压力容器强度分析程序，如美国机械工程师学会（ASME）锅炉和压力容器规范中的规则，是从实践经验发展到20世纪40年代中期。这种经验在很大程度上与低强度碳钢有关。疲劳失效相对较少，因为大多数压力容器服务不涉及显著的疲劳载荷，且所用材料的低膜应力水平和高延展性有助于补偿局部几何不连续处的应力集中。经济型高强度钢的可用性，其屈服强度与极限强度的比率比碳钢高得多，以及对压力容器强度的新要求，要求审查和修订设计和制造程序，以实现高效和安全的设计。 建立新设计标准所需的信息是通过受控实验而非服务经验开发的。低周疲劳强度是ASME选择的需要调查的几个设计因素之一，压力容器研究委员会（PVRC）对此进行了研究。本文是一份数据和信息的报告，这些数据和信息是通过良好的商业惯例制造的压力容器的低周疲劳强度研究获得的，而不是通常的实验室试样，其加工精度接近公差。测试的容器是7英尺长的圆柱形壳体。 长，36英寸。身份证，2英寸。墙壁和半球形端盖，一个带有1英寸。墙容器包含六到八个加固开口，本文对此进行了详细描述。建立测试条件是为了研究特定变量之间的关系，而不是为了模拟服务行为。这些容器试验的结果必须与通过这些关系预测的使用寿命有关，且不得被视为压力容器使用的典型结果。

Pressure vessel strength analysis procedures, such as the rules embodied in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, were evolved from practical experience until the mid-1940's. The experience was, for the most part, with low strength carbon steels. Fatigue failures were relatively rare because most pressure vessel services did not involve significant fatigue loading, and the low membrane stress levels and high ductility of the materials used helped to compensate for stress concentrations at local geometric discontinuities. The availability of economical higher strength steels, with much higher ratios of yield to ultimate strengths than carbon steels, with new demands on pressure vessel strength required review and revision of design and fabrication procedures to permit efficient and safe design. The information required to establish new design criteria have been developed by controlled experiments rather than from service experience. Low cycle fatigue strength is one of the several design factors, selected by ASME as requiring investigation, which the Pressure Vessel Research Committee (PVRC) undertook to study. This paper is a report of the data and information gained from a study of the low-cycle fatigue strength of pressure vessels fabricated by good commercial practice as opposed to the usual laboratory specimen which is machined to close tolerances. The vessels tested were cylindrical shells, 7ft. long, with a 36-in. ID, a 2-in. wall and hemispherical end closures, one with a 1-in. wall. The vessels contained from six to eight reinforced openings which are described in detail in this paper. The test conditions were established to study the relationships between specific variables and not to simulate service behavior. The results of these vessel tests must be related to predictions of service life through these relationships and must not be considered to be typical of pressure vessel service.