
through fatigue test data covering LCF, HCF and VHCF stage. The crystal
plastic finite element (CPFE) was adopted in the evaluation, and the
parameters used in the CPFE were calibrated by LCF hysteresis loop
[19]. Based on the evaluation results, a porosity defect related fatigue
Note: STD denoted as industrial solution treatment and HT denoted as solution
heat treatment.
Fig. 1. Slip planes of N-SC superalloy.
life prediction method which can distinguish the fracture modes was
proposed.
2. Experiment
Ormastroni et al. [8] recently conducted a comprehensive fatigue
test and provided detailed fatigue test data for a newly developed third-
generation N-SC superalloy CMSX-4 Plus, its nominal chemical compo­
sition is detailed in Table 1. The fatigue test data cover different tem­
peratures (650◦ C, 950◦ C and1000◦ C) and stress states (LCF, HCF and
VHCF) encountered in high-pressure turbine blades.
In order to analyze the influence of different micro-defects on fatigue
performance, four differently heat treated specimens with an orientation
deviation angle from perfect [0 0 1] orientation of <13◦ were selected in
the experiment. The nomenclature of different specimen group and heat
treatment methods are shown in Table 2.
Due to the systematic test data and detailed research of Ormastroni
et al. [8], this paper did not repeat the experiments, but cited their
experimental data. Appendix A briefly lists the test process and test
results.
3. CPFE and implementation
The N-SC superalloy is a typical face-centered cubic crystal, with four
octahedral slip planes and three hexahedral slip planes (see Fig. 1). The
four octahedral slip planes each has three primary slip directions and
three secondary slip directions, forming twelve 〈1 1 0〉{1 1 1} primary
slip systems and twelve 〈1 1 2〉{1 1 1} secondary slip systems, respec­
tively. Each of the three cubic slip planes has two slip directions, forming
six 〈1 1 0〉{1 0 0} cubic slip systems. The activation of the slip system is
the reason for its plastic deformation, so the stress and strain compo­
nents on the slip system are necessary for the calculation of fatigue
damage in N-SC superalloys [17]. In this paper, a crystal plastic finite
element (CPFE) model will be constructed based on the single crystal

2
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

hαβ = h(γ)[q + (1 − q)δαβ ]

⃒ ⃒
⃒ h0 γ ⃒ (6)
h(γ) = h0 sech2 ⃒⃒ ⃒
τs − τ0 ⃒

where h0 is the initial hardening modulus, q is the latent hardening

parameter, τ0 and τs are the initial and saturated slip resistance,
respectively.
The accumulated shear strain on all slip system γ can be obtained by
∑∫ t
γ= |γ̇α |dt (7)
α 0

3.2. CPFE implementation

The above constitutive formulation was realized by the user-defined

material subroutine (UMAT) in the finite element software ABAQUS,
and both octahedral and cubic slip systems were considered active in the
UMAT code. As shown in Fig. 2, three-dimensional solid grids were used
in the finite element models, and the model geometry was the same as
Fig. 2. Finite element models for LCF, HCF and VHCF specimens. the fatigue test specimens (See Appendix A for the geometry dimension).
Although many parameters (such as the pore size, shape, location,
plasticity, and the CPFE parameters will be calibrated through the LCF distribution and etc.) of the pore defects have influence on fatigue life, it
hysteresis loop obtained through experiments [19]. is generally considered that the critical pore (initiated failure crack) size,
shape and location have the greatest influence on the crack initiation life
3.1. Constitutive formulation [26,27], and the crack initiation life accounts for the vast majority of
fatigue life. So the finite element model mainly focuses on the size, shape
The basis of the CPFE is the crystal plasticity constitutive proposed and location of the pore defect that initiates failure crack. Normally, the
by Hill, Rice [20,21], Asaro and Pierce [22,23]. Assuming that the in­ failure cracks only initiate from a large pore defect. Sometimes, the
elastic deformation of the single crystal is only caused by the slip of the failure crack can also initiate from several small pores which are close to
crystal, the movement of the dislocation inside the crystal causes the each other. In this case, these small and close pores could be regarded as
deformation of the crystal lattice, and the macroscopic appearance is the a large defect [28]. Therefore, the finite element model in this paper
plastic flow of the crystal. Then the total deformation gradient F can be only used a single cavity to simulate the critical pore that initiated the
decomposed into elastic part Fe and plastic part Fp : failure crack. Other porosity parameters, such as the pore distribution
and porosity volume fraction, could be reflected by the material pa­
F = Fe ⋅Fp (1) rameters of FEM model. This method can reduce the complexity and
The plastic part F is related to the slip rate on each slip system, and
p mesh number of the FEM model and improve the computational
the relationship between them can be expressed as efficiency.
∑ Since the pore information in this paper was obtained from the
Ḟ ⋅Fp - 1 = (2) fracture surface, the true three-dimensional shape of the pore defect
p
γ̇α sα mα
α cannot be obtained. However, the pore defects in the N-SC superalloys
were relatively round and smooth [29], then a spherical pore with the
where γ̇α is the dislocation slip rate of the slip system α, sα and mα are
same pore size and pore position was used to simulate the pore defect. It
separately the slip direction and normal direction. The flow law of
must be admitted that simplifying the defect into a spherical pore will
dislocation slip rate γ̇ α can be given by the power function form of the
make the calculation result relatively conservative. Therefore, the Feret
shear stress τα , the back stress Xα and the current strength gα [24]:
diameter [30] (circumferential circle diameter of pore defect) was
⃒ α ⃒
⃒τ − X α ⃒n generally used to indirectly consider the influence of the pore shape.
γ̇ α = γ̇ 0 ⃒⃒ ⃒ sgn(τα − X α ) (3) This simplification was very common in the study of the influence of
gα ⃒
pore size and location on the fatigue life [31,32], and results showed
where γ̇0 is the reference strain rate and n is the rate sensitivity expo­ that the error was acceptable.
nent. The evolution of back stress Xα is used to describe the dynamic The grids within five times the volume of the pore were divided into
hardening characteristics of the slip systems, which can be given by the small and fine three-dimensional eight-node octahedral isoparametric
Chaboche model [25]: elements (C3D8I), and the rest were divided into three-dimensional
tetrahedral elements (C3D4). A fixed constraint was applied to one
(4)
α
Ẋ = ζα (rα γ̇α − X α |γ̇α |) end of the model, and the load was applied to the other end. Considering
the grid convergence and calculation cost, different grid densities have
where ζα and rα are material-related constants. The evolution of current
been tested. The convergence criterion was defined as the stress change
strength gα is given according to the model proposed by Peirce [24]:
less than 10% when the grids density was doubled, and the number of
∑
n grids was controlled at about 500,000.
ġα (γ) = hαβ (γ)|γ̇β | (5) The main orientation of each specimen with respect to the loading
axis is listed in Appendix A, where θ in Tables A2–A4 represents the
β

The hardening modulus hαβ can be given by the following formula:
main orientation. The determination of other CPFE parameters refers to
the method of Zhang [19], using a single three-dimensional 8-node
quadrilateral isoparametric element (C3D8) to simulate the cyclic
stress–strain response of the LCF test and calibrate the model parameters
by minimizing the difference between the simulation results and

3
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Table 3 with the test data, especially the cyclic hardening behavior. Table 4
Stiffness constants of CMSX-4 plus for different temperatures. collects the flow law parameters of slip systems after calibration. Fig. 3
Temperature/◦ C c11 /GPa c22 /GPa c44 /GPa compares the experimental and simulated results of the first four cyclic
stress–strain curves of the HT1 and HT2 specimens (the solid points are
650 246.123 164.078 121.195
the test results and the hollow points are the simulation results), it can be
950 239.070 172.880 105.656
1000 235.986 170.823 104.479 seen that the simulation results are in good agreement with the test
results.
The test only measured the cyclic stress–strain curves of HT1 and
HT2 specimens and it was assumed that the fatigue test results of STD
Table 4
and HT3 were closer to that of HT1, the same CPFE parameters as HT1
The slip system flow law parameters of CMSX-4 plus.
were used in the STD and HT3 specimens. As the stress–strain response
HT1, HT3, STD HT2
of the HT1 specimen tends to be stable after five cycles of loading, the
Parameters Octahedral slip Cubic slip Octahedral slip Cubic slip stress and strain simulation results after five cycles will be used to
n 10 2 13 2 calculate the fatigue damage parameters.
γ̇0 /s− 1 0.00001 0.000026 0.00001 0.000026
h0 /MPa 300 172.5 300 172.5 4. Evaluation of porosity-related damage parameters
τs /MPa 250 130.21 250 130.21
τ0 /MPa 219.3 114.22 219.3 114.22 4.1. Damage parameters
q 1 1 1 1
ζα 14 14 8 8 According to the common evaluation methods for porosity defects in
rα /MPa 180 180 180 180 castings metal [36] and 3D printing materials[16], as well as the eval­
uation results of Su[17] and Li[18] on critical plane damage parameters
of N-SC superalloys with different orientations, the following damage
parameters have been selected and their abilities in the prediction of
porosity-related fatigue life are evaluated.

(1) Stress intensity factor (SIF) range

For the SIF parameter, it was indeed initially proposed for the crack.
However, the SIF parameter in this paper was proposed by Murakami
[36] especially for the defects evaluation in steel materials. Murakami
thought that the maximum cross-section of the pore defect in the vertical
plane of load direction had the greatest impact on fatigue life, so he
treated the maximum cross-section as a plane crack. Then an analytical
formula based on the SIF parameter was obtained to describe the in­
fluence of pore defects.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
DSIF = ΔK = YΔσ π Apore (8)

Fig. 3. Comparison of cyclic stress–strain curve between experiment results
and simulation results.
corresponding experimental data. From the static test results, there was
almost no difference in the stiffness of differently heat treated test
pieces, so the stiffness constant was assumed to depend only on the
temperature. At first, the three anisotropic stiffness constants c11 , c22
and c44 at different temperatures were determined by matching the
elastic part of monotonic stress–strain response. Since the test only
measured the cyclic stress–strain curve at 650◦ C, the experimental
stiffness constants at 950◦ C and 1000◦ C were taken from literature [33]
as reference. Table 3 lists the stiffness constants at different tempera­
tures after test calibration.
Su [17] thinks that the difference in CPFE model parameters at
different temperatures lies mainly in the stiffness constants c11 , c22 and
c44 , there is no difference in the flow law on the slip system. The flow law
parameters, published in literature from Ma [34], Han [35] and Zhang
[19] for similar nickel alloys, served as a general guideline for an initial
estimation. The ratio of the initial slip resistance of the octahedral and
the hexahedral slip systems τoct 0 /τ0
cub
is 1.92, and the ratio of the satu­
rated slip resistance of the octahedral slip and the hexahedral slip system
τoct
s /τs
cub
is 1.14. The flow parameters were repeatedly calibrated for
calculations until the finite element simulation results were consistent
where Y is the shape factor (0.5 for internal/subsurface pores and 0.65
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
for surface pores), Δσ is the applied positive stress range, and Apore is
the size of pore defect. Because the above formula is simple to calculate
and can effectively evaluate the impact of defects on fatigue life, it has
been widely used in isotropic materials [16,27,31]. Therefore, the SIF
parameter was directly calculated by the above formula by using the size
and the position of the pore. And in this progress, it doesn’t matter
whether the pore defect is treated as a spherical cavity or a crack.
This parameter indicates the fact that the surface pore defects are
potentially more harmful than the deep ones from a stress intensity
viewpoint.
(2) Stress concentration factor (SCF)
From a mechanical point of view, the stress concentration factor is a
suitable parameter for evaluating the porosity defect, because it con­
siders the size, position and shape of the pore defect, as well as the
interaction with adjacent defects [26], which is defined as,
kt = σmax /σ ∞ (9)
where σ max is the maximum stress around the pore defect and σ ∞ is the
far field stress. The same as DSIF , the product of stress concentration
factor kt and the applied positive stress range Δσ are used as the fatigue
damage parameter.
DSCF = kt Δσ (10)

4
W. Jiang et al.
(3) Geometric mean of stress–strain concentration factor (GCF)
On the basis of stress concentration factor, kg further considers the
influence of plastic strain around the pore defect and is calculated by the
geometric mean of the principal stress concentration factor and prin­
cipal strain concentration factor around the pore defect [16], which is a
good parameter to quantify the influence of porosity defects on fatigue
crack initiation and to predict the fatigue crack growth rate [32,33], kg is
defined as
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
σ max εmax
kg = kσ kε = (11)
σ ∞ ε∞
where σ max and σ ∞ are the maximum stress around the pore defect and
the far field stress respectively, εmax and ε∞ are the maximum strain
around the pore defect and the far field strain respectively. The damage
parameter DGCF is also defined as the product of stress concentration
factor kg and the applied positive stress range Δσ.
DGCF = kg Δσ (12)
(4) Multiaxial critical-plane damage parameters
The N-SC superalloys undergo plastic motion along the slip plane,
and the slip plane can be regarded as a natural critical plane. Therefore,
the multiaxial critical plane damage parameters are often used to eval­
uate the fatigue life of N-SC superalloys. Su [17] and Li [18] have
evaluated the critical plane damage parameters of N-SC superalloys with
different orientations, and the results showed that the CCB parameter
and NOK parameter based on the energy criterion were better. In this
paper, referring to their evaluation results, five critical plane damage
parameters were selected, including the Findley parameter based on
stress components, Kandil parameter and SSR parameter based on strain
components, CCB parameter and NOK parameter based on strain energy
density.
a) Findley parameter
Findley [37] proposed a multiaxial fatigue damage parameter in
1959, which combines the shear stress and normal stress
DFIN = τa + k1 σ max (13)
where τa is taken as the shear stress amplitude on the slip system, σmax is
taken as the maximum normal stress on the corresponding slip plane, k1
is a material constant and is set as 0.1 here. The slip plane where the
Findley parameter reaches the maximum is defined as the critical slip
plane.
b) Kandil parameter
Kandil [38] has regarded the maximum shear stress on the critical
plane as the main factor affecting fatigue damage and considered that
the normal stress on the critical plane is the factor promoting crack
propagation. The Kandil parameter is defined as
DKAN = γmax + k2 εa (14)
When applying Kandil parameter to the N-SC, γmax is the maximum
shear strain on the slip system, εa is the normal strain amplitude on the
corresponding slip plane, k2 is a material constant and is set as 0.1 here.
The critical slip plane is defined as the slip system with the largest Kandil
value.
c) SSR parameter
The shear strain range (SSR) parameter [39] thinks that the shear
5
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883
strain range on the critical plane has a greater impact on fatigue damage,
which is defined as below,
DSSR = Δγmax (15)
where Δγmax is the maximum shear strain range on the slip plane and the
corresponding slip plane is the critical plane.
d) CCB parameter
Chu, Conle and Bonnen [40] have also proposed a fatigue damage
parameter in the form of strain energy density, which consists of two
parts. The first part is the shear strain energy density, and the second
part is the normal strain energy density, as shown in Eq. (16).
DCCB = 2τmax γa + σmax εa (16)
where τmax and γ a are respectively the maximum shear stress and shear
strain range on the slip system, σ max and εa are respectively the
maximum normal stress and the normal strain range on the corre­
sponding slip planes. The critical slip plane is defined as the slip system
with the largest CCB value.
e) NOK parameter
Nitta, Ogata and Kuwabara [41] have proposed different multiaxial
damage parameters in the form of strain energy density for mode I and
mode II cracks, respectively. These parameters are in the form of the
product of stress range and strain range.
DNOK = ΔτΔγ (17)
Δτ is the shear stress range on the slip system and Δγ is the shear strain
range on the corresponding slip system. The critical slip system is
defined as the slip system with the largest shear strain.
(5) FIP parameter
For the FIP parameter, it is a critical plane parameter and is related to
the distribution of stress and strain on the critical plane. This model was
originally proposed by Fatemi et al. [42], which defines the maximum
shear strain range plane as the critical plane.
[ ]
σ max
FIP = Δγpmax 1 + k3 n (18)
σy
Δγpmax is the maximum cyclic shear strain range, σmaxn is the maximum
normal stress on the maximum plastic shear range plane and is
normalized by the yield strength σy , and k3 is a material constant with a
value between 0.5 and 1.
When applying FIP parameter to the N-SC, Steuer et al. [4] recon­
sidered and adapted the FIP parameter in order to capture the crack
initiation size and make the formula easier to calculate analytically, as
shown in the following formula
μΔ σ
[
ΔK
]
DFIP = 1 + k3 (19)
E[001] ΔKthreshold
where the maximum cyclic shear strain range Δγpmax is estimated by the
applied positive stress range Δσ over the Young’s modulus E[001] for an
[0 0 1] oriented N-SC superalloy, and multiplied by the Schmid factor μ
(which is 0.408 for octahedral slip with an applied stress along the
[0 0 1] direction). The maximum normal stress σ max is replaced by the
n
stress intensity factor ΔK (see Eq. (8)) to capture the pore size influence
on crack initiation and normalized by the value of the threshold stress
intensity ΔKthreshold , which is 10 MPa × m0.5 for some N-SC superalloys
in air [4,6,7]. The parameter k3 here is taken as 1 to achieve the best fit.
The studies from Steuer and Cervellon [4,6,7] have demonstrated that
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Fig. 4. Stress and strain calculation results of pore defect, a) principal stress, b) principal strain, c) maximum shear stress of slip systems, d) maximum shear strain of
slip systems.

the reconstruction of FIP parameter was reasonable, and the results were
Table 5
in good agreement with the test results. Since the FIP parameter only
Curve fitting values for various fatigue damage parameter.
used the SIP parameter to capture the pore size, and it was also
dependent on the size and the position of the pore, thus it has nothing to Damage parameters Fitting curves Correlation factor (R2 )
do with the spherical cavity simplification. SIF DSIF = 25.806 × N− 0.157 0.54
SCF DSCF = 9193.7 × N− 0.169 0.76
4.2. Evaluation method GCF DGCF = 17395 × N− 0.205 0.80
KAN DKAN = 2.9645 × N− 0.524 0.77
It should be noted that not all damage parameters need to be FIN DFIN = 1293 × N− 0.121 0.78
calculated through the finite element model. The SIF parameter and the SSR DSSR = 3.4884 × N− 0.432 0.75
FIP parameter were calculated directly from the analytical formula, CCB 0.272 0.75
DCCB = 11.341 × N−
therefor, have nothing to do with the spherical cavity simplification. For
NOK DNOK = 3529.3 × N− 0.584 0.74
other damage parameters, they were only related to the stress and strain
FIP DFIP = 0.0307 × N− 0.185 0.76
distribution around the pore defect, which were not derived based on
the crack and fracture mechanics. Therefore, the finite element method
was used to calculate the stress and strain distribution around the pore parameters and fatigue life [4,8,44]. Then the exponential Basquin
defect. In addition, the purpose of evaluating different damage param­ equation was used to connect the damage parameters Di (i represents
eters was to find one for N-SC superalloy in the damage parameters different damage parameters) and fatigue life N,
commonly used in isotropic materials and critical plane methods, which
could provide inspiration for proposing a new model later in this paper. Di = aN b (20)
As shown in Fig. 4, the stress and strain response around the pore defect
was calculated by the CPFE model in Section 3 (it should be pointed out where a and b are fitting parameters. It is a common practice to evaluate
that the data from other literatures [4–7] have been added to the SIF and the predictive ability of damage parameters by assessing the correlation
FIP parameters.). Then the critical slip plane and the damage parameters factor between the predicted results and the test data in engineering
were determined according to the definition of different damage pa­ [18]. The correlation factor is quantified by the coefficient of determi­
rameters. According to Wohler’s schematization, the S-N curve often nation R2 , which is shown as follows
shows a power law between the applied stress and fatigue life [43]. As ∑( )2
Nexp − N mod
the damage parameters are often the functions of applied stress and the R2 = 1 − ∑ ( )2 (21)
Basquin equation in exponential form is simple, the power law is often Nexp − Nexp
used to quantitatively describe the relationship between damage

6
W. Jiang et al.
Fig. 5. The experimental life versus predicted life of different fatigue damage parameters.
where Nexp is the experimental data, N mod is the predicted result, Nexp is
the mean value of experimental data. The range of R2 is from 0 to 1 and a
higher value of R2 suggests a better predictive ability of the fatigue life
model.
4.3. Evaluation results
The fitting results of all fatigue damage parameters are shown in
Table 5. From the fitting results, the SIF damage parameter (R2 = 0.54)
calculated by semi-empirical equation has the lowest correlation factors.
This is because the SIF parameter is proposed based on isotropic mate­
rials, which cannot reflect the anisotropy and slip system characteristics
of N-SCs [45]. As the CPFE model is based on single crystal plastic slip
and its physical mechanism is clear, the damage parameters calculated
by CPFE all have higher correlation factors [46]. The GCF damage
parameter (R2 = 0.80) has the highest correlation factor, because the
GCF damage parameter considers the local plastic strain around the pore
defect on the basis of the SCF parameter (R2 = 0.76) [16]. The multi­
axial damage parameters of metallic materials have a solid research
foundation and a wider range of application [18], the overall correlation
factor of the damage parameters based on the multiaxial critical plane is
better (R2 = 0.74 ∼ 0.78). However, as the evaluated test data have
different stress ratios, the KAN and FIN damage parameters which
7
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883
consider the average stress effect by introducing the peak of the
stress–strain component, are relatively better. Combining the advan­
tages of multiaxial critical plane damage parameters, the FIP parameter
(R2 = 0.76) in the form of semi-empirical formulas is convenient to
calculate and has a high correlation factor, but the threshold stress in­
tensity is difficult to obtain.
Fig. 5 compares the fatigue life prediction results of different damage
parameters with the experimental fatigue life. The test data in the
literature [4–7] are added to the SIF parameter and the FIP parameter.
Due to the existence of porosity defects, the fatigue life scatters are
relatively large [47], and the predicted fatigue life scatter bands of all
damage parameters have exceeded 5 times. The scatter bands gradually
increase as the stress level decreases, and the life prediction ability of all
damage parameters in VHCF range is relatively poor, while the
maximum scatter band has exceeded 10 times.
Most data points of SIF parameters are out of the 10-tiem scatter
band and the prediction results are the worst. For the GCF parameter
with the highest goodness of fit, most of the prediction results are within
the 5-time scatter band, but some data points in VHCF range have
exceeded the 10-time scatter band. Compared with the SCF parameter,
the improved fatigue life prediction ability of GCF parameter is mainly
shown in the LCF and HCF ranges, while the prediction abilities of the
them are the same as in the VHCF range. This is because the GCF
parameter further considers the influence of plastic strain around the
W. Jiang et al.
Fig. 6. Fracture modes distinguished damage parameter.
pore defect on the basis of the SCF parameter [16]. However, the local
plasticity of the pore defect edge is obvious in the LCF and HCF, which is
not obvious in the VHCF.
The prediction ability of the critical plane damage parameters is
similar, and the fatigue life prediction ability in the VHCF stage is even
better than that of the GCF parameter, but their prediction ability in the
LCF range is worse than that of the GCF parameter. Considering the LCF
life prediction ability of critical plane damage parameters, the CCB and
NOK parameters based on the energy criterion are indeed better, which
are the same as the conclusions of Su [17] and Li [18]. Although the data
from other documents have been added to the evaluation of the FIP
parameter [4–7], the overall prediction results are acceptable. However,
the fatigue life prediction scatter band of the FIP parameter in the LCF
range has exceeded 10 times, which is greater than all damage param­
eters except the SIF parameter. This is because the plasticity in the LCF
range is severe, but the FIP parameter has ignored the influence of
plasticity when estimating the maximum cyclic shear strain range by
using the elastic simplification method, where the applied positive stress
range is divided by the Young’s modulus of [0 0 1] orientation.
Comprehensively considering the correlation factors and the life
prediction results, the GCF parameter is a suitable parameter to quantify
the effect of pore defects on fatigue, which is the same as the conclusions
for conventional metal materials [31,32]. The reason that explains the
advantages of the GCF parameter over the other parameters is related to
the fatigue crack initiation and growth. Liu [2] conducted a finite
element analysis on the 3D reconstructed structure obtained by syn­
chrotron radiation micro X-ray micro computerized tomography and
revealed that stress concentration on the interdendritic surface of
micropore induces microcracks in Laves bands. Texier [48] and Agudo
[49] experimentally found that the presence of stress concentrators
(mainly pores) within interdendritic spacing as well as a coarser pre­
cipitation state is much more favorable to develop earlier slip, which
will promote creep and thereby reduce fatigue durability. The GCF
parameter not only considers the tress concentration, but also considers
the plasticity of pore defect, which can quantify the influence of porosity
on fatigue cracking and fatigue crack growth rate [31].
5. A fatigue life prediction method distinguishing fracture
modes
5.1. Theoretical model
According to the evaluation results, the geometric mean of stress–­
strain concentration factor kg is a suitable parameter as it can quantify
8
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883
Fig. 7. The experimental life versus GRCF parameter with different stress ratio.
the influence of porosity defect on fatigue crack initiation and growth.
For the N-SC superalloys, the slip is the cause of its plastic deformation.
Due to the clear physical mechanism, the critical plane damage pa­
rameters based on the stress and strain components of slip systems also
have a good life prediction ability [17]. Combining the advantages of
these two kinds damage parameters, this paper proposes the geometric
mean of resolved stress–strain concentration factor krg on slip systems,
which is defined as
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
̅√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
τmax γmax
krg = krσ krε = (22)
τ∞ γ∞
where τmax and γ max are respectively the maximum resolved stress and
resolved strain on slip systems, τ∞ and γ ∞ are respectively the far field
resolved stress and resolved strain of the corresponding slip plane with
τmax and γmax .
As shown in Fig. 6, the experiment in this paper found that the fa­
tigue fracture modes of CMSX-4 plus would transform with the change of
temperature and frequency. All LCF specimens were crystallographic
fracture and all VHCF specimens were opening mode fracture, but the
HCF specimens were mixed fracture (crystallographic fracture or
opening fracture alternate). Fig. 6 analyzes the relationship between the
max(krg ,kg )and the fracture modes, it is found that the krg is bigger in the
crystallographic fracture zone and the kg is bigger in the opening frac­
ture zone, but the krg or kg is alternatively bigger in the mixed fracture
zone. The results are interesting as the crystallographic fracture occurs
when the krg is bigger and the opening fracture occurs when the kg is
bigger. Thereby, the fracture modes of N-SC superalloys can be distin­
guished by the max(krg , kg ). The reasons may be that when the temper­
ature is low, the strength of the strengthening phase is low and the
dislocation will cut the matrix phase and the strengthening phase [13],
resulting in uneven macro deformation and shear failure on slip plane,
so the resolved stress–strain concentration in slip becomes severer.
When the temperature rises, the strength of the strengthening phase
gradually increases, and the dislocation movement begins to change into
climbing and cross-slip, even by-passing the strengthening phase [13],
so the macro deformation tends to be uniform and the principal
stress–strain concentration becomes less severe.
According to the definition of DGCF parameter, a damage parameter
DGRCF that can predict the fracture modes is proposed,
krg > kg Crystallographic fracture
DGRCF = max(krg , kg )Δσ (23)
krg < kg Mode I fracture
where Δσ is the applied positive stress range. Fig. 7 shows the
W. Jiang et al.
Fig. 8. Fitting result of M-GRCF damage parameter versus the experi­
mental life.
Fig. 9. The experimental life versus predicted life of both GRCF and
GCF parameters.
relationship between the GRCF parameters and the fatigue life of
different specimens. It can be found that the stress ratio significantly
affects the results, so the effect of average stress needs to be considered.
In this paper, the Gerber formula (Eq. (24)) was used to revise the
average stress of DGRCF , and a fatigue damage parameter DM− GRCF after
mean stress correction can be proposed as Eq. (25).
[ ]
Gerber : Δσ R = Δσ − 1 1 − (σm /σ b )2 (24)
max(krg , kg )Δσ R krg > kg Crystallographic fracture
DM− = (25)
GRCF
1 − (σ m /σ b )2 krg < kg Mode I fracture
where σ− 1 is the stress amplitude when the stress ratio is − 1, σR is the
stress amplitude when the stress ratio is R after mean stress correction.
σ m is the average stress, and σ b is the ultimate tensile strength. Similar to
the previous damage parameter evaluation, the exponential Basquin
formula (Eq. (20)) was used to predict the fatigue life.
9
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883
5.2. Model evaluation
The relationship between the M-GRCF parameter and the experi­
mental fatigue life is shown in Fig. 8. It can be found that the relation­
ship between the M-GRCF parameter and the experimental fatigue life
shows a power law and it is reasonable to use the exponential Basquin
equation to describe their relation. Compared Fig. 8 with Fig. 7, the
goodness of fitting has been significantly improved. Therefore, the se­
lection of the Gerber formula is suitable for the average stress correction.
From the fitting results in Fig. 8, the M-GRCF parameter (R2 = 0.86)
proposed in this paper has higher predictive ability than the GCF
parameter (R2 = 0.80) with the best evaluation result above. The
experimental life versus predicted life obtained from the M-GRCF
parameter and the GCF parameter is shown in Fig. 9. It can be observed
that the life prediction scatter band of M-GRCF in the LCF, HCF and
VHCF ranges are all smaller than that of the GCF parameter. Especially
in LCF and HCF ranges, the predicted results of the M-GRCF parameter
all fall within 5-time scatter band. The fracture modes prediction results
have been shown in Fig. 6, and the fracture modes prediction results are
consistent with the experiments. The evaluation results indicate that the
fatigue life prediction ability of the M-GRCF parameter has been
improved compared with the GCF parameter and the M-GRCF parameter
can successfully predict the fatigue fracture modes of N-SC superalloys.
6. Conclusion
In this paper, nine porosity-related fatigue damage parameters for N-
SC superalloys were evaluated by referring to those parameters origi­
nally proposed for casting and printing metal materials as well as the
critical plane damage parameters commonly used in N-SC superalloys.
Based on the evaluation results, a fatigue life prediction method for N-SC
superalloys, which considers the pore defect and can predict fracture
modes, is proposed. The following main conclusions are obtained:
(1) The CPFE model was constructed based on the single crystal
plasticity constitutive law, and the LCF hysteresis loop obtained
by the experiment was used to calibrate the CPFE parameters,
which provided a basement for the evaluation of the fatigue
damage parameter.
(2) The fatigue damage parameters were evaluated by experiment
data covering LCF, HCF and VHCF, and the evaluation results
show that the GCF parameter is the best, which can be a suitable
parameter to quantify the effect of porosity defects on fatigue.
(3) Combining the GCF parameter (kg ) and the characteristics of the
slip systems, the geometric mean of resolved stress and strain
concentration factor of the slip system krg was proposed. It is
found that maximum of kg and krg can predict the fracture modes
of N-SC superalloys.
(4) Based on the max(krg , kg ), a fatigue life prediction method for N-
SC superalloys considering porosity defect, which can distinguish
fracture modes, was proposed. The fracture mode prediction re­
sults are consistent with experimental results and the fatigue life
prediction results have also been improved compared with the
GCF parameter.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Wen Jiang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal
analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualiza­
tion. Weixing Yao: Validation, Resources, Supervision, Project admin­
istration, Funding acquisition. Piao Li: Investigation, Formal analysis,
Writing - review & editing. Peng Luo: Investigation, Formal analysis,
Writing - review & editing.
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Declaration of Competing Interest Acknowledgement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial This work was supported by the National Major Science and Tech­
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence nology Project of China (2017-VI-0003-0073) and the Priority Academic
the work reported in this paper. Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (Grant
No. 1108007002).

Appendix A

The tensile tests at 650 ◦ C and 950 ◦ C were carried out, and fatigue tests under three different conditions were carried out. The fatigue tests were
loaded with sinusoidal waveforms under load control. The LCF tests were conducted at temperature T = 650 ◦ C, frequency f = 0.5 Hz, stress ratio Rσ =
0.05 and the specimens used for these tests have a 13 mm gauge length, a ~4.3 mm gauge diameter and a 56 mm total length. The HCF tests were
conducted at T = 950 ◦ C, f = 72 Hz, Rσ =0.05 and the specimens used for these tests have a 15 mm gauge length, a ~ 5.0 mm gauge diameter and a 70
mm total length. The VHCF tests have been performed at T = 1000 ◦ C, f = ±20 + 0.5kHz, Rε =-1 using an ultrasonic fatigue machine and the specimens
have an hourglass shape with a 3 mm minimum diameter and a 36 mm total length [5]. After the mechanical test, the SEM was used to analyze the
fracture surface to obtain the size and location of the pore defect where the failure crack initiated.
The tensile properties at 650 ◦ C and 950 ◦ C were listed in Table A1, the LCF, HCF and VHCF test results and the information of the pore defect
initiate failure crack were listed in Tables A2–A4, where θ is the primary misorientation with respect to the [0 0 1] orientation, σ max is the maximum
applied stress, Nf is number of cycles to failure, ϕsurr is the diameter of the circle that circumscribe the main crack initiation site, d is the distance
between the main crack initiation site and the specimen surface, ϕsurr /d is the Murakami parameter and its classification (close-to-surface pore for
ϕsurr /d ≥ 1.6and internal pore for other condition) [50].

Table A1
Tensile properties at 650 ◦ C and 950 ◦ C of different STs of CMSX-4 Plus.
Heat Treatment T/ C E/GPa YS/GPa UTS/MPa A% Z%
◦

STD 650 102.6 1001.1 1179.1 13.5 13.1

HT1 105.5 979.8 1184.4 14.4 32.0
HT2 105.5 973.9 1042.3 2.1 9.6
HT3 104.2 984.1 1162.1 7.3 10.5
STD 950 81.7 789.4 / / /
HT1 83.4 832.1 999.6 25.4 24.8
HT2 86.7 834.0 962.3 24.8 19.6
HT3 88.3 837.0 996.9 24.7 30.7

Table A2
LCF test results at T = 650 ◦ C/Rσ = 0.05/f = 0.5Hz.
Reference Nf d/μm Initiation site
◦
θ/ σmax /MPa ϕsurr /μm ϕsurr /d

STD-LCF-1 7.5 950 128,468 55.7 650.0 0.09 Internal

STD-LCF-2 7.5 975 9,418 57.1 0 ∞ Surface
STD-LCF-3 5.1 930 118,431 57.6 890.0 0.06 Internal
STD-LCF-4 5.1 1025 38,315 104.7 1,092.0 0.10 Internal
HT1-LCF-1 9.1 1025 65,905 123.6 883.0 0.14 Internal
HT1-LCF-2 9.1 950 188,645 91.6 517.0 0.18 Internal
HT1-LCF-3 8.1 1040 29,175 154.0 36.0 4.28 Close-to-Surface
HT1-LCF-4 8.1 975 160,990 84.6 920.0 0.09 Internal
HT2-LCF-2 7.4 930 124,550 67.6 1,210.0 0.06 Internal
HT2-LCF-3 7.4 950 113,297 43.0 54.8 0.78 Internal
HT2-LCF-4 12.8 975 25,864 51.0 55.2 0.92 Internal
HT2-LCF-5 12.8 1000 3554 24.0 321.1 0.07 Internal
HT3-LCF-1 7.2 950 119,239 116.0 465.0 0.25 Internal
HT3-LCF-2 7.2 1025 28,587 118.4 227.0 0.52 Internal
HT3-LCF-3 8.6 1000 116,193 84.4 352.0 0.24 Internal
HT3-LCF-5 4.3 975 149,957 21.3 380.0 0.06 Internal
HT3-LCF-6 4.3 930 237,176 27.2 748.0 0.04 Internal

10
W. Jiang et al. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883

Table A3
HCF test results at T = 950 ◦ C/Rσ = 0.05/f = 72Hz.
Reference Nf d/μm Initiation site
◦
θ/ σmax /MPa ϕsurr /μm ϕsurr /d

HT1-HCF-1 5.0 610 12,705,417 102.8 800.0 0.13 Internal

HT1-HCF-2 5.2 650 3,166,955 70.0 620.0 0.11 Internal
HT1-HCF-3 5.2 590 17,577,660 20.0 96.3 0.21 Internal
HT1-HCF-4 9.4 665 1,0179,650 80.0 480.0 0.17 Internal
HT2-HCF-1 6.2 610 2,535,158 102.0 700.0 0.15 Internal
HT2-HCF-2 8.2 650 2,499,157 100.8 650.0 0.16 Internal
HT2-HCF-4 6.9 590 8,827,995 68.0 900.0 0.08 Internal

Table A4
VHCF test results at T = 1000 ◦ C/Rε = − 1/f = 20kHz.
Reference Nf d/μm Initiation site
◦
θ/ σmax /MPa ϕsurr /μm ϕsurr /d

HT1-VHCF-1 5.0 200 2,885,622 40.3 213.0 0.19 Internal

HT1-VHCF-2 5.2 220 6,146,832 33.0 215.7 0.15 Internal
HT1-VHCF-3 5.2 180 694,242,760 32.5 148.1 0.22 Internal
HT1-VHCF-4 9.4 160 149,329,836 93.6 322.9 0.29 Internal
HT1-VHCF-5 <5 153 6,596,872 79.4 995.9 0.08 Internal
HT2-VHCF-1 6.2 200 3,760,876 31.0 135.0 0.23 Internal
HT2-VHCF-2 8.2 160 58,122,556 37.0 23.0 1.61 Close-to-Surface
HT2-VHCF-3 6.9 180 249,125,966 69.0 74.0 0.93 Internal
HT2-VHCF-4 <5 153 5,690,909 110.2 216.5 0.51 Internal
HT3-VHCF-1 2.1 180 1,059,460,251 20.2 220. 0.92 Internal
HT3-VHCF-2 0.7 200 129,345,825 20.0 43.0 0.47 Internal
HT3-VHCF-3 5.7 220 1,657,244 40.0 178.0 0.22 Internal
HT3-VHCF-4 12.2 160 1,519,474,359 25.0 54.0 0.46 Internal

References [17] Y. Su, Q. Han, C. Zhang, et al., Effects of secondary orientation and temperature on
the fretting fatigue behaviors of Ni-based single crystal superalloys, Tribol. Int. 130
(2019) 9–18.
[1] I.S. Kim, B.G. Choi, J.E. Jung, et al., Effect of microstructural characteristics on the
[18] P. Li, W. Yao, H. Shi, et al., A topologized resolved shear stress method for the life
low cycle fatigue behaviors of cast Ni-base superalloys, Mater. Charact. 106 (2015)
prediction of nickel-base single crystal superalloys, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 108
375–381.
(2020), 102624.
[2] Y. Liu, M. Kang, Y. Wu, et al., Effects of microporosity and precipitates on the
[19] L. Zhang, L. Zhao, R. Jiang, et al., Crystal plasticity finite-element modelling of
cracking behavior in polycrystalline superalloy Inconel 718, Mater. Charact. 132
cyclic deformation and crack initiation in a nickel-based single-crystal superalloy
(2017) 175–186.
under low-cycle fatigue, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. (2020).
[3] L. Kunz, P. Lukáš, R. Konečná, High-cycle fatigue of Ni-base superalloy Inconel
[20] R. Hill, et al., Constitutive analysis of elastic-plastic crystals at arbitrary strain,
713LC, Int. J. Fatigue 32 (6) (2010) 908–913.
J. Mech. Phys. Solids (1972).
[4] S. Steuer, P. Villechaise, T.M. Pollock, et al., Benefits of high gradient solidification
[21] R.J.R.J. Asaro, Strain localization in ductile single crystals, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 25
for creep and low cycle fatigue of AM1 single crystal superalloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
(5) (1977) 309–338.
645 (2015) 109–115.
[22] R.J. Asaro, Micromechanics of crystals and polycrystals, Adv. Appl. Mech. 23 (08)
[5] A. Cervellon, J. Cormier, F. Mauget, et al., VHCF life evolution after microstructure
(1983) 1–115.
degradation of a Ni-based single crystal superalloy, Int. J. Fatigue 104 (2017)
[23] D. Peirce, R.J. Asaro, A. Needleman, Material rate dependence and localized
251–262.
deformation in crystalline solids, Acta Metallurgica 31 (12) (1983) 1951–1976.
[6] A. Cervellon, J. Cormier, F. Mauget, et al., Very high cycle fatigue of Ni-based
[24] D. Peirce, R.J. Asaro, A. Needleman, An analysis of nonuniform and localized
single-crystal superalloys at high temperature, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 49 (9)
deformation in ductile single crystals, Acta Metallurgica 30 (6) (1982) 1087–1119.
(2018) 3938–3950.
[25] J.L. Chaboche, Constitutive equations for cyclic plasticity and cyclic
[7] B. Nie, Z. Zhao, S. Liu, et al., Very high cycle fatigue behavior of a directionally
viscoplasticity, Int. J. Plast. 5 (3) (1989) 247–302.
solidified Ni-base superalloy DZ4, Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 11 (1) (2018) 98.
[26] I. Serrano-Munoz, J.Y. Buffiere, C. Verdu, Casting defects in structural components:
[8] L.M. Bortoluci Ormastroni, L. Mataveli Suave, A. Cervellon, et al., LCF, HCF and
are they all dangerous? A 3D study, Int. J. Fatigue 117 (2018) 471–484.
VHCF life sensitivity to solution heat treatment of a third-generation Ni-based
[27] Y.N. Hu, S.C. Wu, P.J. Withers, et al., The effect of manufacturing defects on the
single crystal superalloy, Int. J. Fatigue 130 (2020), 105247.
fatigue life of selective laser melted Ti-6Al-4V structures, Mater. Des. 192 (2020),
[9] L. Rémy, M. Geuffrard, A. Alam, et al., Effects of microstructure in high
108708.
temperature fatigue: lifetime to crack initiation of a single crystal superalloy in
[28] A. Tajiri, T. Nozaki, Y. Uematsu, et al., Fatigue limit prediction of large scale cast
high temperature low cycle fatigue, Int. J. Fatigue 57 (2013) 37–49.
aluminum alloy A356, Procedia Mater. Sci. 3 (2014) 924–929.
[10] F. Bourbita, L. Rémy, A combined critical distance and energy density model to
[29] T. Link, S. Zabler, A. Epishin, et al., Synchrotron tomography of porosity in single-
predict high temperature fatigue life in notched single crystal superalloy members,
crystal nickel-base superalloys, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 425 (1–2) (2006) 47–54.
Int. J. Fatigue 84 (2016) 17–27.
[30] G. Nicoletto, R. Konečná, S. Fintova, Characterization of microshrinkage casting
[11] S. Suzuki, M. Sakaguchi, H. Inoue, Temperature dependent fatigue crack
defects of Al–Si alloys by X-ray computed tomography and metallography, Int. J.
propagation in a single crystal Ni-base superalloy affected by primary and
Fatigue 41 (2012) 39–46.
secondary orientations, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 724 (2018) 559–565.
[31] P. Li, P.D. Lee, D.M. Maijer, et al., Quantification of the interaction within defect
[12] Z. He, Y. Zhang, W. Qiu, et al., Temperature effect on the low cycle fatigue
populations on fatigue behavior in an aluminum alloy, Acta Materialia 57 (12)
behavior of a directionally solidified nickel-base superalloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 676
(2009) 3539–3548.
(2016) 246–252.
[32] Y.X. Gao, J.Z. Yi, P.D. Lee, et al., The effect of porosity on the fatigue life of cast
[13] P. Li, Q.Q. Li, T. Jin, et al., Comparison of low-cycle fatigue behaviors between two
aluminium-silicon alloys, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 27 (7) (2004) 559–570.
nickel-based single-crystal superalloys, Int. J. Fatigue 63 (2014) 137–144.
[33] D.M. Nissley, T.G. Meyer, K.P. Walker, Life prediction and constitutive models for
[14] B.S. Adair, W.S. Johnson, S.D. Antolovich, et al., Crystallographic orientation and
engine hot section anisotropic materials program, NASA Contractor Report
temperature effects on the fatigue crack growth rate and resulting fracture surface
189223, 1992.
morphology in PWA1484 single crystal superalloy, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater.
[34] A. Ma, F. Roters, A constitutive model for fcc single crystals based on dislocation
Struct. 38 (1) (2015) 56–68.
densities and its application to uniaxial compression of aluminium single crystals,
[15] J. Telesman, L.J. Ghosn, Fatigue crack growth behavior of PWA 1484 single crystal
Acta Materialia 52 (12) (2004) 3603–3612.
superalloy at elevated temperatures, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 118 (118) (1995)
[35] Q. Han, W. Qiu, Z. He, et al., The effect of crystal orientation on fretting fatigue
399–405.
crack formation in Ni-based single-crystal superalloys: in-situ SEM observation and
[16] Y.N. Hu, S.C. Wu, Z.K. Wu, et al., A new approach to correlate the defect
crystal plasticity finite element simulation, Tribol. Int. 125 (2018) 209–219.
population with the fatigue life of selective laser melted Ti-6Al-4V alloy, Int. J.
[36] Y. Murakami, Material defects as the basis of fatigue design, Int. J. Fatigue 41
Fatigue 136 (2020), 105584.
(2012) 2–10.

11
W. Jiang et al.
[37] W.N. Findley, A theory for the effect of mean stress on fatigue of metals under
combined torsion and axial load or bending, J. Eng. Ind. 81 (4) (1959) 301.
[38] F.A. Kandil, M.W. Brown, K.J. Miller, Biaxial low-cycle fatigue fracture of 316
stainless steel at elevated temperature, Met. Soc. 280 (1982) 203–210.
[39] R.A. Naik, D.P. Deluca, D.M. Shah, Critical plane fatigue modeling and
characterization of single crystal nickel superalloys, J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power
126 (2) (2002).
[40] C.C. Chu, F.A. Conle, J.J.F. Bonnen, Multiaxial stress-strain modeling and fatigue
life prediction of SAE axle shafts. Advances in multiaxial fatigue. ASTM
International, 1993.
[41] A. Nitta, T. Ogata, K. Kuwabara, Fracture mechanisms and life assessment under
high-strain biaxial cyclic loading of Type 304 stainless steel, Int. J. Fatigue 11 (6)
(1989) 454.
[42] A. Fatemi, D.F. Socie, A critical plane approach to multiaxial fatigue damage
including out-of-phase loading, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 11 (3) (1988)
149–165.
[43] L. Susmel, D. Taylor, A novel formulation of the theory of critical distances to
estimate lifetime of notched components in the medium-cycle fatigue regime,
Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 30 (7) (2007) 567–581.
12
Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 112 (2021) 102883
[44] L. Susmel, The theory of critical distances: a review of its applications in fatigue,
Eng. Fract. Mech. 75 (7) (2008) 1706–1724.
[45] W. Yang, J. Li, S. Liu, et al., Orientation dependence of transverse tensile properties
of nickel-based third generation single crystal superalloy DD9 from 760 to 1100 ◦ C,
Trans. Nonferr. Met. Soc. China 29 (3) (2019) 558–568.
[46] N.G. Prastiti, Y. Xu, D.S. Balint, et al., Discrete dislocation, crystal plasticity and
experimental studies of fatigue crack nucleation in single-crystal nickel, Int. J.
Plast. 126 (2020), 102615.
[47] R.J. Morrissey, R. John, W. John Porter Iii, Fatigue variability of a single crystal
superalloy at elevated temperature, Int. J. Fatigue 31 (11–12) (2009) 1758–1763.
[48] D. Texier, D. Monceau, R. Mainguy, et al., Evidence of high-temperature strain
heterogeneities in a nickel-based single-crystal superalloy, Adv. Eng. Mater. 16 (1)
(2014) 60–64.
[49] L. Agudo Jácome, P. Nörtershäuser, J.K. Heyer, et al., High-temperature and low-
stress creep anisotropy of single-crystal superalloys, Acta Materialia 61 (8) (2013)
2926–2943.
[50] Y. Murakami, Metal Fatigue-effects of small defects and nonmetallic inclusions,
Oxford, 2002.