Baumgartner, JörgJörgBaumgartnerBreitenberger, MarcoMarcoBreitenbergerSonsino, Cetin MorrisCetin MorrisSonsino2025-02-142025-02-142024-08-28https://publica.fraunhofer.de/handle/publica/48397510.1007/s40194-024-01820-7This paper treats different fatigue (FAT)-scenarios for determining damage-equivalent stress ranges according to two methods for transforming a stress or load spectrum into a damage-equivalent constant amplitude loading, i.e., the Modified Equivalent Stress (MES) and the Required Fatigue Strength (RFS) concepts. The MES method is suggested by the IIW-recommendations for fatigue design and the RFS method is applied especially in the design of vehicle safety components. The resulting MES- and RFS-ranges are similar, but not equal. The MES-method delivers a damage-equivalent stress range that depends on the selected FAT-value, i.e., the position of the Woehler-curve is decisive. In contrast, the RFS-method results in a damage-equivalent fictitious Woehler-line that indicates the lowest necessary strength quality for a given stress spectrum. The allocation of the modified equivalent stress range to the appertaining bi-linear Woehler-curve does not result in the fatigue life caused by the spectrum. Only in the case of a linear Woehler-curve, the fatigue life is directly obtained. In the case of the RFS-application, the fatigue life is by definition equal to the spectrum length. For durability tests, the modified equivalent stress range (at cycles) and the associated FAT-Woehler-curve should not be used. However, the Woehler-curve derived by the RFS-method allows experimental durability proofs for any amplitude-cycle combination along it. Furthermore, the required lowest necessary strength also enables the selection of the most cost-effective manufacturing technique and quality. The RFS-Woehler-curve also results in a FAT-value with a defined probability of failure depending on the required safety factor.enFatigueVariable amplitude loadingModified equivalent stress rangeRequired fatigue strength rangeFatigue lifeProbability of failureSafetyjournal article