Figs.7 shows the comparisons for the initial cycle between LCF testing result from the SSFS specimen and the predicted results from the MTP FE specimens with varied scaling factors at 600 °C for FV566. The predicted average strain-stress responses in the loading direction, , were extracted from the parallel gauge length regions. Taking the design of l 0/d0 = 1.0 (MTP-1) as an example, it can be observed from Fig.7a that the
hysteresis shape obtained from the numerical FE model changes with the increase of scaling factor (e.g., β increases from 2.0 to 4.0), while the predicted hysteresis curve is in good agreement with SSFS data until β reaches to 4.0. As for the other two MTP samples shown in Figs.7b and 7c, the geometry constraint effect mitigates caused by the increase of l 0/d0 , leading to an excellent agreement of hysteresis responses with SSFS data using relatively smaller values of scaling factor, for example, β = 3.2 for MTP-2, and β = 2.7 for MTP-3, respectively. It can be clearly concluded here that the tentative scaling factors could result in different hysteresis responses for the MTP specimen until an appropriate value occurs. This value is regarded as the finalized scaling factor as tabulated in Table 2, which is capable to provide the excellent predicted hysteresis response and agree well with the experimental SSFS data.