Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Mckee Chapter 7,8

    Uploaded by

    Arnab Azad
    11 views57 pages

    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

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views57 pages

    Mckee Chapter 7,8

    Uploaded by

    Arnab Azad

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 57
    CHAPTER -51CTION REDICT] Or STATIC FAILURE . aR or w u b o +T % fl i s ' Except for safety devices, military ordnance, and a few other items which art tended to fail, a large part of design i i i ial let Sarg ee This implies the acess cnpredcti ne ale vondioa? informatio sesential “°88" OF devices whose function is to fie is | rl opr conte a caleltd level of ef tension test. One ofthe classic ae aes Measured in a standard test 5 ne ity of the other oats from Coulomb in the eighty i TS Of note ‘ centut) ort 48 Concentrated are from the nineteenth celv paces! in the Dropagnnae Mechanics, which is based on as is highly likely op ah cracks. This is very important assumed. ot neo 164 pe Pom PREDICON OF stATIC FAILURE 165, FAILURE THEORIES, DUCTILE AVIOR : -Shear-Stress Theory also known as the Coulomb! the, als Cory, asserts that fa i she Mat failure occu yi ed ina stress reaches a critical level, That canal eel oe sion . ical level is most c St, In that test the load is tmaxial. and The maximum The tension st eee 1d is S,/2. The mi einen: RE saw in Section 44. Thus the critical shear : shear stress for general loading we deduced in oy — 05 z Recall the order: 6 > ¢2 > ¢5.) Thus, for safe desig” 3 e832 SM 2 <2Fs o ve a, ~ 035% (ly FS ; where FS is the factor of safety, discussed in Chapter 5. Relation (7.1) can be shown on a plot of principal stresses o,, ¢3. 03, as in Fig- ure 7.1. The stress in the z direction, ¢, = 0, is one of these principal stresses. It will be 01, 02, OF 04, depending on the signs of the other two. In the first quadrant, two of the principal stresses are positive, and the three Mohr's circles appear as sketched. ‘The (wo positive principalstresses then become o, and ¢,, and a, = 0 = o3. Relation ' (11) reduces to o4,< S,/FS. a vertical line. In the fourth quadrant, one principal stress is positive, and the other-is negative. The relative positions of the Mohr's circles are sketched in the figure, and c, = 0 is in the nilddie position, #2. The positive principal stress is o, and the negative stress becomes o. Relation (7.1) is as written (neither 4, nor 03 ig zero) and becomes the line of slope = 1,s shown. In the third quadrant, Iwo principal stressed are negative, hence o, = 0 is the largest and becomes 4, Rela feo (7.1) then reduces to —23 < SYFS, of 03 = —S,/FS, the horizontal Aine in the igure, : ‘ . = . . ‘Charks"Augustin de Coulomb (1736-1806) was'a Frengh engineer and physS9" ts un Asim Pilshed a work on the strength of raterias rom which is derived the hee™ Freon eet lovato engineers for his study of fictional forces (1779), Dry lon er eng under male alot eocity) is frequently called Coulomb friction. He also developed a me “A underlies modern techniques. eg ti rage 2Uomb is best known for his research in elects At eis phe Tepulsion states that the force between cares bf pabiaals Renda MVetsly asthe square of the distance between jism. Coulomb's Jaw of electrostatic rpa tothe product of the charges of electric charge is today called tom runout L034 plane Limit due to maximum ——— shear in 12 1-3) plane 7 O\ Limit due to maximum shear in ‘s, loading plane 1-3 : biowaveomasinum [FS 6, 05 «Fe shearing (12 plane eins gw oye 0) SFE evan ee I loading —ductile material. Mariwun der re ees pec maxims ates theo fo bisa c ina er on plata te 19 deans Fore nbetng ae fe eke Safe--Mobe's circle does not exceed the boundaries Unsafe” (aiture in 1-3. * plane) oh citete for the V4 t0eS Not exceed the zi * Me situation is sate. Noun pa ; Maskoumsheacatess theory on 10 plot : TT. : num shear PREDICTION OF staTIC FAILURE 167 ne theory can also be shown as an env thin whic Rey se aefety. This repre ‘clope within which the Mohr's circle(s) ‘On appears in Figure 7.2. If you sketch the A. A closed-end tube of material wit Example 7. Ac material with a yield strength of 60 ksi has outer diameter (OD) and a wall thickness of 0.050 in I is subjected to inner ee sure of 1200 psi. Find the margin of safety in pounds per square inch thow many more pounds per square inch could we add before failure occurs) A siress element is shown in Figure 7a, and ty ; the thin-wall equations as for Example 4.7: ior ea ore commuted by using 1200 x 3 2x 0050 ~ 36 000, ~ 18.000 (In this thin-wall pipe problem, the diameter is taken as the OD, 3 in, for convenience. You could argue that the average diameter 2975 should be used. The difference is in- significant in this case.) ° The 01, 02, and a3 above are the principal stresses. They are labeled according to the convention established: ¢, > 0 > 05. Failure will occur in the {-3 plane,.a shear failure at 45° to the 1 and 3 diréctions, as shown in Figure 7.3b. Since we want to find the margin of safety (MS) in terms of pressure, expression (7.1) is used as an equality with FS = L. In other words, we will find the limiting value of stress: . ~ agai OFS, = 60 ksi Since the stresses are proportional to the pipe pressure; Since the stresees are proporticesl to. ee Ms = 92= 78 (1200) = 800 psi 36 % Lex Plane of maximum shear: ‘ ' a) stresses FIGURE 7.3 Example 7.1. (a) Stress element. (b) Plane of maximum shear stress. ° & ie 5108 ant De mvvcat or ure erat 168 ruwowntt /vpaiture boundary (see Fig 7-2) FIGURE 74 ksi Figure 7.2 representation fo failure for Example 7.1. Stresses sit i 7.2. and showing the lee oblem by drawing Figure ee ment Mohr's els on a “ce baie shear stress is that causing yield in the tension test: Sy ; : ya = 30 ksi . Since all the stresses are linear with the Pipe pressure, the MS, is ! 2am = 800 psi of pressure Plot (Figure 7,1) for this problem. The FS is plotted. Since the Stresses are directly pro @ “load line” through this Figure 75's a sketch of a 0, vs, 4s, again, taken as 1. The point (36, 18 ks portional to the pressure, we can construct is ines . hw alloy steel with §,, = 904i ch is shown in Figure 7.6, It is made of ” by 80.1 4 gure vf then stands on the end of ihe tare oe SMIC puts a prop under the evtension (OHIEIME hae or the yeh © !05En an bsg eae proceed by finding wiry yor “0 “ 4 f a cna i OF the a takes to produce fire. Then . te 7.115 i feesboxly gi, bene Tand w ‘Are th ic i 0, in-plane principal ~ ose Stresses positive 3 . 0, in-plane stresses of Opposite sign 93 and S,_ are negative numbers.) cy < 6, in-plane principal stresses negative Note: a3 and Sy. are negative numbers.) I (3p the Mohr theory ate also shown in Figure 7.14, which is fat Peralleling Figure 7.1, 3 f ‘ oho theory, which extends the vertical boundary ite secommieduts ie Produce Yielding. tonne an al (@, = 03), as shown, generally fits € ‘AMation (7.5) above is-replaced bY (1st) AVailable a lure bound eS" EUs, which would include 15 The By OU Stamey art ATERE Curves unenclosed by te € hydrosti vane is ate es state, Whethes oot this arrangement i 8. stress re (7.52) (7.Sb) '7.5c) ch is 1 the 7 { by 5b’) sit ress at it not PREDICTION oF stanc FarLURE 179. theory s+ _7 Sheat diagonal (0, 3° FIGURE 7.14 : . fas sires limits per Molir's theory of failurg for biaxial loading. See notes on Figure 7.1 re axis labels. ayy Tog Be aa SE Sees ree ey Ts) (7.56) The t vs: @ representation of the modified theory is shown in the following sxample. : eye Example 7.5. Given the stress element of Figure 7.154, how large may the compressive stress , be if the material is brittle with S,, = 200 MPa ahd Sy = —1000 MPa? The factor of safety is FS = 2. We will perform the analysis graphically first. The modified Mobr theory (Figure 7.13) is shown in Figure. 7.15b, We do not know the greatest principal stress ¢, yet, only that it is positive, as shown by the sketth of Mohr's tircle. Also, ‘clearly 6, = ¢,=0 and oy <0, Point'a on Moht's circle for the stress element is located at 0, = 0, x = 80, ‘alues which will not change (the sigi. of r is immaterial). Tho center of the circle is then found by trial such that the circle passes through point a and is also tangent to 88 required. Then a, ~ 440 MPa is read as shown. af ha The solution may also be arrived at analytically. The limiting expression is Equa- (56°), which represents the tangent line bd in.the graphical solution. We see from ‘he element's Mohr's circle there that tion ¢ he negative direction.) We a eect, : “a eee tor having been shown in t positive ntimber, the vec iB he eave diecton) ‘ubstituting these in Equation (7.56"), the only unknown is oy, sai eNTAL FIGURE 7.15 ee & Acclys for Eaample 75. (a) Stress element Kodified Mohr theory sketch ¢_ = 428 MPa.(A second larger value ofc, 2s problem 7.15.) The unmodified Mohr theory follow: , = 410 MPa. This fi unmodified theory ig fers is we ult also results. The Significance of this we !:\ s Figure 7.13 or Equation 7.5b, with the bar igure is somewhat less than that for the modified theory, a8 more restrictive, (See Figure 7.14.) A) ov Norma Sires They, I the compressive strength $._ of a bri 4 4 rittl hats tensit eneth Sa You wll seein Figure 0 thal the Mra Rey the same asthe shear-stress theory ( the nthe Mot ‘au the circles on © ends boo nt theory reduces to the max material d, fail ji : CO. a ition, a teaches the fin aaa eat, Failure hay shee . Z ance ste nthe tension 1. s he. larges: vt) exceeds the compre: nSion test g lenge mc si c Ssive limit (sg. Hot the smallest (largest compres s Fequires for safety chant» ™aximum-non ee theoty ™ MO Eo) < Su “a Fs ms DICTION OF staTiC FarLuME 181 GURE 7.16 Maximum-normsl-ttress theory, On a plot of principal stresses, the theory appears as shown in Figure 7.16. comparing this plot with that of Figure 7.14, you see that the maximum-normal- fees theory is the same as the modified Mohr theory for the case where Sy = —Su. Example 7.6 We have the stress situation shown in Figuré 7.17a in a brittle material, for which S,, = 250 ksi. What is the FS? : result pe 1s the * nsile um- ittle ive) hus ¥l IRE 7.07 ne . Hlement aiid analysis for Example 7.6. (a) Stess 7.6) f ‘i (b) element: (b) Mohe's circle. pesion : prone evpaneeverats or MECHAIEAL . i 182 ie shown in Figure 7178. The cic iy stress 1316 Tg find FS. gives, ste Mone’ el ft HE SET i fi F : jan (7.5). with 1s == 300, Relation (7) a, - 390= s cs 49 aT Failure occurs. yvs STRESS CONCENTRATIC » acranding oft PREAOMERGN oy, aus tthe ca vor uniform thickness which cartes jt a plate ular, and the load is evenly Sistributey storm, If Row the dotted areas are cut out pa, be assumed by the redusr A simple illustration Ie concentration. Figure 7.18 shows longitudinally. Initially the plate 8 fe is across any section, i, the stresis uniform, I AO load which hid been carried by the removed pieces NN! Te Tes Tha y the the load will be borne by t i ver there is a change in geometry of a part. : In a few instances of simple geometry, the stresses can be computed exau ons {rom elasticity theory. These are very few indeed, so that Tor most practical situar; ‘fepsin shalis, Keyways, grooves, etc) the severity of the concentration has bers letermined experimentally or estimated by computer programs. The expaaees Pettis Han sense ‘or photoelastic techniques. The computers, made it possible to do the same work numerically through the finite-element method, Gai golutions for a number of difficult geometries have appeared in recent years ig . the literature, The result is expressed in the “theoretical” or “gcometric™ stress. concentration factor, which is The stress in the denominator for the plate in Figure 7.18 would be F/As, that com- ‘als in the lower secti on ctor is thos a mae, rat al ower section. The concentration increase in the larger noma ¢ r ‘Ber nominal stress due to the de- Stress concentration ‘ema ae aay OF stress 8 along ‘tributed Out. the reduced We have When. £xactly uations 2s been eNTAl ter has rethod. cars in stress- com- ration 1e de- PREDICTION oF static Fanune "T83 the geometry at the step. (Occasionait, (ion ee Hany event i is alas indionaa the reference is not the largest nit eesconcentration factors have been deterini suress-C0 fee number of com: Sarton. THE largest single source is the Pi on Sifts ae teproduced jn many teat, including thi sme Nee obtained by photoelastic and other methods we ters. domi of highest stress is usu: fon of RE. Peterson (8). is one (Appendix A). Those » before the widespread use ally a localized repi t a ly zed region of stress concentrati case of ductile behavior, if yielding in such an area cannot be tolerated thes Mmputed stress, incorporating K,, will be required to fall within the failure mits . earlier. This, however, is a rare case; localized yielding in most static sit ‘ons is ot objectionable (less than about a thousand Joading cycles). On the frst fad (or overload) application, yielding occurs; the material flows, and when’the jad is removed, residual stress of opposite sign exists (e.g., compressive if the ing w2s tensile). Then on subsequent loadings the stress level does not again ich the yield. The stress-concentration effect has lessened. m ‘Thus, whea ductile behavior and: static loading are anticipated, the effect of sees concentration usually need not be taken into account in reckoning strength, takss yielding at the location of the concentration is prevented by triaxiality or is. oiherwise unacceptable. ~ good engineer will seek to minimize stress concentrations through proper eign, For example, in’ Figure 7.18 the transition from A, to A, would always be done with as large a“radius as possible and never by straight lines, with a resulting sharp comer. / When the stress changes’ in magnitude and/or difection with time, which is termed fatigue, discussed in the following two chaptefs, stress concentration is the “uStimportant factor in failure. Over 80 percent of machine parts which fail do so by fatigue, and nearly all’such failures initiate at a’stress raiser (concentration). Since brittle materials do not yield, the computation of stress must include the stessconcentration factor K,. Steel becomes brittle when itis treated to high hard: 8 and we usually put cast irons in this category as well, though some are quite {ict (malleable iron, for example). Ceramics, which are coming into Widespread ing use, are naturally brittle. Cast iron has many internal irregularities (graphite, slag, etc.) as well as a rough ‘tlc. These irregularities represent points of stress congentration, exactly as does *tachined notch on the surface. Since published strengths are obtained on spec “ts with all these defects, the additional effect of notches, etc, on the surface Suall. The full value of Kj is thus not appropriate, and itis, rmodified through @ ameter g, known as the norch sensiirits. Notch sensitivity plays a free rte in ive calculations, discussed in Chapter 9. ‘The net stress-concentration factor uted by Ke1taki-) oe due to the concentration (K, f the stress dubtots val ri as 3, the factor to use would Neg wean Measures the amount s {09-410 the nominal stress (where K is 1). For ¢ K ig Ofttn suggested. Thus, for example, if K, is ~~ a ee Rao oe | a - ‘ Beh inh illimeters Dimensions im Hot RE TI9 ration for Example 77 Tension bar with stress conse je aMea oan iron (Sy = 32 ksi = 221 MP2) with 2 tran, aifin tension as shown in Figure 7.19. How we, of 1.5 is specified? : 2 40(1.5) = 60 KN. If We take the bar tote ess calculation, and the crtst Example 7.7./A bar of ASTM no verse hole of 6-mm diameter is loa rust the bar be if a factor of safety With FS = 1.5, we design for a force F brittle, the stress concentration js included in the stré stress then is oe oy = AE 4.06 = Kopoq = [1 + 0.2K, = Waar where-K, can be taken from Appendix-A-1. However, the width w is not known, Thy nominal stress used for this chart is, as we might expect, calculated on the basis of 4 = (w ~ dt, We also note that the abscissa of the chart is d/w (d = 0.006). After they facts are taken into account, the above stress relation results in We determine the point on the K, chart satisfying this i fi thi si A 18s, we have dw = 020'and.w = 30mm. ns aPression by tra. 7 LINEAR ELASTIC FRAC Teg tNea SP RACIURE ake Over the years there h; i m1 'as been constant pi ce utilize materials i tina en! inetd oe more efficiently. At the same time, ae Hae a ca po q rgists and metals ducers have st VEN to i r improve the eeneral aggressiveness hg sonat nd teak lores modate local aetie a has Pushed materials to th ely eee er “ facturing defer Sain without ensuing frat littit of their capacity t8 aceon uring defects, and even crack vice Ieautt &xi “starting point in design feta 6° 220% i : é fice i mechanics ste science of pat? 48 Most no sey cnt nd Fa fon ean ee na Predicting under what ‘a ly the aircraft industry. Fractu® NCONtrOllably pronase eUMStances an existing imperle> and result in total fracture. : Pagar Stresses at Crack ‘Tips ae Figure 7.20 shows th , : . termed modes I, 1, and 1°, PFincip ways aS inde in whi involving cracks are of the mode 1 sted in the ‘ieee Maks ae loaded. They 2 : They YP Mode int ig vant! engineering situation? ; = Sarly shear and would com as. de al PREDICTION OF stATiC Faitune ’ 185 ~ ie atong this avis \ Qe ~ CF 2 QS ©) ACURE 720 Q : sie Mates of crack loading. (a) Mode I: tensile mode. (6) Mode II: sliding mode. (c) Mode III: tearing or ‘tarsg mode. (d) Example of mixed modes. - Se py in cracked parts subjected to twisting torques. Mode'Il is seldom encoun- An occasional mix of modes occurs,’such as when a crack is disposed at an Sit the loading direction, indicated in Figure 7.20d. Here, even with an incli thon tele « as great as 60°, mode II makes little contribution to failure. In this nuultcton to fracture mechanidy, we ligit the discussion, to the tensile loading of tte Gi ae ah Stes element in the Vieinity of the ip of a mode I crack is showin in Figure Stresses have been determined analytically: . 30\ Kt cos 3(: sind sin 2) (1.7a) Pru Site eet 2 E 0 250. 36 176 i /geee Rt aos$(1 4 sins z (7.70) °, 2 Janr 0.0 30 So egy = Bhecos 5 sin 5 008 Jane 392 cance ee “ (170) pesion yNeNT comror 1s of MECHANICAL ; ruNpanenAl 186 in ‘The element is located by r and 4, : the vicinity of a mode I crack tis located by Stresses o2 an element in the sicinity of The expressions for mode II and mode.IIT cracks are similar. K is a Proportional constant we will discuss presently; its subscript indicates the mode type. fs The x and y' stresses result in strains in the = direction due to the Poisson e! a F thin nage od M the material is unrestrained in that direction, as in the cast c a thin plate, then no stress a. results. This is known as plane stress, i.e., stresses it rensions only (x and }). On the other hand, if the plate is thick, then in is is the surface) the material is Testrained in the z direction ation is known as plane strain (strains in two dimensions mstnase2r tx) 878 2ero in plane stress or plane st nstitutes thick and thin plates, and 9, = (6, + 0) This situ only). The z-type shear stres. We indicate shortly what ¢o, Stress-lntemsity Factor i: ¢ ‘ In (77s ¢Pends on the type and fie equation, you see that the units SPR 7) ifr is put on the left side O o psivin. Values of the steet 3 te intensity facie’ Sess x Jai psi Vin S-intensity fy Velstance, situations and are found j itera ee been worked out for a numbe! re nt “8 50,51]. A few charts for com configurations are shown jn * so) bons — Forman and Kobayashi: Isida; Mendelson 16, 3 ols 03S OG x 1= plate thickness a @) fo Bueckner 2 2 Irwin . ° 10 1a 14 1618: 20°27 D a G 4 ©) Fours 722 ' ‘testintensity factors [73]: (Copyright ASTM. Reprinted with permission) \ (Continoed) Where Mis bending moment an 3-poiat or 4-point bending “Te thickness Ww Continued, \V/ Paes ; DICTION OF static rane 189 t Crack zone pestle : indicated by expressi nest at eereonesn aie (7.7) attain high levels as nes agi Onsiderations woilhd jee ome Nery small, whey ahe assumption of linear clastic behan Oilld indicate. These stresses are op reaches ; foie state. The extent of the plastic Ane, material nearest the crack tip i : Zone alo: ing the stresses on elements along @ = 0, wen, oe sain x is obtained by ‘. Equations (7.7a) and 4g, 80 that, with eith yield o, theory or the distortion OF T7-7b). J 4 : ) plane stress 17.8) which is the distance’along the crack axis that yielding extends. It is labeled, plane ress Because NO @, Was considéred in the calculation. For plane strain [52] 1 (K,\? 5 ES plane strain (79) shich is smaller than that for plane stress, because of the additional restraint in the gestion. we rhe plastic zone makes the crack length effectively somewhat greater, and r, znd the physical length a of the crack are summed to produce an effective crack length: + ag =atr, Irthe plastic zone is large relative to the crack length, the background assump tion of linear elastic material behavior comes into question. Elastie-plastic fracture mechanics is a growing area of this science for dealing with such situations. It is beyond the scope of this synopsis. t Gitical Stress Intensity and Fracture Toughness Fer any of the configurations represented in Figure 7.22, or others, it is important ‘note two things: \ The stress ( y poit d mode I cracks is given by Equations g, OF gy) at-any point aroun 7 Fe eee te expressed as o = Kisid, ri where S(0,2)s the sam for any configuration involving a mode T crack. us : . 2 As you see in Figure 7.22, K, is directly proportional oe a oe trample, for the edge cracks of Figure 7.22c, Ki = (Yale. Now measure of Mette parameter, so K, varies diretly with the sUCSS 1 cy seduces the the stress near the crack. As K, increases, the extension ote nit The ca overat sites of te pizee and thus the potential MOIR Soon is reached tension forms a new surface, which require + yet fe potential enetBY a : , ; 3s the release © ‘ch that a small increase in crack si26 arts itwation has become unstable and tegen — caste is critical re the new sutl 4 ‘occurs at this critical crack po eB rpoceierating rate. Cataclysmic FAPINES ms , pesto, us or mncranten i . . with K, being analo, ; pot Ki THUS BOUS 1 vale of i wich is a silat angi yield strength for uct ied stress, Kye 48 8M tie behaviors _ ari ultima streneth for a jor a material is found in a standar s intensitY ‘crack on its.cdge- Figure 7.23 shoxg ized is visible, between the in The eritical stress IM i n will sion specie” chine. The crack: i Fhe instrument measures the crack separay i, for plane strain results Prin i din @ a specimen mounted i Oi eg through which the load is : ‘The speritich js such a size that the value cf Ke pene taht parts) It is called the plane-strd™t pacture toughness: GS? y, the minimum my Sand erack size a for plane strain to cxist are 24] - a 2.4 - 5 aandt2 23(§ ‘tig « ofthe plastic zone in plane strain in terms of ined for KS, (=Kr/S, at rupture) ang terial thicknes: We can find the approximate siz and t by utilizing expression (7.9). If it iss substituted in (7.10), then aand¢247, of TS 2% ofaandt FAGURE 7.23 tures as machine (Ceres: specimen machine. (Courtesy, Farigue 0) Prepren REDICTION OF static Fanune 191 Clair Asean) Thi leds 132 150 125 220 - 194 208 205, 260 300 25 325 300 seprined by permission of John Wiley & Swar Inc. fn Devermi- ssbnord Fracture Mechanics of Engineering Mazeriais by Richard, W Heraberg, copyright 1976 by John Wiley & Sons) For plane stress the K,, value may be significantly higher than that for plane stain, so design on the presumption of plane strain is conservative..While the plane- stain fracture toughness is a property. of thematerial, the plane-stress fracture tough tess is a property of the material and of the loading ¢ontiguration and part size, ‘pecially the thickness 1. This complicates the analysis. 7 Table 7.1 gives values of K,, (plane strain) for some metals. The yield strength alo indicated, Note that S, and K,, can move in opposite directions—a stronger "aterial does not generally provide greater fracture resistance. Some other values of ".may be found in Appendix D. The ffavture criterion, as developed above, states that for a given crack size “4d crackloading configuration, fracture will oceurat a critical nominaltress Ie) VOninal as defined in the charts), or, for a given nominal-stress level and crack/ oy : ‘configuration, rupture will occur at a critical crack size. The later staterent es mite in fatigye’situations where a crack may be growing slowly and the or iddeprupture is important. : 20 ksi is to be loaded as shown eer nr thickness edge crack } in in ent vl hat number will be applic Teadily detectable. However. @ factor \that a critical crack size a = 0.25 in mu "Suited thickness to avoid failure. | weld _—F ule pees — N= 6p 30E+ 09 xu) i ee z IGURE 7.24” : feu configuration for Example 78 Dimensions in inches < zone at the root of the crack,’using ex. We first calculate the size of the plast with K, = Ky. at rupture. presion (7 Aa : (5) = 0.003 in Ge \220, “The effective crack length is thus 0.253 i. - seo We enter Figure 7.22c with a/W = 0253/1.5 = 0.17 and find ¥ = 1.86. The char, as indicated, is based on At mupture Kj = K,,, hence 2 Yala _, 1866) x 30E + 03 x 0253 ' KW “SSE $03 x 225 This calculation was based on the assumption of plane strain. That needs to be checked ‘against (7.10): . ‘Ky.\? 5s\? ; and 2 25(%4) 225(S) = 0.16 =1.35in Both a and t meet this requirement. If meet t rement. [fone or the ott been conservative, ie, the thickness would be rue * 6x30 59 ksi Since S, for this material j noe S, is 220 ksi, a fa 7 beg es mats a factor of safety of nearly 4 exists for yielding. TH might imagine that We could do the Job better, and fnore che?!) y = 125 ksi and K,= 90 ksivit Tess level g = 98 ksi, The facto! f =... oo PREDICTION oF stanic rantune 193, ‘The plane-strain requirement is simsie Plastic Fracture Mychaties ve ents above The developms Presumed linear clastic. . . Behe patie ZN atthe crack ip be small in compare te coat Se any practical cases, the plastic zone becomes too ymparison iS the crack size. In i and analysis techniques based on elastic-plastic for this assumption to be Wisapproach is still in the development stages, avior must be employed. CLOSURE Limitations ~ This chapter has dealt with static failure theories, whose application therefore is lim- ited to loading conditions approximating those of the tests from which the strengths are derived: ambient temperatures ‘approximating “room” temperature, loadings re hich are not so rapid as to cause brittle behavior of normally ductile materials, and “few” (less than about a thousand) repetitions of the load. Ductile Materials, Static Loading the distortion energy theory is the most accurate. For design under static loadings, but not wastefully so, and some- The maxintum-shear-stress theory is conservative, what easier in its calculations. j Where stress concentrations occur, the stress concentration need not be taken into account if localized yielding can be tolerated. ‘Caution must be sed in situations sere triaxiality of stress may happen, for then brittle fracture can occur. rite Materials, Static Loading. ; the Mohr theory applies. When the ulti i pressit hs differ, ‘hen the ultimate tensile and compressive strengths €V Cl eS hea those strengths are the same, the ve Symumeprincipalstress theory shoul ‘sel. In fact, it is automatic. i If there are stress concentr ateoncentration factor. In general, thi iton a reduced value is used: m Kelt ah o Do ing, stres Sete q is usually taken a5 0.2. The resulting : latinne : i ld be multiplied by @ oretical factor K,. For ‘al siress sho the nomin J to the the ations, the p s is equal s is then used in failure of : 194 _punpaMentals ming COMMON Practice ; is bee! «Mechanics carsieesng omen Bt, i rracture Mee sin seu ral mere critical Cr sin the presummplion OTE ie nes so signing OF the basis 0" Sarre is then apprenrete PROBLEMS and 48 _Sevtions 71 and 72 Cities Ae re situations of Problems naximum- shear-stress theory for pra, rae Assuming FS = 1 ces concentration exis eidaiie crs a Nae a ol fecnie see the distortion encres theory 1 marked i C66 vere eer ava Unsafe 486 Unsafe dap Unsafe 484 Unsne™ 4.74: Sale 43f: Uns : cere Sotarand Sq = — 60 ksi. Use the modified Mohr the, {b) Material is brittle with Sw Answer: 4.7c: Unsale 4.ge Sale Te Unsafe , 4.89: Unsafe oF 48c: Unsafe © ihis 7.2. A stress element has 7 ksi A compressive stress also exists in the x direction. Hos Jarge may that stress bewwith FS . (a) Material is ductile with Sy % 2 maximum-shear-stress theory. ’ (@) Material is britle with S,, = 30.ksi.and S,, = ~ 60 bsir 7.3. Repeat Problem 7.2. but r= 8 ksi, 2, ksi_and_g, is tensile. Anse: (a) Distort 21.9 Fsi maximum-shear-stress: 0, : () 6, = 135 si : 1. Se, is abe made of ductile aluminim alloy having S,, = 120 MPa. It bas? analyzed aya tla Sg and a diameter of 70 mm, With these proportions, it may be hepfl for calculating eee Dressure WilFfail the container? (Example 47! resses,) Use the maximum-shear-stress TREOTY, A bar of duct uy ea yim-shear-sttess THEOty. A bar of duce steel (Sy = 5000 psi is loaded bX the agrangemeat shown it Fit ior of safety: (Note; The bar is twisted, bent, andl pulled sits’ y be helpful.for calculating stresses.) Use the distartion ene) SO ksi, Use the distortic 1 energy theory and te whi taneously. Example 7. theory, ‘Answer: FS = 43 ee ‘Componey nt of C74 -Vertical compen lent of 7° : F along the roa ; FIGURE prs f . | gepent Problem 7.8. CEP thatthe an x5 REPEA Ss0 that the rxial ft ree component ar seat Problem 7.5. except t Of F applied tothe ta inal isin the opposi rc ane PU thatthe nage OTHE Hei comprenive Pee t Ps i 670 MPa. . lis brittle with go>. v answer FS = 261 cette with SEROMA and 5, saress clement has 6, c a4 78 A Material is ductile with 0 ksi and t= Su.= 900 MP ~ ISS Which plate wo ‘al? tele Wi 00 _ th Mgeich in Figure P79 shows a chainedive : 19, The Sput on the right. i shows ein ive er leone th op an da, MPU on he (80 on ‘Ocket larger than 5 in, the obj nthe object (Speed reduction and torque increase. (The Fprockel is ROt_AM erfory Assuming no str © OMissios = 44S ksi, deter . ess So ae go Pekding monn ae een The be they it mo bending moment to the shat. Use th e bearings are self-aligning: ic., Answer’ @y = OUR oy = —T02: size is OK en mumSHEaE-stress theory. sareierial the dimension of the input Hons. FS = 2, and a steel with Input FIGURE P79 et is vertical, not horizontai. Figure P7.1. It is made of intended to torque Lug uts in in diameter. he chain on the left sprock bile is shown in pendix D) and is vo arms of the wrench are m 7.9, except that t 1. The lug wrench supplied with an automo! AISI 1040 steel, colc-drawn 20 percent (AP. 09 oF off at 120 pound-inches (Ib-in). The t of Whait margin’at safely extas%in terms of the 1orgue tEnsmitted, assis the wrench is rst way possible? = 481 Ib-in ‘ 196 pennant . ow ch roe torque can.be ry ¢ Use the maximums r gw PG = 2 exist so nest shown it FHRUE PY 09 +7. ty Materal is eit Wi Sit ne en = sie theory a = 00 MP fake q = 02 (Cast IFO), and se gy say Merits itl th 8 5 rion. 7 : in sume it is the same hr theory. ; modified Mohr theo Lye O i = 40mm FIGURE P7.12 7.13. 4 hollow shaft is supported at its efids on frictionless bars and is loaded by forces ast down‘on two levers, as shown in Figure P7.13. The stress-concentration effet {tos oz bending) at the points of attachment of the arms is estimated to be K, = 25(g=62 Find the margin of safety in terms of the vertical forces. (Hut: As the first step. the location of the worst stress situation must be found) ‘a) The material is steel, with 5, = $0 ksi. Use the maximum-shear-stress theory. Answer: MS = 11978N - (6) The material is cast iron, with a break strength of 30 ksi in tefision and 150\¢i2 compression, 1 Answer: MS = 6908.N a RY 5200 bs 7A4. A stress element has ¢ FIGURE P7.13 be for the mate 1a “ ‘= 15, aniig = 0.2, How large aye ~ 12 and the distortion enecs) 78. In Problem 7, 14, su # TAB? Use FS ve 1.2 Pos, is tens & = Land the ile. How large . ot ssi ain 2 2 0 ort tein ae Solutio, a ¥: For the brittle part Second value is assay 1 aysls, rather than graphically, O% “ys Answer: Duct WERE 8Or to make sense. Explain ¥" ete Say : SS MP) brittle 924MPa * ty eT : PREDICTION OF STAN FatLuRE {97 | tion 74 | yg. A round bar, shown in Figure p7 (a Find the size of the plastic zon {h) Find the rupture load, assumin {c) Find the loud at yield and co 16, as n vie i eat the crack ween crack, NE crack propap, ation vm it with (by | “FIGURE P7116 ~ - |. Materials 20247851 atominum |” : P 147. A plate of 7075 T6S! aluminum with an edge crack is shawa ia Figure P7.17. (a) How large may the crack be without rupture occurring? Answer; a = 108 mm (b) Is the condition one of piane strain or plane stress? = Plane strain : (o) Is the plastic zone significant in the calculation of (a? Answer: No, r, = 0.1 ram > ‘ (d) In view of your response to (b). you may wish to reconsider how you answered (c. SO Soe 4 ae OME. pester year conrosent © is or weer ave a maximum deflection of 198 runoamenta s histo ha atic of ea wie mis to be tolerated. what must jy 2 nag, Figure B7.18 18 8 SEH he bear Or or ine 4340 stecls. . ity, 18. 1 where) Wee 0 FIGURE P7.18 249, A bar of Ti-6Al-4¥ titanium alioy (Table 7.1; Ki = 55 MPa) shown’in Figure P7195, -mm edge crack has been discov, 4 support a load of 50 metrig tons (1). A 2-mm ¢ r ered. Why is the betor of safetjon the load? = Answer: FS = 242 2 sir ge WO Pimensions in mitimeters FIGURE P7.19 ft CHAPTER in th j PHENOMENON OF __ EATIGUE IN : ENGINEERING ma MATERIALS t In the tests described in Chapter 6, the loads were applied gradually and in oze direction (monotonic). The material was subjected to static stresses, and this was the assumption underlying the failure theories, in Chapter 7. In practice, loads are more often varying than they are constant, e.g.. every moving part of any vehicle, the wing spars and skin of an air¢raft, or the structural members of an offshore drilling platform. The nature of most of these elements demands a great many cycles of service life For example,’ in 80.000 kilometers (km) an automobile valve spring goes through some 10 million compression-extensions, and the’ crankshaft is subjected to twice that number of load cycles. Failure under such conditions has been termed far and it always occurs at stress levels less, and often very.much less, than what would be predicted by static failure theory. 7 The designer of devices which are to be subjected to repeated loadings an ‘ow the strength'limitations of materials under such conditions, We stt by Tel, ing a fitle background history and, then look at the common tests periorm ‘he material properties which derive from them. 1 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW g tests on iron chain 80s, alway axkes capacity, Which cling rapidly, the tesa i i some repeated loading (estlist known studies of fatigue Ae sa Tg ‘one by ini incer in . ar stati weet, Gezman mining ene! inn oh aa ti been the basis of their design. As this industry was ten &8P2 He A “blem attracted serious attention. 199 ‘ . wr of them still are tod cege a unit, as many” oF HE today, sects and ateS NTE seg were thus royce ‘beams; in ti © hy : in Figure 8.1a, resulting S84 M the Railway the axle rotated wil railroad cars, the bea moment diagram you s The stress at any Po the neutral axis to the poin aacressurse.at the top of the bottom 1 u h i fon. It will f this beam 1s in compress n. It will be at the top onesie see there. point in nt of interes = My’l, where y is the di a beam is ¢ = Ms/T. istan no rest, as shown in Figure 8.16. The Breatese fr ere y has the value of the radius, q °° s element at the bottom 0! 1 Cnet Gor | f Fomine Siren sange RoAio, Rs = @ Steve Croat man Large | reest Compressive Stresso 7) 7 Tension ¢ 2 Pe : | — Neutral axi } YER sin et ans i ‘ * Largest tengi i tensile ' | stre ' « ae sso ae +0) Ne : FIG : | # eed Compression Railroad cara axle, (0) Ls i Pe moma iagrams 8 0) Su HESS on & : i ae. Sad ©. Se a ulateurnals, where the stress was hi are sess concentration which Stel i snd‘ illiam John M. Rankine (1820-1872) 4's anh published @ paper in 1843 entitled, “On ssjormals of Railway Axles.” A. Woehler, sraiand published the results of 12 yeais of ex wy test scheme used by Woehler was un gue testing. © Laie reourse, fatigue probleris in en; tegin and end with railway axles. Th aor concerns in engineering design, se of the section change. Sconish engineer (the Rankine-cycle 1 Oe, Causes of Unexpected Breakage jerman, studied the problem in great experimentation in 1870. The rotating- til recently the basis of most material gineering components and structures did not ese problems have become, rather, one of the Efforts to overcome the fatigue difficult hi ‘srooeeded on two paths. One has been the study of the aire at the material and theoretical level, which js discussed in this chapter. The other is the testing of components and assemblies, for it was early recognized that there is no sompletely satisfactory substitute for doing this, especially for critical parts. For some: items - that is not a great burden, home washing machines, for example. A good bit of simu- lated use can be accumulated by letting units run in’a company laboratory and making corfections before a new model is released. Then if problems develop in customer use, faulty parts can be redesigned. The proving grounds of automobile ~ manufacturers are a larger.example. Here, of course, product safety is a main con- "am, which has become more and more acute with the development of product liability law in recent years. And the recall of cars to correct a design defect is very costly. SS . ' Over the years there have been a number of fatigue failures in aircraft. The British Comet J was the first jet passenger, airplane. Two of these crashed e 1954, tne of them 4 days following an inspection. The wreckage (recovered from the floor “the Mediterranean) was examined carefully and the conclusion reached thatthe Pessurized cabin had failed, beginning with small cracks at a comer of a oe Pressurization and return to atmospheric pressure at ee apa oe Del of stressing, of which there-had been 1290 in the one plane and. 00 Ut «All Comet aircraft of the type were grounded,and airframe SUE Se {ete es a meee tne an en aa Fase of testing complete major comp rears until a Bosing 77 lost ‘lag integrity scemed to be under control in reeent SEN Napa 1988, Teg tthe. co ofits eabin a Oe eine iatigue failure at rivet oes : idence i ing fat managed to land salely. Eviders Me cicular aircrat part of 2 See Yeidwige stinger above the cae 93 fights, hence that many Press le et Sig Nest of 7375, had Tove i eds wd ‘ asi assemblies are far from tered and every The load: i nd un : Is on airplane parts 4! jth every bump enco’ ting per flight: the Toads change ith mately | poultipl FIGURE 82 : ovine 757 wingfuselage fatigue test stun (Courtesy. Boeing Commercial Airplane Co) PHENOMENON oF FATIGUE IN ENGINEERING MATERIALS 2% ade, Landing Toads.can be severe, and the loads imposed during taxing igue test arrangements for the Boeing 757 are displa 33, The testing setup for the main rotor and blade control mer isscen in Figure 84 iy erp dilemma, On one hand, large safety factors, which one miht Pose ntegrity, also increase weight, which implies decreased payload ereomes, and in the extreme the machine might not even fly. On the err safety factors imply danger to human lives, Trasophies in aircraft design have evolved: Pnare design assumes that fatigue cracks will occur and parts may lt + ng itis necessary to Schedule inspections and backup in the form of i aths and erack stoppers, so that cracks will be found and the pacts fs gel rong yurtesy. Bell not applied jg however 10! © aly iosonhy oe ges. BECAUSE they gay, | urs landing 'B0ar. An gc, ired before failure OC°t frame with re Xcent |, Fe i airplane=1He aie tical t0 4° oye main EEUTS: Any three My > ponent 7 s Vol ? 1, Ba, Fight safety. It is generallY NOY pocing 747 Wy aircraft. eMBINES ACCU nor’ yeh ne f is very large aircralt. sich With mmultene Mead. (ThIS iS generally nor yyy oe in Sy ‘This ph cari bring the plane 19 SS one oF - fe if the aircraft can AY + also assumes the existence jine planes.) life design alse sh ul with small win-eeectolerant oF safe“ More due 10 SUCH CTACKS (ang : Oty actu, Second, damage Olam Oo eit Oe Ot ecermined by weed. The growth rate of « tigue eracks. The acral is Jer germed & ra speci id repa ; al, damage a8 el or cracks are detected 2p tature. A sizable factor of saa GURE oF Frentical for the computation of she equi inspection intervals. It is impon,” | Gack init 7 tt the re arrive.a applied to that time to arcive 0 Or aspection we Se loaat dai sMtquired by he US. AiPForce and Navy for by, | ars i sie : reasons. Iti also used by builders of civil aireral | their associa the maximu j sketch in Fi whine HANISM OF FATIGUE FAILURE Theories attempting to explain fatigue failure.have been through several gener. the process tions-of development. The term fatigue came into being because it was suppose Mater that the material became tired in some way of the stress variations it was subjected high-strengt to. People spoke of a gradual deterioration ofthe material under these condition | tion, ie., sli (whichis, to some extent, true) and then, noting the nature of the broken surfat, the tare reasoned that it had “crystallized” from its original “fibrous” nature. They were,in fact, looking at the surface which broke at the very last, not in fatigue but in static failure, the brittle rupture associated with uncontrolled propagation of a crack. There are three fairly distinct stages in fatigue failures: initiation, erat CRACK GR prowth, and fupture, ly iges in fatigue failures: crack initiation, crack of intense s grows, but the shear s RACK INITIA’ 3 face ee orienta etal consist of many grains or crystals. The erystab | several cra ele) In any can ato Unless the metal has been worked (covjea forged, turned 's often ev Present thet planes of een ye iented so tha under the leading eondiios because th Slip ocurs. The size ofthe enn al sieet to higher shear stress than others | gin of t ‘ i siz sli a [2 Pe esau. applied, OF cours, ppends on the stress level and the a ; ofa Photc bitNe preaiest ston eee ph i" A notch can be a ¢ net stress, a Breatest slip activity in the part wi! term int . ch. m™m - in contour, a of stress concentration, termed anal | phasic 'S of such as an inclusi i " from the Siero Porosity, Thea scratch, or an internal imperfect intrusions make maters yo et S01 See this ee eens ANG metal may et se, ‘oul a microscope, howevel- fe pe, ho} bands finally become, "°"° becay \ . sma ‘@use they i being only a few micron d!! ™Uptutes, tenes HE eXcellent stress raisers. TH rf | Micro, : S, ter 4 MeLETS in sige Pp ed microcracks, They are indeed 5 “rometer um) = 0,001 mm}, Bec! | PHENOSN "ENON OF FATIGUE IN ENGIN INEERING MATERIALS 205 Several microcracks coalesce. They grow in the ditection of maximum sh Win shear Further growth occurs on pi; mn planes of maximum tensile stress ane association with shear stress and slip, microcracks are generally oriented with ihe maximum shear stress. They may grow across several grains, as shown in the _. Gatch in Figure 8.5. There will usually be several cracks in a given locality, and as sia the process progresses, they tend to coalesce: ie ; ore | Materale ‘which are brittle under the loading conditions, such as cast iron of conditions high-strength steelat ordinary temperatures and loading rates, resist shear deforma- conditions an ie slip. In these cases the initiation, ‘of fatigue may occur at discontinuities in surfaces, ye structure or at some-inchusion or void, rather thaf at the surface. Ly were, in | | ut in static can | CRACK GROWTH: The tips of the microcracks created in the first phase are regions ‘ion. crack | Gfivenes stress eoncentratfon, and the material there isin a plastic state, The rack grows, but in a direction controlled by the maximuni tensile stress rather than by ve shear atrese which initiated the process. This is seen in Figure 8.5. There May be se crystals ral cracks, which will tend to come together. The advancing front of the crack wollen cakhert on the fractured surface as a series of ripples termed beachmarks. ireause they have the appearance of sand on a beach. Beg concentric with the origin of the trouble, the beachmarks give notice of the crack’s location. Figure 8.6 isa photograph of a typical fracture surface. This sige of the farigue process © We ROE i are simply crack growl, The siete of fracture chanics has proved to be a valuable tool for analysis of ths and the following Dhases of fatigue failure. i ; .5 until a critical PTURE, The growth of the crack(s) as described above comines ania

    You might also like