Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • BASF MathDesignThermoplasticMachine

    Uploaded by

    Edgąrd Romero
    46 views15 pages
    excelente libro

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    excelente libro

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    46 views15 pages

    BASF MathDesignThermoplasticMachine

    Uploaded by

    Edgąrd Romero
    excelente libro

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 15
    BASF Materials data sheet Review of mathematical design methods for thermoplastic machine parts This materials data sheet describes the mathematical methods adopted in current design practice for deter- mining the permissible loads that can be imposed on thermoplastic parts. Means are also presented for estimating the life of various parts in the light of figures obtained in practice. Attention is also drawn to the necessity of adhering to some dimensions that specit- ically concern polymers, particularly the permissible clearance between mating parts. Problems on materials and their processing and their influence on design The mechanical properties of plastics depend very much more than those of metals on the temperature, the nature of the load, and the duration and extent of loading. Furthermore, many ambient effects, e.g. ultra- violet radiation or the presence of certain chemicals, may give rise to aging and associated changes in prop- erties that are very difficult to express quantitatively in a design calculation Since their strength is roughly one order of magnitude less than that of metals, thermoplastics may be exces- sively stressed by comparatively low loads. This is counteracted by the fact that the moduli of elasticity for plastics differ from those of metals by as much as two orders of magnitude. Hence, it may be concluded that a Figure 1 Burger model for linear viscoelastic creep and extension during loading and unloading cycle plastics part is more likely to become unserviceable as a result of excessive deformation than by fracture. The very complexity of the stress-strain relationship makes it extremely difficult to calculate exact figures for the strain, and a large mathematical outlay is required. Stress-strain relationship There are three components of strain under external load: — instantaneous elastic strain, = time-dependent viscoelastic, completely reversible strain, and — time-dependent irreversible viscous strain, This can be easily understood in the light of a physical model (Figure 1) that allows the time-dependent stress-strain relationship to be formulated mathemati- cally. For various reasons, other approximations, e.g. that of Findley, are preferred for mathematical treatment of the problem (cf. Materials data sheet “Behaviour of Plastics under sustained static load”). The purely elastic, instantaneously reversible strain is restricted to less than one-thousandth of the entire range covered by the stress-strain relationship for most plastics. Hence the range in which Hook's law is valid, i.e. where the stress is proportional to the strain, is usually well exceeded in practice. ‘As the strain increases, the elastic range passes over into a range in which the laws of linear viscoelasticity apply. Within this range, any two strains e, and 2 may be added together if the associated stresses 0, and o, are superimposed. In an isochronous stress-strain diagram, this range is marked by the end of the linear portion of the isochrones. For most plastics, it ends at stresses that are responsible for 0.5 to 1% strain at the most. In the section of the curve that follows, the ratio of stress to strain does not depend solely on time (and the temperature of course), but also on the applied stress itself; the deformation process becomes more and more irreversibly viscous. 82607 July 1982 In standard design practice, thermoplastics are often loaded to a point in the vicinity of this range or some- times even within the range itself. Consequently, any design calculation based on the laws derived from the theory of elasticity would yield results that do not con- form to the actual conditions to an extent depending on the location of the loading point. On the other hand, even geometrically simple parts will involve a large mathematical outlay if the design calculation is to con- form exactly to the stress-strain characteristic for the plastic. Apart from this, figures are frequently not avail- able for the physical properties of the plastics that enter into the calculation. As long as the load remains at least in the vicinity of the linear viscoelastic range, the equations derived from the theory of elasticity wil allow sufficient accuracy. Consequently, their applica- tion is quite justifiable and is, in fact, indicated for economic reasons. Anisotropy Another difficulty imposed on the design of plastics parts is that it cannot be assumed that the continuous phase is homogeneous and isotropic. An anisotropy may assume the following forms. — Strength anisotropy, which entails that strength de- pends on the direction in which it is measured. — Elasticity anisotropy, which entails that the moduli depend on the direction of measurement. = Anisotropy on failure; the nature of the fracture (separation or shear failure) in the individual layers of a composite may depend on direction. Our interest is focussed on the first two forms of anisotropy, the cause of which may lie in the material itself, e.g. reinforcing with uniaxial fibres, or in mechanisms that arise during processing or machin- ing, including the orientation and moulded-in stresses induced during production. Molecular orientation The shear forces that act while the moulding com- pound is flowing change the original tangled structure of the molecules into unravelled strands or aligned rows of crystallites. If the moulding compound cools rapidly, these strands and rows are frozen into position (Figure 2). The results are molecular orientation and stresses orientated in a given direction. The amount of shear-induced orientation that can re- main in a machine part depends on the time available for the macromolecule to attain the energetically favourable state of maximum entropy, equivalent to an unorientated entangled structure, on cooling at a temperature above the glass transition point. The de- formed molecules do not reassume their original en- tangled shape unless the temperature is above the glass transition point. In other words, a machine part with an oriented structure will not distort unless it is heated to a temperature above the glass transition point. However, if it is cut mechanically into two parts with different orientation potential at temperatures lower than this, both parts will retain their original geometry. Figure 2 Molecular orientation caused by deformation of a circular felement of area resulting from shear flow (according to Chatain), bebe bce Macroscopic evidence of strength anisotropy would exist if the strength in the direction of orientation were decidedly higher than the basic level, i.e. the level in the unoriented state, and the strength at right angles to the direction of orientation were lower than this level. It is barely possible, if not impossible, to express this relationship quantitatively in a design calculation. Moulded-in stresses In contrast to stresses caused by orientation, moulded- in stresses can also relax or cause deformation in the energy-elastic range. They need not necessarily assume an externally visible form but will certainly become evident if a moulding is cut into two halves. The cause of moulded-in stresses is restriction of mac- roscopic shrinkage, for which three reasons exist: the cooling rate is not uniform over the cross-section of the moulding: the outer contours of the moulding have solidified while follow-up pressure is still being exerted on the interior; the tooling may also exert restraint, e.g. metal inserts. Another, entirely different type of moulded-in stress arises from the structure and may originate from the curing reactions into which ther- mosetting plastics enter, or by crystallization of par- tially crystalline thermoplastics. Yet another source is microscopic occlusions, e.g. pigments. Those stresses caused by differential cooling and follow-up pressure may exert a strong effect. Differences in the rate of cooling throughout the cross- section give rise to compressive stresses at the surface of the moulding, and these may counteract any tensile stresses acting in the outer layers, e.g. on bending. As opposed to this, follow-up pressure causes compres- sive stresses in the interior of the mould and tensile stresses in the outer zones. The stresses are superim- posed on those caused by cooling, with the result that tensile stresses may well occur at the surface of the moulding if the follow-up pressure is sufficiently high (Figure 3). These conditions are also difficult to express quantita- tively and introduce a further factor of uncertainty into the design calculation. Filler orientation Another form of orientation besides molecular occurs in fibre-reinforced plastics when the fibres are aligned in the direction of flow. Filler orientation of this nature exerts a greater influence than molecular orientation on the strength and the stress-strain characteristic (Figure 4) The difficulty here lies in predicting the orientation of the fibres within a moulding and thus in determining the corresponding values to be inserted in the design calculation. It is just as difficult to achieve an intended fibre orientation that will conform to the pattern of forces acting on the moulding. Machine parts with predictable load patterns ‘An immense mathematical outlay would be required to allow for all of these relationships in a design calcula- tion. Apart from a few highly specialized problems, this outlay could not be justified in standard design prac- tice, if only for economic reasons. Another point that arises is that although the parameters introduced dur- ing processing can be determined quantitatively on specimens and models they cannot yet be predicted with sufficient accuracy for mouldings of any desired geometry. Thus, in order to restrict the mathematical outlay to within justifiable limits, it is assumed that the mould- ings (obtained from unreinforced plastics) are isotropic and that the equations derived from the theory of elas- ticity apply. Any possible deviations are evaluated qual- itatively and allowed for in the form of safety factors. The fundamental procedure is shown in Figure 5. Information on the numerical value and the nature of the stresses acting on the cross-section to be studied can be obtained from a stress analysis. If the stress field is multiaxial, a reference value of stress that would give rise to identical strain is derived from the theory of failure. It is compared with the maximum permissible stress, which is obtained from the properties of the material, a safety factor and any necessary efficiency factors. rmouldedin stresses esol oleae follow-up super Figure@ Patterns for moulded-in stresses in mouldings: compression In direction of tare | torsion | compression | atrignt angles to rection thre 2b == htnout alas tres iongjtinal tension = ransverea| rr Figure 4 Stress-strain diagram for Ultramid B3EGS (GAP-nyion 6, 25% wt) paraliel to and at right angles to the orientation ofthe fires. Toad in roms Section sede ‘shape and size i nar] reference stress permeable erase ” mm = STA condition tobe sated OF Onn L__ igure 5 Design procedure to be adopted. Table 1 ‘Comparison of calculated and measured values for failure by bursting in thin-wall tubes Calculated failure stress Sev Material Wall Mean Bursting Tangential Reference Tensile strength thick- radius_—pressure stress stress measured on ness fm {mm} p[bar] a [N/mm?] specimen, s [mm] IN/mm?] og [N/mm] ®Lupolen 5261 Z (HOPE) 15 50 85 28.3 254 28 Lupolen 5261 Z (HOPE) 1.0 45 64 28.8 255 28 Lupolen 5261 Z (HOPE) 0.75 4.25 50 28.3 25.4 28 "Vinoflex (PVC) 0.75 5.25 1 637 56.4 58 Vinofiex (PVC) 0.75 5.25 89 623 55.2 58 The general equation for uniaxial tensile load with homogeneous stress distribution is F o-— a) where F = applied load A = cross-sectional area. The change in length per unit length under this load is a function of stress, temperature and time, i.e. = at (0,0, ) 2) Machine parts with this simple stress distribution are very rarely encountered in practice. One example might be found by considering the average hoop stress in a thin-wall tube under internal pressure.” Similar relationships exist in a thin collar that has been forced onto a metal boss. If the pressure within the tube is kept constant, the stress will also remain constant, and the strain will change with time and temperature (creep) as indicated by Eqn. (2). The amount of change can be obtained from the isochronous stress-strain diagram or calcu- lated from the apparent modulus E,, i. ©" Ee a (3) “In actual fact, this is @ 3-dimensional stress system or at least ‘wordimensional at the surface of the tube The maximum permissible stress above which failure by bursting might occur is given by (4) where S is the safety factor and op can be obtained from the stress-strain diagram relevant for bursting** or from a creep diagram. Table 1 lists the results of some burst- ing tests that were carried out on thin-wall tubes. These figures are compared with values of hoop stress calcu- lated from the following equation r %= PS (5) If the axial stress is also taken into consideration, the reference stress can be calculated from the maximum distortion energy theory (HMH ~ Huber, von Mises and Hencky: 0, am = 0.886 0%) It can be seen that this value agrees very well with the tensile strength determined in the tensile test. Figures calculated for the strain do not agree so well with the measured values. This can be illustrated by calculating the force that holds a snap-on connector together (Figure 6). The plastics sleeve is forced over the bevel on the collar of the rigid steel bolt until the collars in the recess. The force required to accomplish this is given by 0.62: Ad-e, a(2 Ho 6 ** See Materials data sheot "Stress-strain-temperature diagrams’ pure bending | e io x ° 1 = | & ) C2» ¢ 1) 7) a Sine Wy m= 22.0 oad eflaction * “ Figure6 Stress-strain distribution for the ease of pure bending. Table 2 Comparison of theoretical and measured values for the force required to effect cylindrical snap-on connections Material Oversize Dia-~ Wall Secant Force required Error Ad{mm] meter thickness modulus Theoretical Measured in % d{mm] s{mm] —E, [N/mm] Lupolen 18... (LD-PE) 0.65 32 9.0 250 980 620 58 Lupolen 18... (LD-PE) 14 4 43 450 1440 1420 14 Lupolen 60... (HD-PE) 1.0 51 60 600 1780 1395 276 ®Novolen 11... . (PP) 0.25 12 25 1400 430 395 a8 Ultraform N 2210 (POM) o4 10 4.0 3000 1290 1070 20.5 Ultraform N 2210 (POM) 0.16 30 75 3100 3240 1985 63 Vinoflex (PVC) 09 254 15 1550 1255 1000 25.5 Figure7 Snap-on connector Consisting of steel bolt and Plastics sieove, Eqn. (6) has been derived from the case of a rigid rod on an unyielding substrate. It is extremely important that the secant modulus E, for the average elongation of the sleeve be inserted in the equation. In this case, the calculation will yield an acceptable result, partic- ularly for thin-wall sleeves, although the elastic range is well exceeded. In the second case, in which a plastics sleeve is pressed over a rigid bolt, the strain in the sleeve remains con- stant after the joint has been effected, but the stress relaxes according to the general equation f(t) ” The decrease in stress can be read off from the time- stress curves. However, data on relaxation tests of this nature are scanty and may be replaced with sufficient accuracy by values read off from isochronous stress- strain diagrams obtained in creep tests." * See Materials data sheet “Behaviour of plastics under sustained static load The retaining force that can be transmitted axially or radially can then be calculated from this value of induced stress and the coefficient of friction. The case of pure bending ‘An example of pure bending is when a beam is sub- jected to a bending moment as is shown in Figure 7. If ‘the bending load is imposed by lateral forces, in- homogeneously distributed shear stresses will also act over the cross-section of the beam. However, if the dis- tance between supports is not less than the maximum deflection, these shear stresses can be neglected. Hence, if this condition is satisfied, even spiral springs or sprung hooks (snap-on connections) can be con- sidered as cases of pure bending for the purposes of the design calculation. In practice, these parts are also frequently loaded well above the elastic range. Nevertheless, it has become accepted practice to apply the equation valid for elastic stress-strain relationships to these cases as well and thus to determine a fictitious stress in the outer fibres. The figures thus calculated are higher than the actual stresses (Figure 7) Shear stresses Up to now, consideration has been given only to nor- mal stresses, i.e. those caused by forces acting at right angles to the cross-section. Since shear stresses are caused by forces that act in the plane of the cross- section, they also occur in any projections of the cross-section in question. In contrast to normal stresses, shear stresses give rise to angular displacement and not to changes in length; and, in analogy to Eqn. (3), the shear stress t and the strain y are related through the shear modulus G, i.e oRay ° The shear modulus and the modulus of elasticity are, in turn, related through Poisson's ratio u, i.e. E(o, 0,1) 82+ ul0.0,4) (9) In common with the other elastic “‘constants”, Pois- son's ratio « depends on the time, temperature and stress. If the temperature is below the glass transition and the duration of loading is brief, a numerical value of 0.35 is normally taken for unfilled plastics. Since the maximum value that u can attain is 0.5 (the volume remains constant), the error involved in inserting the wrong numerical value for yin Eqn. (9) is only about 11%, The case of pure torsion Ia shaft is subjected to pure torque, i.e. if no other forces act on it, and if it has a uniform circular cross- section, the maximum shear stress is located at the circumference, i.e. (10) As in the case of bending, the stress system is not homogeneous. Thus, if the stress in the outer fibre ex- ceeds the elastic limit, the underlying layers of material act as a support, and the stress distribution is no longer linear. The shear stress profile over the cross-section of a shaft subjected to torque is shown in Figure 8 for the case of deformation outside the elastic range, e.g. in a tightened plastics bolt. Here, too, it is standard practice to assume a linear stress distribution in de- termining the maximum stress, because any error thus involved is on the safe side. The case of shear Plastics are rarely used for shafts or other parts sub- jected to a torque but are resorted to more frequently for applications involving shear, e.g. rivetted joints, threads subjected to shear, etc. (Figure 9). In these cases, shear is always accompanied by bend- ing. However, if the bending component can be neg- lected, the permissible shear stress can be satisfactor- ily determined from the maximum shear theory, which assumes that failure occurs when the maximum shear- ing stress equals that in a specimen under simple J, stress profile EEN ere sroe prot ' x h @ | clastic range plastic range ‘True toss protie from ‘Sochronaus <> diagram iu Ustaly- however, 2 het (= moment ot inertia) Figure 8 Shear stress/shear distribution in the case of pure torsion. ia Sino — shoar force causing ‘lure simple shear) re Foendin Figure 8 Examples of parts subjected to shear with eq on the simplifying assumption of homogeneous stress distribution. tension at yield. The result in this case would be 1, = 0.5 o,. If the HMH maximum distortion energy theory is applied, the result would be t, = 0.58 o. Some theoretical figures obtained on this assumption are compared with experimental results in Figure 10. ‘Asis to be expected, the agreement becomes better the more the stress system corresponds to the case of pure shear, e.g. in a thumbscrew connection. The discre- pancy between theoretical and experimental figures for glass-reinforced nylon 66 can be ascribed to orienta- tion of the glass fibres. Good agreement is also obtained in tests consisting of withdrawing screws with fine metric threads (Table 3). However, owing to the additional bending stresses in- volved, the results obtained in experiments on screws with standard metric threads were decidedly lower than the figures calculated. In both cases, the threads were cut in the plastics part beforehand. The actual force required to withdraw self-tapping screws was higher than the calculated values. It was assumed that the stress pattern caused by the thread grooves was responsible for this. Values of shear strength measured on riveted connec- tions with one plane of shear are listed in Table 4. It is immediately apparent that in this case of loading the average shear stress determined from the results by the relationship tq = Fma/A is Substantially more than half the tensile strength at yield of the material concerned. This is only to be expected, because this stress system can certainly no longer be considered as pure shear. 109 § | a mooretica Eo = ft | | x Utramis ASE? 0| {ORE FA S625 95% my —¥%. | | 2 Utramd B55 PAG) cateulated 182 Ne | | 1 Upoion 56 2 HOPE) n | | i] / | A / j i ' / / | | | | ~ xf—| — u | x ‘0 iY 4 | xe he | aaa | | a a a Figure 10 Maximum torque transmitted by steel bolts with knurled heads in various plastics. Length-to-diameter ratio for the force fit= 1 On the other hand, the actual stress system would be very difficult to define mathematically. For this reason, values of t», corresponding roughly to 0.8 a,, the tensile strength at yield, should be inserted in design calcula- tions for rivetted connections. The same procedure should be adopted in determining the forces involved in punching. Table 3 Comparison of theoretical and measured values of the force required to withdraw screws with various types of thread from Terluran 877 T (ABS) Multiaxial stress systems Various theories of failure have been put forward to as- sist designers in determining whether a given machine part will withstand the multiaxial stress systems that are usually encountered in practice. For instance, the maximum stress theory (Rankine) assumes that failure occurs when the largest principal stress reaches the yield stress in a specimen subjected to tension or compression, i.e. if'o, = + o, The classic theories of failure do not completely de- scribe the behaviour of plastics. Nevertheless, the shear experiments described in the previous section have demonstrated that the maximum shear theory can be adopted with sufficient accuracy, i.e. the assump- tion that failure occurs when the maximum shear stress ‘equals that in a simple tension or compression speci- men at yield. Mathematically, + 6,= 03-05 (11) It thus follows that the maximum permissible shear stress is given by 1=050 (12) Experience has also shown that results of sufficient accuracy can also be obtained from the maximum dis tortion energy theory (Huber, von Mises and Hencky) In this case, the maximum permissible stress is given by 03)? + (03-04)? + (0; Onna a) (13) If this theory is assumed to be correct, allowance must be made for the fact that the factors of safety thus obtained are on the low side in the tension/tension zone but generally too high in the compression zone (cf. Figure 11) Table 4 Results of shear tests on rivetted connections with one plane of shear. Average values from 5 measurements in each case. Diameter of specimen 8 mm and test carried out at 23°C and 50% relative humidity and a relative rate of shear of v= 5 mm/min 1, = 0.5 0, (04 = 46.3 N/mm). Length of section tapped Material Tensile Shear stress |= 2d. Metric threads cut beforehand strength t= F./A atyield — {N/mm*] Type of screw Stripping force [N] [N/mm?] average of calculated 5 meas- from " Ultramid ASK 85 68 urements Fx=ad It, (PA 66) dry Metric = M4x0.5 2400 2327.3 Ultramid B3EG7 100 727 fine M6x0.5 5325 5236.4 (GRP PA6, thread 35% wt) Standard M4x0.7 1788 2327.3 metric = M6x1 4800 5236.4 Ultraform N 2210 58 56.2 thread (POM) Self- 420 3125 2565.8 tapping 4.80 4400 3351.3 1 Terluran877T 35 272 screw 6.32 5925 5773.1 5 (ABs) ‘A graph representing the theories of failure is shown in Figure 11. Some measured values for the principle stresses obtained on specimens subjected to biaxial stress have been included. The diagram provides a criterion for materials whose compressive strength is, higher than the tensile. Thus stresses that fall outside the ellipse or parabola are likely to cause failure. The equation for the ellipse is, 1 o= she: [ (m1) (61 + 02 + 09) ] (14) and for the parabola, =F . o= FS (+024 ot Ta (6 + 0+ 63)* + Tm Wor-oa + (03-0)? + (02-05)"] (15) where m is the ratio of the compressive to the tensile strength at failure, i.e. m = Ge/ox If m = 1, the Huber, von Mises and Hencky theory applies ‘Specimen calculation for press-fit A press-fit will be taken as an example to show how the mean theoretical failure stress can be calculated from the maximum distortion energy theory (HMH) and from the elliptical stress diagram. If a plastics ring is press- fitted onto a rigid metal shaft, the stress system act- ing on an element of volume dV will be as shown in Figure 12. The tangential tensile stress is given by (5) (16); and the radial compressive stress, by ) (17). The numerical values to be inserted in Eqns. (16) and (17) are 1.6 for r,/r, and 22 N/mm? for p. Hence, accord- ing to the maximum distortion energy theory, the theoretical mean failure stress will be nan = 64 N/mm?, If m = 1.4 (the figure for POM), the theoretical mean failure stress on the elliptical boundary line will be given by 0 = 58.9 N/mm*, Thus, as has already been stated, a higher value, i.e. a larger factor of safety, is obtained by the maximum distortion energy theory. Design stress The design stress must be less than, or at the most equal to, the maximum permissible value, and the associated strain must not exceed a given figure. The design stress is obtained by dividing the applicable material property K by a factor of safety S, i.e., Figure 11 Graphical representation of the various theories of failure. ‘The plotted points represent experimentally determined values of stress ratios leading to failure (m= o./ay, isotropic material and room temperature) Figure 12 Stress distribution in a thick-wall, press-ftted plastics collar. (18) A clearly defined value can be taken for K if the material undergoes brittle fracture (Figure 13 a) or has a pro- nounced yield point (Figure 13 b). If no such clearly de- fined points exist on the stress-strain curve, which is the case with many thermoplastics particularly at ele- vated temperatures, it is more difficult to find a suitable value for K. It has been proposed that the stress to be taken under these circumstances is that that causes a strain with a defined viscous component, e.g. 0.5% (Figure 13). If the stress exceeds a given level in amorphous, i.e. transparent, polymers, orazes are formed. In their initial stages, these crazes can still transmit loads, but as the strain increases, they develop into macroscopic cracks. The value of the critical stress above which crazes are formed can also be taken for K (Figures 13 d and 13 f). Ifthe part concerned is subjected to sustained static loads, K is taken to be the creep strength (Figure 19 g); or, in analogy with the method for determining the 6, «,s limit, the isochronous stress-strain diagram may be resorted to (Figure 13 e). If dynamic loads are imposed, K can be derived from the Wohler or the Smith diagram (Figs. 13 h and 13). In selecting K, allowance must obviously be made for the strong relationship between temperature and the properties of thermoplastics, regardless of whether the heat is applied externally or is generated by friction. If the temperature is likely to exceed the melting point of the thermoplastic, it assumes the character of K 0) iterate cone S| valle L ab: / cone [: S: a si sadeges’, RGSS, Ne 7 © || oecigram . ‘ 7 {fante | cigiat | iesananeous " —_shtilond stuicoas Sains, RN ae | | 3 cmp ‘yy \ . | | oe i cles ane Wonler diagram x7 = ann Te eiw gyeamietosa dynamic toss eee a Figure 19 Values of K for various loads (Lw = No. of load cycles) Safety factors The safety factor depends on the various factors of uncertainty that arise in the design calculation and in determining the properties of the materials. Examples of these are the determination of the design load, any simplifying assumptions made on the geometry, the stress analysis, and the previous history in processing. In this case, it is the designer's responsibility to lay down the safety factor. He must assess the significance of the simplifications made and the unquantifiable effects of processing The safety factor also depends on the extent of the damage that may occur in the event of failure and to the value assigned to K. In this case, the following values are submitted as a guide for the safety factor provided no other figures have been laid down or agreed upon. Smin= 2 safety factor against fracture (e.g. Figures 13 a, b, g, hand i. Smin= 3 factor of safety against bending and buck- ling Spin = 1.2 factor of safety against crazing (e.g. Fig- ures 13 d and f), with the proviso that the factor of safety for the strength is at least 2, 1.8. Spin = 2 Smin = 1.0 ford, o5,i-€. if the design stress is one-half of the tensile stress at yield (Figures 13 c and e) with the proviso that Sy = 2 for the strength. Smin = 1.5 against exceeding the critical strain. Et jency factors The lack of data on the behaviour of materials under certain conditions introduces further uncertainties in design calculations. If these were included in the factor of safety, they would obscure the stress analysis. For this reason they are treated separately and referred to as efficiency factors for the specific material con- cerned. They are all higher than unity. K 1 1 1 1 1 oem Ay An Bam Aa Aw me | not specific specific for for the material the material ‘Ay allows for the effect of temperature on the tensile strength and can be determined from the following equation, A (20) I~[C (-20)] where C has the following numerical values: *Ultramid A resins (nylon 66) Uitramid B resins (nylon 6) Ultradur resins (PBTP) = Glass-reinforced Ultramid and Ultradur (GRP-PA and GRP-PBTP) Ultraform (POM) = 0.0082 Terluran (ABS) = 0.0117 .0112 0.0125 0095, 0071 The above values were obtained by linear interpolation of the tensile stress/temperature curve between 0 and 100°C Obviously, more reliable figures could be ob- tained by direct measurement. On the other hand, Eqn. (20) can also be used to obtain a rough estimate for the effect of temperature on other mechanical properties. Ax. allows for the duration of loading, and the following numerical values may be taken for it. 1.3 if the load is sustained for a few hours 1.6 if the load is sustained for a few weeks 1.7 if the load is sustained for some months 2. ifthe load is sustained for some years. ‘Agy allows for the effect of dynamic loads, and a figure of about 1.3 to 1.6 can be assumed for it. The factor A, allows for any effects exerted by aging. If the properties of a material are altered by absorption of water, an efficiency factor A,, must be introduced It is given by the following equation, which is valid for unreinforced nylon 1 Ae paw en where w is the moisture content in % weight, assuming uniform distribution over the entire cross-section. Equation (21) is valid for 0%

    You might also like