Review of creep–fatigue endurance and life prediction of 316 stainless steels

• Effects of different factors on the creep–fatigue endurance of 316 SS are reviewed.
• Tensile hold period produces more damage than compressive hold period of 316 SS.
• The 316 SS exhibits cyclic-hardening characteristics under creep–fatigue conditions.
• Different creep–fatigue life prediction methods are summarized.
• The creep–fatigue life prediction capacities are evaluated.

The effects of different factors on the creep–fatigue endurance of 316 stainless steel are reviewed in this paper. The factors include hold period, strain range, stress range at half-life and stress relaxation behavior. The strength and limitation of different creep–fatigue life prediction methods are also summarized from the available data. It is found that each method shows some agreement with prediction with a specific set of testing data. Standard deviations of different prediction methods are calculated to evaluate the prediction capacity of these methods. It is showed that ductility exhaustion model exhibits highest accuracy at two different temperatures.