Talk:Fatigue (material)

message: Completed merge of the above article. Placed the contents including references into the "Factors that affect fatigue-life" section. Seems to have worked out fairly well. scope_creep (talk) 00:20, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Difference of fatigue strength in vacuum and air]]

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Fatigue (material). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090107042926/http://objectwiki.sciencemuseum.org.uk/wiki/Fuselage_of_de_Havilland_Comet_Airliner_G-ALYP to http://objectwiki.sciencemuseum.org.uk/wiki/Fuselage_of_de_Havilland_Comet_Airliner_G-ALYP
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:51, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fatigue (material). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050830021748/http://www.sv.vt.edu/classes/MSE2094_NoteBook/97ClassProj/anal/kelly/fatigue.html to http://www.sv.vt.edu/classes/MSE2094_NoteBook/97ClassProj/anal/kelly/fatigue.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070524230808/http://www.zwick.co.uk/appsdisp.php?id=25 to http://www.zwick.co.uk/appsdisp.php?id=25
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:38, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Thermal fatigue redirects to this article - but it seems that it is not described at all here (or too well hidden to find with the search term "thermal"). --Andi47 (talk) 11:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thermal Fatigue? Redirect to here, but not described. 

message: Much of the topic of low-cycle fatigue is covered here in Fatigue (material). 
There is a strong overlap in content with low cycle fatigue, with the formula section already re-produced in the Fatigue page.
Given that there is not a lot of unique content in Low-cycle fatigue, I propose to merge Low-cycle fatigue into the Fatigue (material) page and put a forwarding link.
NeedsGlasses (talk) 11:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose - This article is the main one of fatigue.  This article is long enough; it'd be better to move details from this article to Low-cycle fatigue instead, imo. -Fnlayson (talk) 12:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

text: I suspect the Fatigue page only seems long. By comparison with other pages such as fracture toughness its not really. The uneven area seems to be in predicting fatigue life which could be a page on its own. I was hoping to fix up the redundancy with a merge. Moving it (or whatever is not already there) into low-cycle fatigue is an option. Similarly the paris equation is already covered in the Paris page which is now a sub category of crack growth equations. The para "Fatigue failures, both for high and low cycle, all follow the same basic steps process of crack initiation, stage I crack growth, stage II crack growth, and finally ultimate failure." suggested there was more in common with low cycle fatigue, but the low cycle fatigue page makes no mention of any of this. NeedsGlasses (talk) 07:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

text: * OK, but you're still supposed to get a consensus here before making such a change (see WP:MERGE. -Fnlayson (talk) 14:23, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

text: no concensus was reached. Merge will not happen NeedsGlasses (talk) 01:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Low-cycle fatigue]] into [[Fatigue (material)]] 

message: I suspect that a previous statement questioning the existence of a fatigue limit for any metals was removed due to another editor's opinion on the subject. While the debate over the existence of fatigue limits in the fatigue community may not be settled, there is certainly more than enough evidence to put in a clause raising doubts about its existence. In fact, leaving the existence of fatigue limits unchallenged can lead to dangerous design choices for applications that may have large numbers of cycles.Bob Clemintime (talk) 19:56, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: When was this content added and removed before?  I don't remember seeing this content added or removed before, though I may have missed it. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  It took me some digging because the statement was added 28 November 2011! It turns out it you were the editor who removed the statement, claiming a single source was insufficient for such claims. Hopefully, I have provided enough sources to satisfy you from the past Bob Clemintime (talk) 01:37, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

text: * OK, I was expecting much more recent removal. Having only one source can appear to be a fringe theory, which is generally prohibited on Wikipedia. -Fnlayson (talk) 13:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Existence of fatigue limit