DESIGN OF SHAFTS

FOR

GENERAL ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS

by

GERMAN V. DRYDALE

Supervisor:
Prof. N. L. Svensson
School of Mechanical Engineering

Submitted in partial fulfilment of requirements

for the Degree of Master of Engineering Science

in the Faculty of Engineering at the University

of New South Wales

1978
< !j r ;•

10721 18. DEC. 19

LIBRARY
 I hereby certify that this work has not been submitted

for a higher degree to any other university or institution.

G. V. Drydale
 3

CONTENTS

PAGE

(i) LIST OF TABLES 5

(ii) LIST OF FIGURES 6

1. SYNOPSIS 8

2. INTRODUCTION 10

3. NOTATION AND UNITS 13

4. DESIGN PROCEDURE - (FLOW DIAGRAM) 17

5. PRELIMINARY DESIGN 18

5.1. Preliminary design formulae 19

5.2. Material selection 20

5.3. Shaft Strength Factor 25

5.4. Loads on Shaft 28

5.5. Service Factor 32

6. GEOMETRIC DESIGN 35

6.1. Most Common Shaft Features and

their stress concentration factors 37

6.2. Analysis of Shaft Features as Stress

Risers 67

6.3. Surface Finish 72

6.4. Size Factor 77

7. VERIFICATION 80

7.1. Reserve of Strength Concept 80

7.2 Design stresses 87

7.3 Reserve of Strength Formulae 89

 4

PAGE
8. REFERENCES 114

9. APPENDICES
A.l. Derivation of preliminary design

formulae 116
A.2. Construction of graph for the reciprocal
of shaft strength factor 123

A.3. Shaft design formulae based on elastic

theories of failure 127

A.4. Shaft material embrittlement under

low-cycle load 138

A.5. Derivation of reserve of strength

formulae for design stresses 7.3.1.
to 7.3.5. inclusively 146
A.6. Reserve of strength formulae for design
stresses a f 0, a f 0, t =t =0 160
a ' m ' ’a m
A.7. Reserve of strength formulae for design
stresses t ^ 0, t ^ 0, a = a =0 172
a ' ’ m ' ’a m
A.8. Reserve of strength formulae for design
stresses a ^ 0, x ^ 0, a =t =0 176

A.9. Reserve of strength formulae for design

stresses t f 0, o ^0,t = cr =0 181

A.10. Reserve of strength formulae for design

stresses a #0,x f 0, o = t =0 187

A.11. Application of G. Sines criterion for

fatigue failure to solution of complex

design stress cases 193

A.12. Worked example - design of shafts for

chain scraper drive 215
10. CONCLUSION 240
 5

(i) LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

5.2.1. List of carbon and alloy steels 21

5.5.1. Service factors - K 33

ser.
6.1.1. Index of stress concentration factors 38
7.1.1 Reserve of strength formulae Index 85-86
 6

(ii) LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

5.3.1. Graph of -— - reciprocal of shaft

str.
strength factor 24

5.4.1. Graph of 7 load cases 29

6.1.1. Solid circular shaft; circular fillet,

bending 39

6.1.2. Solid circular shaft, circular fillet,

torsion 40

6.1.3. Solid circular shaft, elliptical fillet,

bending 41

6.1.4. Example of shaft diameter change 43

6.1.5. Solid circular shaft, circular groove,

bending 48

6.1.6. Solid circular shaft, circular groove,

torsion 49

6.1.7. Solid circular shaft, hyperbolic groove,

bending 50

6.1.8. Stress rising factors for keyseats 53

6.1.9. Endurance limit reduction factors for

splines 55

6.1.10. Solid circular shaft, plain press fit,

bending 57

6.1.11. Endurance limit reduction factors for

press fits 59

6.1.12. Fatigue strength comparison of torque

transmitting devices 61

6.1.13. Endurance limit reduction factors for

metric threads 63
 7

PAGE

6.1.14. Solid circular shaft, transverse hole,

bending 64

6.1.15. Solid circular shaft, transverse hole,

torsion 65

6.2.1. Notch sensitivity factors 68

6.3.1. Surface factor - K „ 73

surf.
6.4.1. Size factors C , and C , 78
s.b. s.sh.
A.1.1. Graphical solution of [LOAD]] equation 120

A.2.1. Graphical solution of :— equation 122

str.
10 x C x K
A.2.2. Graphical solution of (---- o~---- ) 3 124

A.4.1. Severity of K_^ ' at 103 cycles 142

A.4.2 . Graph of effective stress concentration

factor (K ) at 103 cycles 142

A.6.1. Typical (a - a ) diagram 159

A.6.2. (a - a ) diagram for (n ) derivation 162

a nr & y.
A.6.3. (a - a ) diagram with reduced endurance
a m
limit 165

A.7.1. Typical (t - x ) diagram 171

A.8.1. Typical (aa ~ Tm) diagram 175

A.9.1. Typical (x - affl) diagram 180

A.10.1. Typical (x - a ) diagram 186

a a
A.12.1. Schematic diagram of chain scraper drive 214

A.12.2. Diagram of loads acting on shaft 1 222

A.12.3. Diagram of loads acting on shaft 2 227

A.12.4. Detail drawing of shaft 2 231

 8

1. SYNOPSIS

In this work a design procedure for determining of

shaft sizes is outlined. The design procedure is a summary

and a result of a literature search with the aim of
assisting an engineer, practising in general engineering.

The author does not postulate any theoretical concepts

and does not contribute any new experimental data. However,

in setting out the design procedure, the areas lacking such
data are highlighted, so that the future research will make
the procedure more complete and useful.

This work is limited to the shafts encountered in

general industrial engineering and excludes such fields as
aircraft, automotive, thermal and highly corrosive

environments.

The design procedure consists of the following three

basic stages:

1. Preliminary Design
2. Geometric Design
3. Verification.

THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN enables the designer of a new

machine to predict the size of a shaft, having knowledge of

the load conditions and only a conceptual sketch of the

shaft and the components associated with the shaft.

THE GEOMETRIC DESIGN is actually a detailed layout of

the shaft and its components. During this stage the shaft

is shaped to satisfy the requirements of other components.

 9

At this stage the stress risers are introduced, however the

number of these stress risers can be reduced by considering

the alternative solutions suggested in this work.

IN THE VERIFICATION STAGE the shaft suitability for

the load conditions is assessed by the value of the RESERVE

OF STRENGTH (OR FACTOR OF SAFETY) designed into the shaft.

It is suggested that the statutory bodies and the

Standards Associations draw up a comprehensive list of the

reserve of strength values for the various industrial shaft

applications, so that the shafts may be designed with

greater economy and confidence.

An example of shaft calculations illustrating the

proposed design procedure is included.
 10

2. INTRODUCTION

This thesis has its origin in B.H.P. Central Engineer­

ing Design office at North Sydney, where I was fortunate to

participate in design of such mechanical components as

special gearboxes for steelworks cranes, drives for belt

conveyors and other material handling and steelworks
machinery. Having to design a complete unit, a gearbox -
for example, the design process involves some guessing in

the earlier stage, followed by a preliminary layout, then

more accurate calculations and, after several changes, the

final layout is confirmed by the safety margins for the

critical components. This design process depends largely
on the experience of the designer and can become very
tedious and frustrating.

A brief literature search at the time has revealed

that for some components a systematic design approach had
been developed consisting of three basic stages:

(i) preliminary design

(ii) geometric design
(iii) verification stage of design.

For example, the Engineering Science data sheets published

by Engineering Science Data Unit in London suggest the

above method for design of spur and helical gears. The

design textbooks and references from U.S.S.R. (some in
Russian) strongly recommend the above design procedure for

the shaft design ERefs. 2, 6, 15, 25H. On the other hand

the literature from U.K. and U.S.A. seem to ignore the

method and, instead, offer the design formulae which

 11

concentrate on determining the shaft diameter from the

known layout of machinery. Similarly, the Australian

Standard AS B249-1969 (under revision at present) provides

formulae for calculating the shaft diameters. Having

used both design approaches, I have come to the conclusion
that the former: "preliminary - geometric - verification"

method is the most suitable for design of shafts. Hence

this method forms the basis of this thesis, together with

a detailed study of the complex stress combinations in the

shafts.

The thesis consists of two distinctive, but inter­

related parts. The first part includes sections 4, 5, 6, 7;
and the second part includes Appendices A.l. to A.11.
inclusively, whereas the remaining sections 1, 2, 3, 8 and
Appendix A.12. are of general nature. The first part is
specifically compiled to become designer’s reference for
shaft design, being of the similar format to the Engineering
Science Data publications on gear design. It commences with
Design Procedure which outlines the design process in
detail, and directs the designer to other sections of the
thesis. Those sections are:

Preliminary design which enables the designer to

estimate the preliminary shaft diameters in the

most critically loaded parts of the shaft.

Geometric design explains the effect of various

stress concentrations on the fatigue strength of

the shaft.

Verification design provides the reserve of strength

 12

formulae for all possible design stress combinations

encountered in the shafts.

The Appendices form the second part of this thesis

and contain all theoretical considerations used in compiling

the first part. It is proposed to use the thesis in the

following ways:
(i) in design of new shafts - use all three:
preliminary, geometric and verification

stages of design.

(ii) in checking existing shafts - use verifica­

tion stage only.

(iii) in upgrading the shafts - use verification

stage first to establish the available
reserve of strength, then use geometric
design for modifications, and finally use
verification stage again.

(iv) in analysis of failed shaft - the verifica­

tion stage may be used.

A difficulty was experienced in obtaining the

experimental data in the form suitable for the practical

design. The data seems to be spread among the various

institutions and insufficient effort is being made in

compiling it.

In preparing this thesis I have indebted myself to

many people and I take this opportunity to express my

gratitude to them, but my special thanks go to my wife,
Maya, for her patience and understanding.
 13

3. NOTATION & UNITS

units

A - centre distance for gear pair m

b - face width of gear m

C - size factor
s.
Cg ^ - size factor, determined in fully

reversing bending stress test

conditions

Cg gh - size factor, determined in fully

reversing torsional stress test
conditions

D diameter of various components m

d shaft diameter m

. f.
preliminary shaft diameter based m

on fatigue failure conditions

d preliminary shaft diameter based m

p-y-
on yield failure conditions

E Young's modules of material N/m2

F axial force N

F r ,’ F,t etc. force as defined by subscript N

reduction ratio

K - endurance limit reduction factor

- endurance limit reduction factor,

determined in fully reversing
bending stress test conditions
 14

K preliminary strength reduction

P-
factor

K service factor
ser.

K sh.
u endurance limit reduction factor,

determined in fully reversing

torsional shear stress test

conditions

K , „ shaft fatigue strength factor ^N/m2)

str.f.

K , shaft yield strength factor ^N/m2)

str.y.

K , surface factor
surf.

theoretical stress concentration -

Kt.
factor

L linear dimensions as defined by m

subscript

M bending moment N-m

m module for gears mm

N power watt

reserve of strength against

nf.
fatigue failure

n reserve of strength against

y•
yield failure

p pulling force in chain N

p chain pitch

s , endurance limit of material, N/m2

e. b.
determined in fully reversing

bending stress test conditions

 15

S e. sh.
u endurance limit of material, N/m2

determined in fully reversing

torsional shear stress test

conditions

S ultimate tensile strength of N/m2

ul.

material

tensile yield strength of material N/m2

S , shear yield strength of material N/m2

y. sh.

V shear force N

v linear velocity m/sec

z number of teeth (gears, sprockets)

a pressure angle for gear teeth degrees

3 pitch cone angle degrees

£ strain

n efficiency coefficient

A slenderness ratio

y Poisson's ratio

a normal stress N/m2

a amplitude of alternating normal N/m2

a
stress

a constant (mean) component of N/m2

m
stress

x shear stress N/m2

x amplitude of alternating shear N/m2

a
stress
 16

xm - constant (mean) component of N/m2

shear stress

u> - angular speed rev/min

 17

4. DESIGN PROCEDURE - (FLOW DIAGRAM)

DATA: PROPOSED LAYOUT AND LOADING DIAGRAM

SELECT MATERIAL sect.

ESTIMATE SHAFT STRENGTH FACTOR sect.

CALCULATE COMBINED LOADS ON SHAFT sect.

DETERMINE SERVICE FACTOR sect.

CALCULATE PRELIMINARY DIAMETER OF SHAFT sect .

CARRY-OUT

GEOMETRIC DESIGN sect.

REVISE LOADING DIAGRAM

CALCULATE DESIGN STRESSES - a sect.

FIND THE RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULA sect.

FIND STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTORS - K, &K sect .

DETERMINE SURFACE FACTOR sect.

surf.
FIND SIZE FACTORS sect .

CALCULATE RESERVE OF STRENGTH

AGAINST FATIGUE FAILURE sect.

AGAINST YIELD FAILURE

ASSESS SUITABILITY OF n sect.

ARE NOT SUITABLE, CHANGE

MATERIAL OR SHAFT DIAMETER

AND REPEAT VERIFICATION DESIGN

CHECK SHAFT FOR OTHER REQUIREMENTS,

SUCH AS, DEFLECTION, DYNAMIC STABILITY.

 18

5. PRELIMINARY DESIGN

The preliminary design is an approximate, but

systematic method of calculating the size of the shaft.

Before commencing the calculation, the designer has to
prepare the initial information on the:

(i) basic configuration of the shaft and the

components attached to it;

(ii) material of the shaft;

(iii) the nature and magnitude of the loads

applied to the shaft;

(iv) service requirements on the equipment.

At this stage, the accuracy of the information is not

essential and some of the initially selected parameters
will be modified during later stages of the design. This
section is arranged in the order prescribed by the design
procedure in section 4 and will assist the designer in
preparation of the required information and calculations.

Worked examples of shaft calculations are given in

the Appendix A.12. The examples also illustrate the

dependence of the shaft calculations on the parameters of

the components attached to the shaft.

 19

5.1. PRELIMINARY DESIGN FORMULA

The formula for determining the preliminary shaft

diameter is given as: [Ref. Appendix A.1.]

do = tf-- ---- x [LOAD]1/3 x K (5.1.1.)

p.f. K , o ser. v '
str.f.

where: preliminary shaft diameter (cyclic

loads) - (m)

shaft strength factor - (-^L-) ^

Kstr. = m.
Refer to Sect. 5.3.

[LOAD]1/3 = cubic root of load conditions - (N - m) 16

V,
Refer to Sect. 5.4.

service factor (dimensionless) -

ser
Refer to Sect. 5.5.

In the equation (5.1.1.) the shaft diameter ( d^ ^ ^

is based on the fatigue strength of material, designed to

withstand fatigue imposing loads. The shafts, which are

not subjected to a cyclic load, are designed to be stressed

to the yield point of the material. For these shafts the

equation (5.1.2.) should be used:

x [LOAD]1/3 x K (5.1.2.)
p-y ser
str.y.

where: dp y = preliminary shaft diameter (static) - (m)

Kstr y = s^aft yield strength factor - (-^-) ^

Refer to Sect. 5.3.

The theoretical justification for the formulae

(5.1.1.) and (5.1.2.) is given in Appendix A.l.

 20

5.2. MATERIAL SELECTION

A great number of materials are available and used

for shaft construction, both ferrous and non-ferrous type.

However, within the scope of this thesis the most common

shaft materials are plain carbon steels and high strength

alloy steels. An abridged list of these steels is given

in table (5.2.1.). The list is compiled in the order of

increasing Ultimate Tensile Strength (S ^ ) beginning

with S ^ = 380 x 106 N/m2 and including steels with

S ^ = 1000 x 106 N/m2. There are higher strength steels,

but their use is limited to the special applications.

The Ultimate Tensile strength of the steel is the

prime factor in selection of the shaft material. Since

the diameter of a shaft is inversely proportional to the

cubic root of (S ^ ), the selection of steel with higher

Ultimate Tensile strength leads to a smaller shaft.

However, it should be noted that, the lateral rigidity of

a shaft decreases with the use of the high strength material,

because the deflection of a shaft is inversely proportional

to the fourth power of the shaft diameter. Hence, the

rigidity decrease is greater than the decrease in the

diameter of the shaft.

For example: consider 2 simply supported shafts, carrying

identical loads in the middle, and made of two

different steels with ultimate tensile strength ratio

of

<Sul.>l
2.5
(Sul.^ 2
 21

OTHER ULTIMATE
DESCRIPTION AUSTRALIAN SPECIFICATIONS TENSILE
OF STEEL STANDARD BRITISH AMERICAN Sul STRENGTH
x 106 N/m2
BS-970 S.A.E.

MILD STEEL AS 1442/1020 En3 1020 380

'30' CARBON STEEL AS 1442/1030 En5 1030 460

*40' CARBON STEEL AS 1442/1040 En8 1040 540

'50' CARBON STEEL AS 1442/1050 En43 1050 650

NICKEL-CHROMIUM-
MOLYBDENUM STEEL AS 1444/8617 En361 8617 700
(CARBURISED)

CHROMIUM- AS 1444/4130 4130

MOLYBDENUM STEELS AS 1444/4135 4135 700-850
AS 1444/4140 - 4140

MANGANESE- - Enl6 700-850

MOLYBDENUM STEELS Enl7 -

NICKEL-CHROMIUM - En36A - 850

STEEL (CARBURISED)

NICKEL-CHROMIUM
STEEL AS 1444/3135 En 111 3135 850-950

NICKEL-CHROMIUM- En24 - 850-950

MOLYBDENUM STEELS - En25 900-1000

TABLE 5.2.1.
LIST OF CARBON AND ALLOY STEELS
 22

Since, the diameter of a shaft is a function of

(Su^ ) ^ , that is

dl “ f<Sul.>l'1/3

d2 = f(Sul.)2'V3

and providing that both shafts are designed to take

maximum allowable stress for each material, then the

ratio of their diameters is

(SUl-V/3 (2.5)^ 1.36

<Sul.V

The deflections for the shafts are

and the ratio of their deflections is

JT = ( j--)4 = (1.36)4 = 3.4

2 Q1

That is the shaft made from stronger material has

3.4 greater deflection than the shaft from weaker

material, when both shafts are loaded to their

respective maximum allowable stresses.

Therefore, when the lateral rigidity of a shaft is

important, and where the change in material will result in

reduction of the cross-section of the shaft, but not its

length then the low strength materials are more suitable.

[Ref. 11, ch. 3, pp. 173, 174.]

The other selection factors are: the cost of the

 23

material, which is more important in shafts produced in

large numbers and the cost of machining, which is higher

for the high strength steels. The ability of the shaft to
withstand wear is often required, and those shafts are
made from carburizing steels or through hardening steels.

In the general engineering applications it is better

to select steels from lower (S ^ ) range, such as ’30' or

’40’ carbon steels, because of their relatively low cost,
good machinability, almost universal availability, the
ability to take through hardening, as well as, localized

and surface hardening.

The list of steels in the table (5.2.1.) is provided

for quick reference during preliminary design stage. A
complete material specification is required for final
assessment of its suitability.
24

o:

^ o

X X
*— CM

<
CJ X FIGURE 5. 3.1
O Lj- r-
CC < O <x
£L ^ XO 1
_;to UJ h-
y cc o GRAPH OF
y L^- t— < Kstr
x Oil) it
RECIPROCAL OF SHAFT STRENGTH FACTOR
 25

5.3. SHAFT STRENGTH FACTOR

The reciprocal of shaft strength factor (7—^—) is

Kstr.
presented in a graphical form in the figure (5.3.1.). The

graph is the solution of an equation:

10 x C x K
1 r______s 7a (5.3.1.)
K , . L 0.45 X
str.f. ul.

The equation shows that, the shaft strength factor

(K tr ) combines the effect on the shaft diameter of the:

C - size factor
s.
K - stress rising factor

S ^ - ultimate tensile strength of the shaft

ul.
material.

The explanation of the graph construction is given in

Appendix A.2. The use of the graph is illustrated by the

example given in Figure (5.3.1.) and the following procedure:

(1) Determine the ultimate tensile strength (S )

for the selected material from table (5.2.1.)

in Section 5.2. or from other reference

source.

(2) Assess the stress rising factor (K), with the

aid of a rough sketch of the shaft, or an

initial layout of the machinery. The stress

rising factors are grouped as follows:

K = 1 Plain shafts, having no steps, key

seats or any stress rising features;

K = 2 Shafts, having small steps, large

fillet radii, light fitted components(

 26

involute splines;
K = 3 Shafts having interference fitted
components, key seats, large steps,
parallel sided splines, transverse
holes;
K = 4 Shafts, having shrink fitted

components with key seats and may

have several stress rising features

in the close proximity to the shafts

critical section.
This grouping is a guide only, whereas the

accurate values of the stress rising factors

(K) are given in Section 6, but at this
stage of design the guide is adequate.

(3) Assess the size of the shaft, that is, if the

diameter of shaft is less than 60 mm - then

C is 1 < C < 1.5; if the shaft diameter

s. s.
is 60 < d < 200, the size factor is
1.5 < C S • <2. For shafts with diameter
greater than 200, the size factor is Cg = 2.

The reciprocal of shaft fatigue strength factor

(jr——---) is in the range of 3 x 10-3 to 8 x 10 3, which,

str.f.
when used in equation (5.1.1.), gives the shaft diameter

(d) in metres, however for a quick mental calculation, the

-3 1
multiple (10 ) may be omitted. The ( =----- ) factor
str.f.
becomes 3 to 8, but the answer for the shaft diameter in
equation (5.1.1.) is then in (mm).

The reciprocal of shaft yield strength factor (t?——---)

str.y.
 27

is also given in the figure (5.3.1.)- In the example quoted

in the graph ^——--- = 2.8 x 10 3.
str.y.
 28

5.4. LOADS ON SHAFT

Loads are applied to the shaft through various

input/output devices. At this stage of design, the nominal
loads, not overloads, should be considered in the critical
sections of the shaft. These loads are to be resolved into

three basic forms:

(i) Bending moment - M - (N - m)

(ii) Torque - T - (N - m)
(iii) Axial force - F - (N)

Some of the input/output devices apply the

their basic form, such as: couplings transmit torque (T),
a drill transmits torque (T) and axial force (F) through
drill chuck. Other devices, such as: gears, belt and
chain drives apply transverse forces, acting at some distance
from the axis of the shaft, which in addition to torque, also
generate bending moments (M) and axial forces (F). Since a
number of transverse forces may be acting in various planes,
the bending moments generated by these forces, must be
resolved into their components and (where x - y is an
orthogonal set of axis) and the resultant bending moment
calculated from:

M = [M 2 + M 2P
x y

Refer to [Reference 3] for some most commonly

encountered input/output devices and the loads associated

with them.

The basic loads M, T and F should now be combined to

give [LOAD] factor in the preliminary design formula. There
 29

Figure 5.4.1. GRAPH OF 7 LOAD CASES

are 7 load cases possible as shown in figure 5.4.1.

For the preliminary design, the maximum shear stress

theory of failure is used, which is in agreement with most

theories of failure, but makes the shaft diameter selection

on the safe side. The Appendix A.3. derives the shaft

diameter formulae for various theories of failure.

The [LOAD] factor for each load case, as shown in

figure (5.4.1.) can be calculated as follows:

 30

(1) T - torque only, such as a transmission

shaft,

[LOAD] = T (N - m)

(2) M - bending moment only, for example -

railway wagon axle,

[LOAD] = M (N - m)

(3) F - axial force only, this is a rare case

in practice, and is best treated
separately as tension/compression
member.

(4) T &M - torque and bending moment are

present, this is a very common case
and both M and T should be considered:

[LOAD] = VSFTt? (N - m)

(5) M &F - bending moment and axial force, such

as a portion of a worm shaft on the

side of thrust bearing, but not on
torque side.

[LOAD] = M ± F 4-d- (N - m)
o

(F) is positive, if it produces

tension stress.

(F) is negative, if it produces

compression stress.

When (F) is small, in comparison to

oo|a

(M), it can be neglected, because (

is usually very small number, (in the
 31

order of 0.025 for the shaft diameter

d = 0.2m, and less for smaller
shafts), thus making the — g —
component of the load very small.
However, if (F) is comparatively
large, then a rough guess of the
expected shaft diameter should be
made.

(6) T & F - torque and axial force, for example:

Spindle of drilling machine

[LOAD] = v4F- g d)2 + T2 (N - m)

If (F) is small in comparison to (T),

F x d may be neglected;
the component —g—
refer to (M + F) case for explanation.

(7) T, M & F - torque, bending moment and axial force

are present. This is the most general
case for a critical section of a shaft

[LOAD] = ± F q d)2 + T2
o

Once again, if (F) is small, see

(M & F) case for explanation and sign

convention.

It should be noted again, that only the nominal loads

are used in the preliminary design, whereas the overloads

are allowed for by a service factor (K ser. ).

 32

5.5. SERVICE FACTOR

The service factor (K ser. ) is introduced in the

preliminary design formula to allow for the dynamic

(inertial) increases in the nominal loads on a shaft. The

increases are due to starting and stopping of a mechanism,
as well as, any sudden speed changes, which may be introduced
by fluctuation of demand load on the mechanism. The value
of the service factor depends on the type of prime mover,
load transmission devices and the nature of the mechanisms
useage.

In the preliminary stage of design the kinematic

analysis of the mechanism is impossible, due to lack of

detailed knowledge about its components, and so the service

factor is determined from statistical data on the performance
of existing machines. An abridged list of the service
factors (K ) is given in table (5.5.1.) [ref. 6^p. 18,
table 0.2].

The original values in the reference table (0.2) are

adjusted to suit the preliminary design formula, that is the

cubic roots of the original values are tabulated in the
table (5.5.1).

The service factor (K ser. ) should not be confused

with a factor of safety, because the service factor is

applied directly to the shaft diameter, whereas the factor

of safety is, usually, applied to a maximum allowable stress

in the material of the shaft. The service factor of unit

(K = 1) is associated with ideal service conditions,

ser.
 33

MJ O vO CM
CA DA CA -3- LA
1 i • • • 1 1 • * •
u 1 i T--- X--- x--- 1 1 x— X---

o 1 i 1
CM
| 1 1 1 | 1
03 JZ 1 i vO o 1 1 vO vO
4J CO 1 i CM CM * 1 1 CM CA
4— CD
03 C — — — — —
CD 4-J
C L. CM -cr r^. O
— 03 JZ 1--- i— CM CM CA
■a -M o • • • • 1 1 1 • 1
03 tn 4—' *--- T— x— '--- 1 1 1 X--- 1
LU O 13 | 1 i 1 1 1 1 | 1
C_> *--- LTV CM CM CA 1 1 1 -LJ- 1
<_> O 1 1 1 1
>
Q<Z — - - — —
LU
CO
CA vD o vO vO CO
u_ X--- CM X--- CM -^r CA CA
o X 1 1 • • • • • • •
•— 1 1 X--- r— T— *--- r— x--- T---
z CL 1 1 | | | 1 i | 1
o 03 1 1 -3- CM LA CM CM CM M3
OC 1 1 CM O CM CM CM CM

Q- — — — --

CC
C_> r^- -cr oo -3- -J" O O
CO •— t— CM o CM CM CA CA
LU 03 1 1 • • • • • • •
Q 33 1 1 r— x— r— X— x--- x--- X—

■a 1 1 i i | 1 1 | |
03 1 1 CM CA CA r^. CA vO
u. 1 1 1--- X--- o x— i— x--- CM
C3 • • • • • • •
1 T

CD O -3- -3" CM -3-

X C r— CM CM
03
0 4-J
i_
r—
|
,— 1 i i T---
|
1
i 1 1 1 i i 1
1 03 LA o O CM 1 i i O 1
o ■M O r— *--- *--- 1 i i ---- 1
z ID • • • • •
T~~ * * '

ID
03 CD CD
O c 03 • in | 03
>- CD O CD CD 03 O C
03 03 4J =3 b CD CD •---
> C CD L_ ---- -Q cn CD L_ JZ
C •--- o 03 •— 03 4-J 0
CD O CD in JZ •M c b X CD
C CJ CD Cl 03 a CD CD C 03 03 Q3 b
•--- c E C 03 03 C O ----- JZ C
4-) 4-1 — 13 •-- b C CD •— N *— CJ 03 CD
+-> .— — CL -C — L. -M •--
V—
o3— 03 > CD C
13 03 ---- u cn 4J 03 <4- b ---- L- •--
U -Q •— ^ 03 c O X •— o 4-J s_ 03 4-J
>- E CD b «— — C ---- -C CJ T3 b 4-
OZ 2 03 x •--- • — •— b •—
LU 03 CD •> c cn c V- 1 1 in L_ 03 03 •—
z L- L_ CD---- c 03 Ci CD L. 4-> CD JZ
a o 4- JZ i_ CD >-
L.
>- 03 c L. 03
in (D 4J O CJ c 4-J U L- CJ 03 03 U CD
o 03 >- 03 c (D »> CD 03 03 u •— O
< c*S L- 03 E 03 CD — c C O u 4—> CL
21 03 > ---- -a 03 X •— •--- •— 03 JZ CD L_
CD C c c CL c CD JZ -C 4J b 0
Ll_ C 03 O O 03 CD •— cj o 4-J l_ ---- Z3 Q.
O — CD
<---
L3 —
-M
u!)
cn
03 03 03 03 o o 2 03
1— 4-J E E 03 C r—
Z — a 03 O CD c CL 03 •--- •*> CL 03
O • — •— 4-J ZJ C •— E CD CD 03 4-J CD •---
L. V- 03 X •— > 2 C C 4- C CJ
I- X 4-J —
Cl
o. 4-> 03 d) •— •— 03 O >- 03
CL. O l 4-J 03 L- CD 4—* 4-J ID _C • — Cl
• •» C3
**
Cl o 2 O — 4-
•--
4-
•--
C
•---
CD CD 03 CD
CC CO •— CD •— in C
C_> u 03 CD CJ CD •— <— CD ---- 03 •— 4-
CO 03 C---- CD * E E L. C E JZ O
LU 2 O -M L. cn x cd ■O CD 4-J 03 CD 0
Q O CD — 03 i/) o CD 03 3- 03 — 03 E i_ c 03 CD
— 03 CD E 03 >- 03 (D 03 O C O
---- ----
CD CJ
•--
a 03
3-
CD b b
_Q -C CD O -C 03 CD in •— — 03 T3 CD
4-1 — 4-> o > CD 03 — _C C 1- _c 4—4 0) CD •--
o0 03 E 3 c c 03 3- O oo a oO 03 4-J 4-J 03 C C
f— CD 03 •— O 1— CL 3- 03 JZ CJ •— c Cl •--- 03
CD C 2 CJ CL CD E CD O 03 2 •— in JZ JZ
C C0 <J * L- 3- 03 ---- 03 CD O
03 CD L- CD c CD C — CD O CD O E 03 CD _C -C =3 03
C4— Q3 4-J 0) O C O 1_ L- 4-J C 4-J 03 0 cn L_ b
C C • — • — •— 4-J 03 03 — 03 — C •— 0
■--- • — 4-1 .— 4-J CL ■M C X > 4J > 03 CD • — >- JZ *
— JZ -C JZ o 03 o 03 C 03 CD 03 > E JZ > CD
03 (J CD <J •— L_ • — O — U — CJ 03 03 CJ 03 XI 0 s_
e 03 — 03 o L_ U 3- X O X !_ 03 03 c 0 0
co E _J E Lu CD M- LU CD UJ JC LU 4-J h- 21 JZ 03 al 4-J

- CM CA -3" LA VO CO CA

TABLE 5-5.1. - SERVICE FACTORS - K

ser
 34

such as, no load starting, a gradual coasting to a stop,

very small speeds, no sudden changes in demand load. From

the preliminary design formula:

d = K , x [LOAD]1/3 x K
p str. ser.

it is clear that, the service factor, for example

Kger = 1.3,(from table 5.5.1., refer to group 4, shock

loading after starting) makes the shaft diameter 30% larger,

than the diameter for the ideal service conditions.

 35

6. GEOMETRIC DESIGN

The geometric design is the design activity involving

a detailed layout of the shaft under consideration, together

with the various components attached to the shaft. The

prerequisite information for the geometric design is the

basic layout of the shaft and its components, and the

preliminary diameters of the critically loaded parts of the

shaft. The end product of the geometric design is a

detailed drawing of the shaft and from this drawing the
verification design is carried out. Unlike the preliminary
and verification stages of design, where the design

procedure is well defined, the geometric design is a

complex, creative process, and its end result largely
depends on the skill, experience and the practical engineer­
ing knowledge of the designer. The degree of complexity
varies from simple, constant diameter transmission shafts,
to the more elaborate stepped shafts, and, perhaps, most
complex crankshafts.

The primary objective in the geometric stage of

design is to arrive at the shape of the shaft, that will

satisfy the functional requirements expected from the shaft.

This functional shape often results in the introduction of
the stress risers, which greatly reduce the strength of the

shaft. Some stress risers are unavoidable and their

detrimental effect is accounted for by various stress

concentration factors.

It is, obviously, impossible to provide a comprehensive

guide for arriving at the functional shape of the shaft,

 36

because the shafts are present in a multitude of the

mechanisms, each with the specific requirements for the

shaft. This part of the geometric design is left to the

designer's skill and ingenuity.

However, some assistance to the designer can be given

by presenting a study of the stress risers and the stress

concentration factors, associated with them as follows in

sections 6.1. to 6.4. inclusively. The aim of the study is

twofold:

(i) to provide a list of the strength reduction

factors for the use in both the geometric

and the verification stages of design;

(ii) to suggest methods of eliminating or at

least reducing the detrimental effects of

the stress risers.

The section (6.1.), which gives a list of the most

common shaft features and their stress concentration factors,

is especially prepared for the use in the geometric design,

however it also provides the basis on which the strength

reduction factors are derived (see section 6.2.) for the

use in the verification stage of design.

The sections (6.3.) - surface finish and (6.4.) -

size factor are useful in both the geometric and the

verification stages of design.

 37

6.1. MOST COMMON SHAFT FEATURES AND THEIR STRESS

CONCENTRATION FACTORS

Most general engineering shafts have some features

that distinguish them from a plain, constant diameter shaft.

These distinguishing features can be divided into four

groups:
(i) diameter changes,

(ii) circumferential grooves

(iii) torque transmitting devices,

(iv) other, miscellaneous features.

The above groups of shaft features are listed in the

table (6.1.1.) with further subdivision within each group.
The basic geometry, the reference section and the number of
the figure, in which the theoretical stress concentration
factor (K^ ) can be found, are also given in the table
(6.1.1.).

A completely plain and constant diameter shaft is very

rare in general engineering, however, some sections of any

shaft can be free of any stress rising features, because
they are plain and constant in diameter. These parts of a
shaft have stress concentration factor equal to unity, but

they are still affected by the surface finish and the size

effect as described in the sections (6.3.) and (6.4.).

 38

FIGURE FOR (K)

DESCRIPTION OF REFERENCE
SHAFT FEATURE BASIC GEOMETRY SECTION
BENDING TORSION

PLAIN, CONSTANT
DIAMETER

GRADUAL CHANGE 6.1.1.

CIRCULAR FILLET 6.1.1. 6.1.1. 6.1.2.

ELLIPTICAL
6.1.3.
FILLET 6.1.1.

CIRCULAR GROOVE 6.1.2. 6.1.5. 6.1.6.

HYPERBOLIC
6.1.2. 6.1.7.
GROOVE

FLAT BOTTOM
GROOVE 6.1.2.

KEY SEATS 6.1.3. 6.1.8. 6.1.8.

SPLINES 6.1.3. 6.1.9. 6.1.9.

V////////////}

6.1.10.
PRESS FIT 6.1.3.
6.1.11.

FRICTION
6.1.3. 6.1.12.
DEVICES

THREADS 6.1.4. 6.1.13. 6.1.13.

HOLES 6.1.4. 6.1.14. 6.1.15.

TABLE 6.1.1.

INDEX OF STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTORS

39

Figure 6.1.1. Solid circular shaft; circular fillet: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor ~ K

Reproduced from reference [22]

 = 4

nom =----- r

-f- = 0.5

Figure 6 12 Solid circular shaft; circular fillet: torsion.

Theoretical stress concentration factor -

Reproduced from reference [22H

41

-2-s 3

Onom 5

d
Figure 6.1.3 Solid circular shaft; elliptical fillet: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor - K

t
Reproduced from reference [22]]
 42

6.1.1. Diameter changes (or steps) are very common features,

which are introduced to a shaft for various reasons,

such as:

(i) to provide a longitudinal location for

gears, bearings etc.

(ii) to assist the assembly of the shaft

mounted components with about the same

bore sizes

(iii) to reduce the shaft diameter at the

bearings, so that the economy in the cost

of the bearings can be achieved.

The last requirement (iii) can be often satisfied

by a gradual diameter change-taper, with included

angle up to 20°, and tool radius not less than 0.3

of the small diameter; such taper does not introduce

any stress concentration. [Ref. 23, ch. 3, (d).H

However, the taper changes are only possible in

the relatively long shafts, whereas in the short

shafts the abrupt diameter changes with either

circular or elliptical fillets are used. The

circular fillets are cheaper to produce and for

this reason they are widely used in preference to

the elliptical ones. The theoretical stress

concentration factors for both types of fillets

are given in the figures (6.1.1.), (6.1.2.) and

(6.1.3.).

In order to illustrate the methods of reducing

the stress concentrations at the diameter changes,

43

K t- bending )
(
R20

FIGURE 6.1.4.- EXAMPLE OF SHAFT DIAMETER CHANGE

 44

an example is provided in the figure (6.1.4.)- In

the example, the change is from larger diameter

D = 60 mm, to the bearing diameter d = 50 mm, the

the single row deep groove ball bearing can tolerate

maximum fillet radius r = 2 mm.

The first three solutions (a, b, c) in the

figure (6.1.4.) do not provide longitudinal location

for the bearing, whereas the other three (d, e, f)

locate the bearing on the shaft. Each solution has

some advantages and disadvantages as outlined in

the following:

Solution (a): the taper in this gradual diameter

change is 10° (or 20° included angle) and

the tool radius is 20 mm (which is 0.4 of

the small diameter (d)). The taper is

economical to produce; the stress concen­

tration factor is unity. The disadvantages

are the lack of longitudinal location for

the bearing and large clearance distance

(28 mm) from the diameter (D) to the bearing

Solution (b): the elliptical fillet reduces the

clearance distance to 8 mm. With reference

to figure (6.1.3.) the dimensions of the

fillet are a = 10 mm, b = 5 mm

10
then — = 2 = 0.2
b 5 and t = 50

Hence, from the figure (6.1.3.) = 1.34

for bending.
 45

Solution (c): the circular fillet is specified to

the maximum radius (5 mm); the bearing to

large diameter clearance is reduced to 3 mm

With reference to figure (6.1.1.) the

dimensions are:

5 mm, h 60 - 50 5 mm

then
50 " °'1

and

Hence, from the figure (6.1.1.) = 1.64

for bending. Comparing the solutions (b)

and (c): the circular grooves are cheaper
to produce, but the stress concentration
factor is higher.

Solution (d): the radius of the circular fillet is

reduced to 4 mm, so that a flat locating
shoulder is created for the spacer. The
cost of this solution is higher than the one
of Solution (c), but the cost is justified
when a positive location of the bearing on

the shaft is required. From figure (6.1.1.)

=1.7 for bending.

Solution (e): the elliptical fillet is cut into the

shoulder, leaving about 1 mm of flat

locating surface and at the same time

providing the necessary clearance for the

bearing. The stress concentration factor

for the cut-in elliptical or circular
 46

fillets are found in the same way as their

non-cut-in equivalents. Thus in this case,

from figure (6.1.3.) for a = 4, b = 2

a 4 n , a 4 ~ 0^
t- =
b 2o = 2 and -r
d = -50
ftt = 0.08

= 1.7 (interpolated)

The cut-in fillets are expensive to produce

and difficult to measure, however, in the

critically loaded shaft, their use can be

justified.

Solution (f): the circular fillet with the radius

dictated by the fitted component (r = 2 in
this case) is the most common solution to
the diameter change problem. However, as
this example shows, it can often be the
most detrimental to the fatigue strength of
the shaft. In this case, from figure (6.1.1.)

for r = 2; f = ^ = °-04

h
= 2.5
r

then K 2.05 (interpolated).

t.

In conclusion, the diameter change shaft features

are often combined with other stress risers, and

those situations are covered in the section (6.2.).

The quality of the surface finish on the fillets

plays as important a role as on any other part of

the shaft. This point is well illustrated in the

example No. 2 by H. A. Borchardt [Ref. 24.j.

 47

The theoretical stress concentration factors are

not used in design directly, but rather, their

derivatives - the endurance limit reduction factors

are used. The method of calculating the endurance
limit reduction factors is set out in the following

sect ion (6.2.).

48

Figure 61 5 Solid circular shaft; circular groove: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor - K

Reproduced from reference [22]

49

Figure 616 Solid circular shaft, circular groove: torsion.

Theoretical stress concentration factor - K

Reproduced from reference [22]]

50

nom

Figure 6.1.7. Solid circular shaft; hyperbolic groove: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor

Reproduced from reference [22]

 51

6.1.2. The circumferential grooves are very undesirable

shaft features from the fatigue strength point of

view. Three types of grooves are considered in

this work, namely: circular groove as shown in

the figures (6.1.5.) and (6.1.6.), hyperbolic

groove as shown in the figure (6.1.7.) and flat

bottom groove as shown in the table (6.1.1.)

The theoretical stress concentration factors for

the grooves are of relatively high order, hence the

use of the grooves in the critically loaded sections

of shaft should be especially avoided. Where
possible, the grooves should be replaced by other
shaft features, or at least re-located to the less
critically loaded sections. Consider a circlip
locating a gear in the middle of a shaft. The
circlip groove can be re-located towards the end
of the shaft and a spacer provided for the location
of the gear.

When the use of the grooves is unavoidable, then

the endurance limit reduction factors should be

calculated as described in the section (6.2.) and

the reduction factors to be used in the fatigue

design.

Note: the values of the theoretical stress

concentration factors for the grooves, as obtained

from the relevant figures listed in the table

(6.1.1.), should be, when used for the verification
design, increased by a factor of:
 52

, d v 3 _ _________ shaft diameter (d)________

^' root diameter of the groove (d )

This is necessary, because the (K^ ) values are

based on the root diameter of the groove, that is

a
max. 32 x M
where
Lt . nom. TT X d J
nom r.

On the other hand the design stresses in the

verification design are based on the nominal

32 X TT
diameter of the shaft, that is a, = ---- -ttt .
’ design 7T x d-3
If we define (K^ as the stress concentration

factor for the use in the verification design,

a
which is equal to (K^ = — max‘— f then by
design
equating x odesign = c K, x a
max. t. nom.

nom. 32 x M x it x d
t. a Lt. it x d 3 x 32 x M
design r.

The factor (-j-—)3 is usually small, because the

r. ,
grooves are shallow and the ratio —) is small.
53

SLED RUNNER END MILLED

KEY SEAT KEY SEAT

Kb orKsh

Kb END MILLED
Ksh BOTH TYPES

Kb SLED RUNNER

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Sul xIO N

FIGURE 6.1.8.

STRESS RISING FACTORS FOR KEY SEATS

 54

6.1.3. There is a wide variety of torque transmitting

devices used in general engineering. Two basic

types are recognized: non-friction devices, such
as keys and splines, and friction devices, such
as press fit on a straight shaft, friction fit on

taper shaft, and other friction locking rings,

bushes etc. The friction and non-friction devices

are often used together, such as a press fit

together with a key.

With reference to the index in the table (6.1.1.)

the endurance limit reduction nature of the torque
transmitting devices is discussed below.

(i) Torque transmission by a key requires a

keyseat which is milled into the shaft.
The two most common keyseats are: the
sled-runner and the end-milled as shown in
figure (6.1.8.). The sled-runner keyseat
has a smaller stress concentration for
bending loads, at the end of the keyseat,

because of less abrupt section changes.

Both keyseats have the same stress concen­

tration factors for the torsion loads. The

proportions of the keyseats are based on
the (USA S B17.1-1967) where (■£) value in
the order of (0.02) is recommended. The

British Standard (B.S.4235 Part 1-1967)

Y
recommends (-^) in the range of (0.005 to

0.01), which introduces considerably larger

stress concentrations. The theoretical

55

INVOLUTE SPLINE STRAIGHT SIDED

& GEAR PINION SPLINE

Ksh STRAIGHT
SIDED SPLINE

Kb BOTH
INVOLUTE SPLINE
& GEAR PINION
AND STRAIGHT
SIDED SPLINE

^sh
INVOLUTE SPLINE
& GEAR PINION

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9 00 1000 SulxlO N

FIGURE 6.1.9.

ENDURANCE LIMIT REDUCTION FACTORS FOR SPLINES

 56

stress concentration factors for the keyseats

can be found in ERef. 23, figs. 182, 183;
ref. 22, fig. 20-38].

The endurance limit reduction factors

(K^ ) and (Kg^ ) are given in the figure
(6.1.8.) and these are based on [Ref. 15,
ch. 4, table 22].

(ii) The splines form the second large group of

the non-friction torque transmitting devices.

The most common types of the splines are:

the straight sided and the involute splines.

The stress concentration develops at the
root of the spline tooth and for this reason
the size of the radius at the root is
important. The involute splines have by far
larger root radius, which is reflected in
the endurance limit reduction factors given
in figure (6.1.9.). The factors (K^ ) and

(Kgk ) are based on [Ref. 15, ch. 4, table

22]. The magnitudes of the endurance limit
reduction factors are comparable to the values

given in [Ref. 18]. Similarly to the keyseats,

the sled-runner type spline has smaller stress

concentration, than the abrupt-ended splines.

There seems to be a lack of comprehensive

data for the fatigue analysis of the spline,

particularly in the larger shaft sizes.

(iii) The press fit, or, more generally, the

57

P = RADIAL PRESSURE, PSl

E : MODULUS OF ELASTICITY , PSl
D,: INTERNAL DI A. COLLAR , IN .
D= EXTERNAL DIA COLLAR ,IN

---- f

Figure 61.10. Solid circular shaft; plain press fit: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor

Reproduced from reference C22J

 58

interference fit is the simplest and the

most commonly used friction device for torque
transmission. The nature of the stress

concentration due to the press fits can be

best discussed with the aid of the graph in

figure (6.1.10.). The theoretical stress
concentration (K^ ) decreases with the
1 i
decrease of (-j-) ratio. The reduction of (-^)

can be achieved by increasing the shaft

diameter (d), which leads to large components,
or by decreasing the length of the hub (l)
which leads to the reduction of the
torque transmission capacity of the joint.
The balance between the two parameters

is often found at (4) = 1.

d

The fatigue failure usually begins in the

shaft at the edges of the hub, and for this
reason the relief grooves in the hub can be
effectively used to reduce the stress
concentration. [Ref. 22, figs. 6-10, 6-13;

ref. 11, ch. 5, p. 319j. The suggested

methods are of descriptive nature, and further

experimental or service data is required, if

they are to be accepted for general
engineering design.

The interference fits are often employed

in conjunction with keys. The combination

of the two stress risers produces very high

stress concentration factors. Typical values

59

u6
SHRINK FIT

PRESS
jK_8
— k6
ROLLING CONTACT
BEARINGS
HEAVY FIT

ROLLING CONTACT
BEARINGS
LIGHT FIT

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9 00 1000 Suix10

WITH
SLED-RUNNER
KEY SEAT

WITH SLED-
RUNNER KEY SEAT

MULTIPLY VALUES
OF K BY 1*1 FOP
END MILLED
KEY SEATS

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Sul*10
FIGURE 6.1.11.
ENDURANCE LIMIT REDUCTION FACTORS FOR PRESS FITS
 60

of the endurance limit reduction factors are

shown in graphical form in the figure

(6.1.11.)- The graph is based on the draft

for [Ref. 18.], and for this reason the

figure (6.1.11.) should be taken as a guide

only, subject to the final recommendations

in the forthcoming replacement for the [Ref.

18.]. It should be noted, that the original

graphs in the [Ref. 18.] have no indication

l
of what values of (3) ratio was used in
d
their derivation. It can only be assumed
l
that (-j-) equals to the range of (1 to 1.2),
which are, generally, typical proportions.
The keyseat geometry in the [Ref. 18.] is
referred to the B.S. 4235: Part 1, which
leads to high stress concentration at the
corner of the keyseat. (See part (i) in
this section.) However, the format of the
graphs in the [Ref. 18.] is most suitable for

the practical design of shaft. More graphs

of this kind could be of great service to a
designer.

(iv) Other friction devices for transmitting the

torque consist of various proprietary items,

such as taper lock, split hub, taper shaft-

hub joint etc. Their merits are best

illustrated by a comparative study of such
devices against the more conventional methods.

The study is presented in the figure (6.1.12.)

61

% 00l

FIGURE 6.1.12.

FATIGUE STRENGTH COMPARISON OF TORQUE TRANSMITTING DEVICES

 62

showing the fatigue strength of each device,

as percentage of the fatigue strength of a

plain shaft.
63

METRIC THREAD

Kb or Ksh

g
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Sulx1Q N

FIGURE 6.1.13.
ENDURANCE LIMIT REDUCTION FACTORS FOR METRIC THREADS
64

Figure 6.1.14. Solid circular shaft; transverse hole: bending.

Theoretical stress concentration factor - K

Reproduced from reference [22]]

65

Figure 6.1.15. Solid circular shaft; transverse hole: torsion

Theoretical stress concentration factor

Reproduced from reference [22J

 66

6.1.4. This group of stress concentration risers combines

the various shaft features not covered in the

preceding sections. The features such as threads,

holes etc. are usually found at the supports of

the shaft, where the bending stresses are low,
however the torsional stresses can be high. The

endurance limit reduction factors (K^ ) and (K ^ )

as given in the figure (6.1.13.)are based on data
from [Ref. 15, ch. 4, table 22].

The theoretical stress concentration factors

for transverse holes are given in the figures

(6.1.14.), (6.1.15.). The effect of the holes
is more pronounced in bending (fig. 6.1.14.); note
also the formula for determining (a
v nom. ).
 67

6.2. ANALYSIS OF SHAFT FEATURES AS STRESS RISERS

The values of stress concentration factors, presented

in the preceding parts of this section, are theoretical

values, which primarily depend on the geometry of the

abrupt change in the shaft's cross-section. The laboratory

tests show that in a great many cases the reductions in the

endurance limit (or fatigue strength), caused by the stress

risers, are less than the predicted reductions based on

the theoretical stress concentration factors (K^ ). To

account for this endurance limit reduction a reduction

factor is introduced and defined as follows:

K _ endurance limit of standard test specimen

endurance limit of the notched specimen

^ e st d
or K = g-- ‘ bL ’-- (6.2.1.)
e. notched

where (K) is the endurance limit reduction factor.

In this work a distinction is made between the

reduction factor assessed in a fully reversing bending

stress test conditions (K^ ) and the one determined in a

fully reversing torsional shear stress conditions (K ^ ).

The degree, by which the (K) values differ to the (K^ )

values is reflected by the notch sensitivity index (q)

which is given as:

[Ref. 1, ch. 13, §13.1.]

The equation (6.2.2.) can be written as:

K = q(Kt - 1) + 1 (6.2.3.)
68

NOTCH RADIUS r mm

FIGURE 6.2.1 .

NOTCH SENSIVITY FACTORS

 69

From this equation it's clear that q = 1 corresponds to the

highly notch sensitive material, and for this material

K - Kt.

On the other hand q = 0, is associated with a material

completely not sensitive to the notch effect, and for this

material K = 1. For most engineering steels:

0 < K < Kt

There is a number of ways to determine (K) values

for various stress risers and materials. The direct fatigue

testing is most reliable, but very expensive. The alter­
native way is suggested by the equation (6.2.3.), that is
the theoretical stress concentration (K^ ) can be corrected
by the notch sensitivity factor (q). A number of methods
had been proposed for determining (q) factors CRef. 1, ch.
13, §13.3], and a graphical solution for the notch
sensitivity factor is given in fig. 13.7 in the above
reference. The graph is reproduced in this work in figure
(6.2.1.) with conversion to S.I. units.

Summarizing the above discussion, the following

procedure for determining of the endurance limit reduction

factor can be used:

(i) determine the theoretical stress concentration

factor (K^_ ) for the stress rising feature

from the figures listed in the table (6.1.1.),
or other sources,

(ii) determine the notch sensitivity factor (q)

from the figure (6.2.1.), or other sources,
 70

(iii) calculate the endurance limit reduction factor

from the equation (6.2.3.).

When the notch sensitivity factor cannot be obtained,

for some reason, the value of (K^ ) can be used in place of

(K), which results in the conservative design with greater

reserve of strength.

Some figures listed in the table (6.1.1.) quote

values of the endurance limit reduction factors for a

single stress riser, as well as multiple stress risers;

for example: the figure (6.1.11.) combines the effect of

keyseats and interference fits. Such diagrams are of

great assistance to the designer, but unfortunately, at

present, only small number of them is available. The

alternative way of determining the combined effect of two

stress risers is suggested in the [Ref. 18]]. Quoting from

the [Ref. 18]:

Where stress concentrations are not

less than d/4 apart, the highest individual
value shall be selected.
Where stress concentrations are less
than d/4 apart, but not less than d/6
apart, the highest individual value shall
be increased by 10 per cent of the
adjacent stress concentration.
Where stress concentrations are less
than d/6 apart, the highest individual
value shall be increased by 20 per cent
of the adjacent stress concentration.

Since the above reference is being reviewed at

present, the recommendation for combining the stress

concentrations should be used with some reservation.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the problem of

 71

notch sensitivity is still under investigation and the

scatter of the experimental data underlines the approximate

nature of the above recommendations on the endurance limit
reduction factors.
 72

6.3. SURFACE FINISH

One of the most important shaft parameters affecting

the endurance strength of the shaft is the condition of

its surface. Fatigue failures mostly start at the surface

of a shaft, where the material is subjected to the greatest

stresses.

The surface of a test specimen used in determining

the endurance limit of a material is usually highly polished

and can be taken as the ideal surface finish, having no
detrimental effect on the fatigue strength of the material.

The other coarser finishes tend to reduce the actual

endurance limit of the component in much the same way as
the stress risers such as notches, grooves etc..

In order to be consistent with the stress concentration

factor definition, the reduction of the endurance limit of
the material due to the surface imperfections is accounted

for by the surface factor (K ^ ) as follows:

[Ref. 3, Appendix, fig. AF5.j

Se of test specimen
^"surf. Sg of the component (6.3.1.)

It follows, that the surface factor (Kgur^ ) is

greater than unity. Other sources quote the reciprocal

value for the surface factor, so that their factor is less
than one.

[Ref. 10, part 1, ch. 3, §31; ref. 17, ch. 7-35.[

A number of investigators have established a definite

73

m
t>5 I---- 1 X X
CD p 0 bD
0 d 0 P
-P a a bD •H
W X m P X bD
P
0 rH •H P
X 0 o x X •H •H
P
(D PH O bD P P
i—I H-> •H •rH 0 bD 0
i—I X P p X
a o •H 0 bJD •rH 0
p ax PH p
CD d -H 0 •H X
O -P P P O P
d O •H d •rH 0 X
phx -a PH X o 0
p CD 0 0 p 0 d P O
P o) O ox p a 0 P
m in) d d 0 p > X
H SH a P 0
CD $ P P X 0 w P
x P P bD 0 O 0 a
d - m m P P d X 0 bD
P w •H •rHbD PH 0 d p
bD x X p X X P P P PH •H
(D 0 o P o •H P •H p PH
£ CD bD •rH •rH d P m X p PH
O PH P -P P a P O m p
pH O O bD P x d X
CD Ph P 0 -P 0 b*>
- CD X 0 X p -P X
CO
CO
x P Xi o m d m •rH 0 •H p
LU bD d P p p P x x X • i—I d
Z P O d a d bD 0 o d bD d
X o o O 0 d P P P bD
o
X
p X
m
0 O £ £ bJD-H u1 P
•rH
0 P I X
o •H £>s •rH X X P X a
X P P
p
d P X o bD -H bD p a
LU
0 •H o 0 0 o •H P •rH 0 d
O > PH o > o X bD ffi t> i-H
D
£ I 1 1 lD

400 900 1000x10

800
700
600
500
K surf

300

SURFACE FACTOR Ksurf

 74

relationship between the surface factor, the surface rough­

ness and the ultimate strength of the material. [Ref. 10,

part 3, ch. 3, fig. 38; ref. 17, ch. 7-35, fig. 7.24; ref.
14, ch. 12, fig. 12.6.] The graphical representations of

this relationship quoted in the references 14 and 17 are

of the qualitative nature, giving very little information
on the degree of roughness introduced by various machining
methods, and hence the graphs are not suitable for design

of shafts.

The graph in figure 38, [Ref. 10, part 2, ch. 3] is

more suitable for the shaft design and this graph with some
modifications is re-drawn in this work as Figure (6.3.1.).
The graph in the figure (6.3.1.) relates the ultimate
tensile strength of material (S ), the surface roughness
(R) expressed in (ym - A.A. values) and the surface factor

(Kgurf ) as defined in the equation (6.3.1.). The basic

differences between the original graph [Ref. 10] and the
graph in figure (6.3.1.) are listed below:

(i) The tensile strength values are converted to

S.I. units and the range is reduced to

(300 x106 N/m2 - 1000 x 106 N/m2) which suits

the shaft materials, as quoted in the table

(5.2.1. ).

(ii) The roughness number (R) is converted from

maximum roughness depth to the Arithmetical

Average value (A.A.), [Ref. 3, ch. 3, §3.14;
ref. 19, p. 2341; ref. 20] and the range of

the roughness (A.A.) values is restricted to

 75

(0.1 urn - 12.5 ym) which is the range of the

surface finishes applicable to the shafts.

(iii) Description of the machining methods is added

along side the roughness (A.A.) values. dRef.

20. ]

(iv) The curves corresponding to each value of (R)

are converted to straight lines, because the

method of correlating the machining process
and the roughness number is approximate enough
to justify the conversion.

The graph in figure (6.3.1.) gives similar results to

those quoted in the preceding references, and hence the
simplifications listed above are justified as far as the
practical use of the graph. It should be noted here, that
very little data is available to support or contradict the
graph and, hence, when used for design of critical shafts,
some caution should be exercised.

So far, in this section, the geometrical conditions

of the shafts surface were discussed. There are other

qualities of the surface, which, also influence the endurance
limit of material. Those are contributed by:

(i) Surface heat treatment - such as: carburizing,

flame hardening, nitriding which all increase

the endurance limit of the shafts.

(ii) Cold working of the surface - such as: shot

peening, rolling, cold drawing which all

introduce residual compressive stresses on the

 76

surface of the shaft, thus increasing its

resistance to the formation of the surface

cracks and increasing the endurance limit of

the shaft.

(iii) Other surface treatments which aim at improve­

ment of the shaft's corrosion resistance, wear

resistance etc., but at the same time change

the fatigue properties of the surface.

[Ref. 12, ch. 6, §§6.3, 6.4; ref. 14, ch. 16, §§16.6, 16.7.]

The above, (items (i), (ii), (iii)), surface treatments

are rarely used in design of shafts for general engineering,
and form a specialised field applicable to such industries
as: automotive, aircraft, etc., where the high cost of these
treatments is justified by the advantages of the high
strength - low weight components.

In conclusion, it is observed that the effect of

surface finish on steel parts subjected to low-cycle loads
(less than 103 cycles) is negligible, and can be ignored.
[Ref. 14, ch. 12, §12.4.] There is also no evidence to

suggest that the surface finish have different effect on

the endurance limit under different load patterns, hence,

at present, the surface factor (Kgur^ ), as given in the

figure (6.3.1.) can be used for all fatigue imposing load
combinations. Further experimental investigation is

necessary into the subject of the surface finish.

 77

6.4. SIZE FACTOR

It had been generally recognised and supported by the

experimental results that the endurance limit of a shaft

reduces with the increase of the shaft's diameter. For the

sake of consistency with the definition of stress concen­

tration factor, the reduction of the endurance limit due

to the size effect is accounted for by a size factor (C )

defined in this work as follows:

[Ref. 2, ch. 3, §10; ref. 18.]

S of test specimen
r = e •__________________ ('6 4 1')
s. Sg of the component v • • •;

Some American and European sources define the size

factor as the reciprocal of the (C ) in the equation

(6.4.1.). [Ref. 10, part 1, ch. 3, §3.2; ref. 14, ch. 12,

§12.3.] Apart from recognising the correct definition,

there is no contradiction in the data between the sources.

The size effect on the endurance limit determined in

fully reversing bending stress tests (S ^ ) is different

to the zise effect on the endurance limit determined in

fully reversing torsional shear stress tests (Se y

[Ref. 10, part 1, ch. 3, §3.2.]

Therefore the definition of (C ) is extended as

s.
follows:

(1) Size factor, determined in fully reversing

bending stress test (C ^ ) is

S ,
r _ __ e.b. (6.4.2.)
s.b. S of shaft
e
78

Cs.sh.

250x10
SHAFT DIAMETER - d ( m )

SIZE FACTOR Cs.sh.

Cs.b.

250x10
SHAFT DIAMETER -d (m)

SIZE FACTOR Cs.b.

FIGURE 6.4.1.

SIZE FACTORS Cs.b. & Cs.sh.

 79

(ii) Size factor, determined in fully reversing

torsional stress test (C . ) is:

s. sh.

S u
C - e.sh. (643}
s.sh. S of shaft )
e.

Both (C k ) and (C ) are plotted against the

shaft diameter range (0-250 mm) in the figure (6.4.1.).

The graphs are based on L. Sors publication [Ref. 10, part 2,

ch. 3, figures 42 and 43], where as the format is adopted

from the AS B249 - 1969 and the related draft DR72181

[Ref. 18].
 80

7. VERIFICATION

7.1. RESERVE OF STRENGTH CONCEPT

The reserve of strength (n) is defined in this work,

as the ratio of the externally applied load, which causes

a failure of the shaft, to the externally applied design

load, which was used in arriving at the proportions of

that shaft.

That is,
Failure load („ n
n Design load \ • • • )

The "failure of the shaft" means the shaft's inability

to meet the service requirements expected from it, and this
failure can take the form of:

(i) Fracture - due to fatigue or brittleness,

(ii) Permanent deformation - due to yielding,
(iii) Excessive deformation - due to lack of
rigidity,
(iv) Excessive wear, vibration, corrosion ... etc.

Depending on the nature of failure, a compatible design

load is selected, so that, a reserve of strength for that

particular type of failure can be determined. It follows,

then, that a shaft can have several reserves of strength,
namely; a reserve of strength against fatigue failure (n^ ),

a reserve of strength against yield failure (n ), a reserve

of strength against brittle fracture (n^ ^ ) and others.

The definition of the reserve of strength, as given

above and in equation (7.1.1.), is in a general form, which

 81

is readily adaptable to any characteristic parameter of the

shaft.

For example: A simply supported rotating shaft

(rail carriage axle) has bending moment (M) acting

at some cross-section under investigation. Let

shaft diameter be (d), then the stress in the

shaft is

32 x M
(7.1.2.)
a tTxcP

which is a fully reversing normal bending stress

at the surface of the shaft. Let (S . ) be the

v e . b.
endurance limit of the shaft material determined

in fully reversing bending test conditions, then

a fatigue failure will take place when

„ = ott x d3 x S , (7.1.3.)
f. f. 32 e.b. v 7

where, - f - bending moment, which, if

exceeded, leads to fatigue failure, and

it is also the failure load in terms of

definition in equation (7.1.1.).

The design load can be found from the

following relationship:

32 x d x cd (7.1.4.)
d.

where, - - bending moment, which the shaft is

expected to support under normal service

conditions

- design stress, which was used in

arriving at the shaft diameter (d).

 82

The reserve of strength against fatigue failure

can now be found from equations (7.1.1.), (7.1.3.)

and (7.1.4.)

failure load
n
f. design load

7ix32xd3xS ,
_____________ e. b
(7.1.5.)
32 x tt x d3 x ^

The result in the equation (7.1.5.) makes the reserve

of strength synonymous with the factor of safety, however

this is only applicable to the simple stress cases, [ref. 2,

p. 8lH, but some authors also use factor of safety for more

complex stress cases [ref. 4 and 5]. The factor of safety

is not used in this work, because of different and sometimes

confusing interpretations being associated with it [ref. 3,

p. 19].

The reserve of strength derived in the equation (7.1.5.)

does not make any allowance for the stress concentrations or

other features of the shaft, that may reduce the endurance

limit of the material. In our example this reduction can

be accounted for as follows:

S.
e. b
(7.1.6.)
f. C ,
s.b.
x K.
b.
xK „ x a ,
surf. d

where, - C , , K, and K are factors as defined in

s.b. b. surf
section 3.

With reference to section 2 in this work the primary

measures of the shaft’s suitability for any application are

the reserve of strength against fatigue failure (n_£ ) and

the reserve of strength against yield failure (n ). It

 83

can be shown, that for both (n_^ ) and (n ) the basic

equation, as given by (7.1.1.), can be transformed into

the ratio of the maximum allowable stress to the equivalent

design stress, e.g.

_ Maximum allowable stress ^ ^ .

equivalent design stress k • • •J

For simple stress cases, the maximum allowable stress

can be:

(i) endurance limit, reduced by the appropriate

strength reduction factors, for determining

of (nf ).

(ii) yield strength of material for determining of

(n ).
y•

(iii) the yield strength, reduced by stress concen­

tration factors, if the material is brittle.

In general a shaft may be experiencing normal stresses,

which can be due to axial forces or bending, or both, and

torsional shear stresses. Both normal and shear stresses

can be fully reversing, pulsating or constant in magnitude.

When 3 or more of these stresses occur simultaneously in

the shaft, then it is said to be subjected to a complex

state of stress. An individual stress which is produced

by an individual load, such as the stress in equation (7.1.2.),

is called a design stress, and the equivalent stress is a

combination of design stresses. There is no uniform or

universal rule for combining of the design stresses and for

this reason all possible design stress combinations are

considered in the following work. The method of calculating

 84

the design stresses is given in section 7.2. A list of all

possible design stress combinations is presented in table

7.1.1. For each design stress combination in the table, the
equation, for (nf_) and (ny.) are given in their basic form,

in order to illustrate the different ways in which the

design stresses combine into the equivalent design stress.

The equations that should be used in the verification

stage of design are given in the relevant verification
sections, numbered 7.3.1. to 7.3.15. inclusively. A
complete derivation of the reserve of strength formulae is
presented in the Appendices A.5. to A.11.inclusively.
85

03

Z3
E
C
o
M—

-o
c
O)
Cl
Cl
LO LO LO LO LO LO oo
C <C <c «=C <’ <C <=t <c
C
O
+->
4-> 03
cue
tO •<— O
> M-
QJ *r- +->
C\J ro •vt" LO LO r^. 00
i— S- O CO CO oo oo oo OO oo oo
<d a> qj
O' > LT) r-^ r^. i"- r^- t'- r^.

4- L0
o a>
00
L0 L0
c a)
o s-
•r- +->
4-> L0
03
C C
•i- CD
JO t-
E 00
O O)
OQ

TABLE 7.1.1 RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE INDEX

 86

TABLE 7.1.1. continued

 87

7.2 DESIGN STRESSES

At this stage of design, having prepared a detailed

layout of the shaft, an accurate assessment of the loads

and corresponding stresses in the shaft is necessary. The

nominal stresses are found as follows:

(i) Normal stresses due to bending moment

32 x M
TT X d6

(ii) Normal stresses due to axial force (F = ZFi)

- 4 x F
° TT X d2

(iii) Torsional shear stresses due to torque (T)

16 x T
T TT X d6

In addition to the nominal values of stresses, the

knowledge of their cyclic nature is required. For example:

a shaft supporting a single helical gear transmits a torque

of a constant magnitude (T) and it has constant torsional

16 x T
shear stress t
const TT x d

In addition the helical gear produces a constant

bending moment (M) and axial force (F). The bending moment

imposes a fully reversing normal stress, with amplitude

aa = tt^x^cP while the axial force imposes a constant (mean)

4 x F
normal stress a = ---- -3-7- . Thus, to summarize the design
m 77 x dz ’
stresses on the shaft:

32 x M = 4 x F
aa itx d3 ’ °m it x d2

16 x T
x 0 T T
a m const. TT X dj
 88

Depending on the load conditions, the design stresses

can result in the following:

(i) normal stresses can be:

equal to zero 0 = 0

or - constant o = 0, a
a
or - fully reversing aa = a, 0
or - non-fully reversing t 0 0
°a

(ii) Shear stresses can be:

equal to zero
or - constant T
or - fully reversing 0

or - non-fully reversing 0

There are 15 possible design stress combinations of the

normal and shear stresses, out of which 12 are of fatigue
nature; all design stress combinations are listed in table

(7.1.1. ).
 89

7.3 RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE

The following list of the reserve of strength formulae

is intended to provide a concise and complete guide for a

designer. It is deliberately free of any theoretical

considerations, which are covered fully in the relevant

Appendices.

It is suggested, that the designer will have all design

stresses in the cross-section of the shaft under consider­

ation reduced to four stresses, namely:

N
aa - amplitude of alternating normal stress (^z)
N
am - constant (mean) component of normal stress (j^z)
N
ta - amplitude of alternating shear stress (^z)
N
xm - constant (mean) component of shear stress (^z)

The section 7.2. gives illustration of the design

stress calculations.

Having found the design stresses, the table (7.1.1.) -

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE INDEX - is used for identifying

the design stress combination and the relevant verification

section.

In the example, quoted in section 7.2. the design

stresses are:
32 x M
°a 7T x dd
4 x F
a = ---- ~rr
m it x dz

16 x T
"rr V H 3
 90

For this stress combination the section (7.3.11.),

gives the relevant reserve of strength formulae, whereas

the Appendix A.11. gives the theoretical justifications for

the formulae.
 91

7.3.1 This is a case of essentially constant torque on a

shaft. The starting and stopping are gradual, or

done through torque limiting device, so that the shaft

does not experience any overloads. Then the design

stresses in the shaft are:

16 x T
m tt x dd

and a = t = a = 0
a a m

Refer to the Appendix A.5. part (i) for the derivation

of the following formulae.

The shaft has the reserve of strength (n ) against

torsional yielding

y. Sh

The above equation is valid for ductile shafts only.

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of ductile and

brittle shafts.

When brittle shaft conditions exist, the shear yield

strength (S ) should be reduced by the effective stress

concentration factor (Kg ), thus

S
n = y* s—1— for brittle shafts
y. K xt
J e. m

(K ) is defined in the Appendix A.4.

The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is not

applicable in this stress case, because the load on shaft

is essentially constant.

If, S , is not known, then use S , 0.577 x S

e. sh. ’ e. sh ul.

[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4; ref. 3, ch 4, §4.7H.

 92

7.3.2 This is a case of a constant axial stress. In

rotating shaft the constant axial stress is generated

by a constant axial force (F).

The design stresses are:

4 x F
7T X dZ

and T 0
a

Refer to the Appendix A.5. for the derivation of

the following formulae.

The axial force (F) can be either tensile or

compressive.

When (F) is tensile, then the shaft has the reserve

strength (n ) against yield failure.

S
n = —^ for ductile shafts (7.3.2.1.)
y. a v J
J m
Refer to the Appendix A.4. for the definition of

the ductile and the brittle shafts.

When the shaft is brittle, then the tensile yield

strength (S ) should be reduced by the effective

stress concentration factor (Ke ), as defined in the

Appendix A.4.

S
n = --- —--- for brittle shafts (7.3.2.2.)
y.
J
Ko x am

When (F) is compressive, and the shaft slenderness

ratio is

A <: \/iTT 2 X E
 93

then the shaft is stable, and it should only be checked

against yield failure in accordance with the equations

(7.3.2.I.) and (7.3.2.2. ).

However, when the slenderness ratio is

X >

then, with reference to the Appendix A.5., the shaft's

stability is assessed by the reserve of strength against

instability (n^ng ) as given by the equation

Note: when using equations (7.3.2.1.), (7.3.2.2.) and

(7.3.2.3.) for compressive stress case, the negative

sign of (om) is omitted.

The slenderness ratio for a round solid shaft is

4 x L
X = —— as defined in Appendix A. 5.

Since, the load on shaft is constant in this case, the

reserve of strength against fatigue is not applicable.

 94

7.3.3 This is a case of constant torque and a constant

axial force applied to the shaft.

The application of the torque must be gradual, or

must be done through torque limiting device, so that

the shaft does not experience any overloads. Then
the design stresses in the shaft are:

aa =0

4 x F
7T X dZ

16 x T
7T X d 3

Refer to the Appendix A.5. for the derivation of

the following formulae. Also, refer to the Appendix
A.4. for the definition of ductile and brittle
shafts.

The ductile shaft has the reserve of strength (n )

against yield failure:
S
rO2+3x2
m m

For brittle shafts, the yield strength of material

must be reduced by the effective stress concentration
factor, as defined in the Appendix A.4.,

hence. S
K /a 2 + 3x 2'
e. m m

When (a ) is compressive, and the slenderness

ratio (A) is

x E
A >
 95

then the reserve of strength against instability

(n.
v ms.') must be determined from

TT 2 X E
n. = --7-----
ins Xz x a
 96

7.3.4 This is a case of a fully reversing normal stress,

which in rotating shafts, is generated by a constant

bending moment (M). The bending moment can be the

resultant of a number of moments, so that

M = /m 2 + M 2 '
x y

The design stresses are:

32 x M
7T X dP
and a

Refer to the Appendix A.5. part (iv) for the

derivation of the following formulae.

The shaft has the reserve of strength (nf )

against fatigue failure:
S
e. b.
f. axC.xK,
a s.b. b. xK surf„

where:

(i) size factor (C ^ ) - see sect. 6.4.

(ii) strength reduction factor (K^ ) - see sect. 6.2.

(iii) surface finish factor (Ksurf ) - see sect. 6.3.

If the endurance limit is not known, an approxi­

mate value of S , = 0.45 x S n may be used.

e.b. ul. J
[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4, ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.H

The reserve of strength against yield failure is

S
n = —^ for ductile shafts
a
S
and K e. x a a for brittle shafts
 97

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for the definition of

ductile and brittle shafts, as well as the effective
stress concentration factor (K ) .
e.
 98

7.3.5 This is case of a fully reversing torsional shear

stress, which is generated by a fully reversing

torque on shaft.

The design stresses in the shaft are:

16 x T
a
a TT X d3

and 0

Refer to Appendix A.5. for the derivation of the

following formulae.

The shaft has the reserve of strength (nf )

against fatigue failure:

S
e . sh.
f.
Ta x ^s.sh. x ^sh. x Ksurf.

where

(i) size factor (C ) - see sect. 6.4.

(ii) strength reduction factor (K ^ ) - see sect. 6.2.

(iii) surface finish factor (Kgurf ) - see sect. 6.3.

If the endurance limit in shear is not known,

then an approximate value may be used.

S . 0.577 x S , 0.26 x S
e . sh. e .b ul

[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4, ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.H

The reserve of strength against yield failure is

S
n = y* s—1 for ductile shafts
y- Ta
S,
and n = y*sh*
y. t?-------- for brittle shafts
i\- X T
 99

where K e. - the effective stress concentration

factor, as defined in the Appendix A.4. along with

the definition of ductile and brittle shafts.

 100

7.3.6. This is a case of a normal mean stress (a ) super­

imposed on alternating normal stress (a ). For the

rotating shaft these stresses are generated by

resultant bending moment (M) and axial force (F).

The design stresses are:

32 x M
°a 77 x dd

4 x F + F = tension
m 77 x d' - F = compression

and

Depending on the relative magnitudes of (a )

a
and (a ) and also the sign of (a ), the formula for
v nr v m ’
the reserve of strength takes different form.

[Refer to Appendix A. 6.]]

Note: M = (M^2 + M^2)2 - resultant bending moment

F = ZF. - resultant axial force.

l

If (a ) is positive, then the shaft has the

reserve of strength against fatigue failure:

S
e .b
f. ax K, C x K + 0.45a

and the same shaft has the reserve of strength

against yield failure:

stt
if the shaft is ductile.
a + a
a m

For a brittle shaft

S
_ _____ y •
K (a + a )
e. a m

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K ) and the ductile and brittle shafts.

 101

If the (a ) is negative then the shaft has the

reserve of strength against fatigue failure:

e. b.
f. a
a
x K,
b.
x C ,
s.b.
x K „
surf.

and the same shaft has the reserve of strength

against compressive yield failure:

-S
if the shaft is ductile
-a + a
a m

If the shaft is brittle, then

-S„
y. K (-a + a )
e. v a nr

The (K ) and the concept of ductile and

brittle shafts are defined in the Appendix A.4.

The shafts in compression can become unstable,

if the slenderness ratio (A) is greater than

x E
For these shafts the reserve of strength
y•
against instability is

E
7T 2 X
where a -a + a
ins. Az x a a m

Refer to Appendix A.6. for derivation of the

above formulae.
 102

7.3.7. This is a case of a mean torsional stress (x )

m
superimposed on an alternating torsional stress

(x ). The design stresses are:

16 x T
x = ----- t-t—• where T - alternating torque
a tt x d° a

16 x T
x = ---- -tt— where T - constant torque
m 7T x d5 m M

and a = a = 0
a m

Refer to Appendix A.7. for derivation of the

following formulae. The shaft has the reserve of

strength against fatigue failure:

e. sh.
f. T X C , x K x K
a s.sh. surf

where, the limiting stress is the endurance limit

(Se sh ) in torsional shear for fully reversing
stresses.

If (S ) is not known, then an approximate

value may be taken as:

0.577 x S 0.26 x S
e.sh. ' e.b. * ul.

[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4; ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.U

If, the shaft is ductile, then the reserve of

strength against yield failure:

s u
„ _ y.sh.
T + T
a m

y. sh for a brittle shaft.

K (T + T )
e. a nr

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K ) and the ductile and brittle shafts.

e.
 103

7.3.8. This is a case of a fully reversing normal stress,

with a constant torsional shear stress superimposed

on it. In rotating shafts the fully reversing

normal stress is generated by a constant resultant

X
bending moment M = (M^2 + M^2)2, whereas the

constant torsional shear is produced by a constant

torque (T).

The design stresses are:

32 x M
and o = 0
T\ X dd m

16 x T
and t
7T X d^

Refer to Appendix A.8. for derivation of the

following formulae.

The shaft has the reserve of strength against

fatigue failure.

e .b.
f. axC.xK, xK „
a s.b. b. surf.

and also the reserve of strength against yield

failure

S
y• -j for ductile shafts
^‘ /o 2 + 3 X T 2

y- for brittle shafts

K /a 2 + 3 x t 2
e. a m

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

the ductile and brittle shafts, also the definition

of the effective stress concentration factor (K )

e.
 104

7.3.9. This is a case of a fully reversing torsional shear

stress, with a constant axial stress superimposed

on it. The design stresses are:

16 x T , n
T = ----------pr and t =0
a itx dJ m

^ 4 x F
a = 0 and o = ---- -t-t
a m 77 x d^

Refer to Appendix A.9. for derivation of the

following formulae. The shaft has the reserve of

strength (n^ ) against the fatigue failure:

Se.sh.
nf . Ksh. x Cs.sh. x Ksurf. (Ta + 0'26am>

Note: a negative (a ) gives greater reserve of

strength, but at the same time a large compressive

(-a ) can cause buckling. The reserve of strength

against instability is found from:

77 2 X E
n.
ins. Xz x o
m
, /2 x E j ii
where
VS m 1 m1
y•

Refer to the Appendix A.5., part (ii) for

definition of (A) and (njLns )•

The same shaft has the reserve of strength

(n ) against torsional yield failure

y.
S
n = -, ^‘ for ductile shafts and
y• /a 2 + 3x 2
m a

S
n == ---- y' —, for brittle shafts.
y- K \/a 2 + 3x 2
e .v m a

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

ductile and brittle shafts, and (K ).

 105

7.3.10. This is a case of a fully reversing normal stress,

having also fully reversing torsional shear stress

present. In rotating shaft the fully reversing

normal stresses are produced by a constant bending
i
moment M= (M 2 +M 2)2 and the fully reversing
x y
torsional stresses by a fully reversing torque
(T). The design stresses are:

32 x M
CT
a 7T X d3
and am 0

16 x T
0
Ta It x d^

The normal and shear stresses may be in phase

or out-of phase, however, the reserve of strength
formula is applicable in both situations.

Refer to Appendix A.10. for derivation of the

following formulae.

The shaft has the reserve of strength (nf )

against fatigue failure:
Se.b.
/(Kb. xCs.b. xKsurf. xoa)2 + 3(Ksh. xCs.sh. xKsurf. x V

The same shaft has the reserve of strength

against yield failure:

Stt
for ductile shafts
vo2+ 3t 2
a a

for brittle shafts

K e. Jo a + 3x a2

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

ductile and brittle shafts, and also (Ke ).

 106

7.3.11. This is a case of a fully reversing normal stress,

generated by a constant resultant bending moment

i
M = (M 2 + M 2)2, with two constant stresses
x y
superimposed on it, namely: a normal mean stress,

generated by a constant axial force (F), and a

torsional mean stress, generated by a constant

torque (T).

The design stresses are:

32 x M 4 x F
a and a
a u x dj m it x dz

16 x M
T 0 and t
a m TTX dd

Refer to the Appendix A.11.1. for derivation

of the following formulae.

The reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is

S ,
_________________ e . b ._______________
nf. axK, xC.xK „ + 0.45a
a b. s.b. surf. m

The reserve of strength against yield

failure is

S
for ductile shafts
/(a + CoU)2 +3t 2
v a m ' m

n = ------- -for brittle

K x /(a + [_o H)2 + 3x 2 shafts
e. a m m

The definitions of ductile and brittle shafts,

as well as the effective stress concentration

factor (K ) are presented in the Appendix A.4.

 107

In the above formulae, Ea U - represents the

absolute value.
 108

7.3.12. This is a case of a fully reversing torsional

shear stress, generated by a fully reversing

torque (T ) with two constant stresses superimposed

on it, namely: a normal mean stress, generated by

constant axial force (F), and a torsional mean

stress, generated by a constant torque (T ).

The design stresses are:

4 x F
a =0 and a
a m tt x d2

16 x T 16 x T
______ a ______ m
x and x
a tt x d3 m tt x d3

Refer to the Appendix A.11.2. for derivation

of the following formulae.

The reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is

s e.
u
sh.
nf‘ K , x C , x K - (t + 0.26a )
sh. s. sh. surf. a nr

Note increase in (nf ) when (a ) is compressive

(negative). The reserve of strength against yield

failure is

- - -- - — - for ductile shafts

/a2 + 3(x + t)2
m a nr

S for brittle
------- y' shafts
K x yo2+ 3(x + t )2
e. m v a nr

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

the effective stress concentration factor (K )

and the ductile and brittle shafts.

 109

7.3.13. This is a case of a fully reversing normal stress,

generated by a constant resultant bending moment

i
M = (M 2 + M 2)2, with a fully reversing torsional
x y
shear stress generated by a fully reversing torque

(T ) and,in addition, - a normal mean stress,

generated by a constant axial force (F), super­

imposed on the former two alternating stresses.

The design stresses are:

32 x M 4 x F
and
7T X d3 7T X d^

16 x T,
and
TT X d 3

Refer to the Appendix A.11.3. for derivation

of the following formulae.

The reserve of strength against fatigue failure

is either

S
e . b.
f.
C , x K, x K _p x vo2 + 3t 2 + 0.45a
s.b. b. surf a a m

for (a ) = tensile mean stress

v m

e .b
or, n
C , x K, x K oX vo 2 + 3x 2
s.b. b. surf. a a

for (a ) = compressive mean stress.

The reserve of strength against yield failure is

Stt
, for ductile shafts
v(o
a
+ Cci U)2
m '
+ 3x
a
2

for brittle
shafts
K x /(o + [a ])2 f 3t 2
e. a m 7 a
 110

[o ] - denotes absolute value,

m

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K ) and the ductile and brittle shafts,

e.
 Ill

7.3.14. This is a case of fully reversing normal

stress, generated by a constant bending moment

3,
M = (M 2 + M 2)2, with a fully reversing torsional
x y
shear stress, generated by a fully reversing

torque (T ); and, in addition, - a mean torsional

a
stress, generated by a constant torque (T ),

superimposed on the former two alternating stresses.

The design stresses are:

32 x M
and 0
TT X d3

16 x T. 16 x T
______ r
and
TT X dd TT x dd

Refer to the Appendix A.11.4. for derivation

of the following formulae.

The reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is:

S e .b.
i_

C , x K, x K „ x fo 2 +3t 2
s.b. b. surf. a a

The reserve of strength against yield failure is

Stt
for ductile shafts
VO 2 + 3( T +T ) 2
a a nr

for brittle shafts

K vo 2 +3( t + x )2'
e. a a nr

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K
e. ) and the ductile and brittle shafts.
 112

7.3.15. This is a case of both the normal and shear

stresses being fully reversing with the mean

stresses superimposed on them.

The design stresses are:

= 32 x M
------~ 4 x F
and
a tt x d6 tt x d z

16 x T 16 x T
______i
and
TT X d tt x dd

where M = (M^2 + My2)2 - resultant bending moment

Ta = alternating magnitude torque

Tm = constant magnitude torque

Refer to the Appendix A.11.5. for derivation

of the following formulae.

The reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is either

S
e. b
f. C , x K, x K _pX /o 2 + 3t 2 + 0.45a
s.b. b. surf a a m

for (a ) = tensile mean stress

m

e .b
or n
C , x K, x K oX /o 2 + 3x 2
s. b. b. surf. a a

for (a ) = compressive mean stress.

The reserve of strength against yield failure is

g
y. for ductile
shafts
/(a
a
+ Cu m H)2
'
+ 3( t
a
+ t
rrr
)2

____________ y_;________________ for brittle

K /(a ^TTr
+ [a7~nv
])22—+4~?TZ
3(x T~Zx T
+ ) 21 shafts
e. a m a my
 113

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K ) and the ductile and brittle shafts,

e.

[a ] - denotes absolute value,

m
 114

8. REFERENCES

1. G. SINES, J. L. WAISMAN (editors) - Metal Fatigue,

McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1959.

2. P. Ye. KRAVCHENKO - Fatigue Resistance, Pergamon

Press, 1964.

3. V. M. FAIRES - Design of machine elements, 4th edition,

The Macmillan Co., New York, 1965.

4. L. D. MITCHELL, D. T. VAUGHAN - A general method for

the fatigue resistant design of mechanical
components, Part 1, Graphical ASME paper 1974,
Winter Annual meeting of ASME, New York, Nov.
17-22, 1974, paper No. 74-WA/DE-4.

5. D. T. VAUGHAN, L. D. MITCHELL - A general method for

the fatigue resistant design of mechanical
components, Part II, Analytical ASME paper
1974, Winter Annual meeting of ASME, New York,
Nov. 17--22, 1974, paper No. 74--WA/DE-5.

6. M. N. IVANOV - "Detali machin" edited by "Visshay

shkola" 1964 (in Russian).

7. V. FEODOSYEV - Strength of Materials, Mir Publishers,

Moscow, 1968.

8. F. B. SEELY, J . 0. SMITH - Advanced mechanics of

solids - 2nd edition, John Wiley and Sons,
1952 .

9. Encyclopedic reference manual - "Machinocmroenie"

edited by "Gosoudarstvenoe nauchno-technicheskoe
isdatelstrvo machinocmroitelnoi literaturi"
Moscow, 1948 (in Russian).

10. L. SORS - Fatigue design of machine components Pergamon

Press - translated from Hungarian, 1971.

11. P. I. ORLOV - Basis of design edited by "Machinostroenie"

Moscow, 1968 (in Russian).

12. N. E. FROST, K. J. MARSH, L. P. POOK - Metal Fatigue,

Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1974.

13. A. G. GUY - Elements of physical metallurgy, Addison-

Wesley Publishing Co. Inc., Massachusetts,
U.S.A., 2nd edition, 1960.

14. R. C. JUVINALL - Engineering considerations of stress,

strain and strength, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
New York, 1967.

15. S. V. SERENSEN, M. B. GROMAN, V. P. KOGAEV, R. M.

SHNEIDOROVICH - Shafts and axles - design and
calculations, edited by "Machinostroenie",
Moscow, 1970 (in Russian).
 115

16. G. B. THOMAS, Jnr. - Calculus and analytic geometry,

Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Inc., 3rd edition,
1965.

17. A. PARRISH (editor) - Mechanical engineers - Reference

Book, The Butterworths Group, 11th edition,
1973.
18. Australian standard recommendation - Design of shafts
for cranes and hoists - AS-B249-1969 (with­
drawn, being under review, present related
document is draft DR82181).
19. H. L. HORTON (editor) - Machinery's handbook,
Industrial Press Inc., New York, 11th edition,
1971.
20. Australian Standard - A.S. 1100 part 11 - 1974,
Indication of surface texture by Standards
Association of Australia.

21. R. B. HEYWOOD - Designing aginst fatigue, Chapman and

Hall Ltd., London, 1962.

22. C. LIPSON, R. C. JUVINALL - Handbook of stress and

strength, the Macmillan Co., New York, 1st
printing, 1963.
23. R. E. PETERSON - Stress concentration factors,
J. While and Sons, New York, 1974.
24. H. A. BORCHARDT - Design of shafts for cranes and
hoists using Australian Standard AS B249-1969.
The Institution of Engineers, Australia
Mechanical and Chemical Engineering Transactions,
May, 1969.
25. K. I. ZABLONSKY, S. L. MAK - Machine elements, the
influence of shape on their service life,
edited by "Technika" Kiev, 1971 (in Russian).

26. J. E. SHIGLEY - Mechanical Engineering design, McGraw-

Hill, New York, 1972, 2nd edition.
 116

APPENDIX A.l.

DERIVATION OF PRELIMINARY DESIGN FORMULAE

In search for a suitable preliminary design formulae

and having considered the elastic theories of failure, as

well as, the design formulae based on these theories, it

was noted that, in all formulae there are several unknowns,

and hence a number of calculations has to be made before a

meaningful result may be attained. A general conclusion

which was drawn from the existing design equations, is that

the shaft diameter is directly proportional to the cubic

root of load on the shaft, and to the severity of the

service conditions, but inversely proportional to the

strength of the material. For example, taking the design

equation based on the maximum shear stress theory of failure

(refer to Appendix A.3. for the list of the design equations

based on the elastic theories of failure):

(A.1.1.)
y

This equation can be written as:

d (A.1.2.)
32 y

we let

K shaft strength factor (A.1.3.)

and
 117

[LOAD]1/3 /
[/(M +
F x dN) 22 + T2
] = cubic (A.1.4.)

root of load

also, let us introduce

Kser = servi-ce factor, which is an empirical factor,

making an allowance for dynamic load variations,

then the equation (A.1.2.) can be written as: [Ref. sect. 5.3]

1 --- .V3
x [LOAD] /3 x K ser (A.1.5.)
‘str.

The simplicity of this equation is obvious, but the

validity can be further justified by considering each factor

more closely.

The shaft strength factor - (K ), as defined above,

is a function of the tensile yield strength of material.

When the shaft under consideration is designed against yield

failure, the shaft strength factor is applicable as defined,

and becomes - shaft yield strength factor (Ks^r ) - that

is

Lstr. y ^xv Vs (A.1.6.)

When the fatigue failure of a shaft is the design

criteria, then the shaft fatigue strength factor - (K ^ )

is more characteristic of the shaft strength and is defined

as:

K , , (A.1.7.)
str.f. x Se.3V3

where S = endurance limit of material, as determined in

e.
a rotating bending fatigue test on a circular
 118

section specimen.

In practical design most shafts differ to the

laboratory test specimen and the endurance limit must be

reduced accordingly. A variation in the size of shaft is

covered by size factor (C ), and any geometrical stress

rising features are accounted for by stress rising factor

(K). Thus, equation (A.1.7.) becomes:

K , ,
e. Vs (A.1.8.)
str.f. x K

For general engineering steels the endurance limit

can be approximated as 0.45 of the ultimate tensile strength

of the material, that is: [Ref. 1ST]

Se> = 0.45 x Sul> (A.1.9.)

also, due to the approximate nature of the preliminary

7T 1
design equation the ratio (-g^) can be made (^q) hence the

equation (A.1.8.) can be written as:

0.45 x
K , SUl • -I 73 (A.1.10.)
str.f. ^10 x C x KJ
s

Since, a diameter of a shaft is inversely proportional

to the shaft strength factor, a graphical solution of the

reciprocal of and ^ is derived in Appendix A. 2.

and the actual graph of the reciprocal of shaft strength

factor is given in section 5.3, in figure 5.3.1.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the shaft

strength factor, as defined in equations (A.1.6.) and

(A.1.10.), is consistent with the 3 most general elastic

theories of failure, namely:

 119

(i) Maximum shearing stress

(ii) Strain energy of distortion

(iii) Octahedral shearing stress

Refer to the Appendix A.3. for design equations based on

these theories of failure.

The next factor in the equation (A.1.5.) to be

considered is the cubic root of load. Again, with reference

to Appendix A.3. and considering the 3 elastic theories

failure mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the cubic

root of load can be written as:

[LOAD]1/3 = + F g d)2 + X x T2 ]^3 (A.1.11.)

where X = 1 for maximum shearing stress theory of failure

and X = 0.75 for strain energy of distortion and

Octahedral shearing stress theories of

failure.

The difference in (X) values is small, and only

becomes noticeable when (T) is very large, in comparison to

(M) and (F). For example, when (M) = (F) = 0

then [LOAD]1/3 = T^3 (for X = l)

and [LOAD]1/3 = 0.75^ x T^3 = 0.95 x T^3 (for X = 0.75)

This discrepancy is not significant for the preliminary

design formulae and value of X = 1 is adopted for simplicity

sake. Thus, the equation (A.1.11.) becomes:

[LOAD]1/3 = [/{m + |-^)2 + T2]1/3 (A. 1.12.)

o

While this formulae appears cumbersome it simplifies

 120

when any one of (M), (F) or (T) is equal to zero. In

addition the [LOAD] part of the equation, that is

[LOAD] = /(M + F g d)2 + T2 (A.1.13.)

has graphical solution as in figure (A.1.1.) below:

FIGURE A.1.1. Graphical solution of [LOAD] equation

This graphical presentation emphasises the contri­

bution of the components (M), (F) and (T) to the total

[LOAD]. When the magnitude of (F) is small, in comparison

F x d
to (M), then the component (—g—) can be neglected, because

(-g) is very small number (for example: d = 0.2 m (very large

shaft), then g = ^g^ = 0.025).

The section 5.4. - LOADS ON SHAFT gives a detailed

treatment of all load combinations and simplifies practical

use of the equation (A.1.12.).

1/
So far in assessing the [LOAD] /3 equation, no

consideration was given to the dynamic (inertial) nature

 121

of the load components.

The approach adopted in the preliminary design is

that only NOMINAL LOADS are used in the [LOAD] equation,

and the overloads due to starting, stopping, speed changes

etc. are accounted for by a service factor - (K ).

ser.

The service factor - (K ) is fully discussed in

ssr •
section 5.5 and a list of recommended values is given in

table 5.5.1.

To summarise, we have derived two preliminary design

formulae:

(i) for preliminary shaft diameter based on yield

failure conditions

d p.y. = xF x [LOAD]1/3 x K (A.1.14. )

K ser.
str.y.

(ii) for preliminary shaft diameter based on fatigue

failure conditions.

d x [LOAD]1/3 x K (A.1.15.)
ser.
122

0©

X
Ll-O
oz
_, Li-l

LLIX<
CT lOLl

FIGURE A.2.1

GRAPHICAL SOLUTION OF rrV- EQUATION

Kstr
 123

APPENDIX A.2.

CONSTRUCTION OF GRAPH FOR THE RECIPROCAL OF SHAFT

STRENGTH FACTOR

The shaft fatigue strength factor is derived in

Appendix A.I., as equation (A.1.10.)

0.45 x Sui Vs
kstr. f. L10 x C x KJ
s.

In preliminary shaft diameter equation (A.1.14.) a

reciprocal of the (K ^ ^ ) is required and a graphical

solution for the reciprocal is derived as follows.

By inverting the equation A.1.10. we get:

10 x C x K
K ,
1
,
_______s
0.45 x
V3 (A.2.1.)
str.f. ul.

Taking logarithm of both sides of the equation:

10 x C x K i. _.
log log[ S- _] 73 _ 1
3log S (A.2.2.)
0.45
Lstr. f

The solution of this equation is represented by a

series of parallel straight lines on a LOG-LOG graph paper

as shown in figure (A.2.1.).

The gradient of the lines is (- ^), and the intercept

10 x C x K i, J
at log = 0 is log [---- q ^----] '•3. We note that the

variables in the equation (A.2.2.) have the following

domains:

300 x 106 < S < 1000 x 106 - (-Sr)

ul. mz
1 < K <4
1 < C <2
s.
124

SIZE
FACTOR
C, =2

-Cc = 1*5

STRESS
RISING
FACTOR
FIGURE A.2.2. <|

GRAPHICAL SOLUTION OF /10xCsxK\3

\ O*A5 '
 125

Hence, the intercept on (■=------ ) axis is

IV ,

(i) log 2.81 for C = 1, K = 1

(ii) log 5.62 for C =2, K = 4

& s.

The part of the graph (shaded area) that satisfies

the above conditions is bound by four lines:

Line (1) - S = 300 x 106 (A)

ul. mz

Line (2) - S = 1000 x 106

ul.
1
Line (3) — - for C = 2, K = 4
K „ s.
str. f.

1
Line (4) — - for C = 1, K = 1
K . s.

In the equation (A.2.2.) the constant component

10 x C x K
log E----o-45---- ^ 3 determines the solution line for the

particular values of C and K. A graphical solution for

S•

the constant can be found on LOG-LOG graph as follows:

10 x C x K
log[- 7s log ( V3 + log (Cs ) Vs + 3 log
0.45 0.45

(A.2.3. )

The graph of this equation is shown in figure

(A.2.2.). The solution is represented by series of straight

parallel lines with gradient + 1/3, each line corresponding

to a particular value of (Cg ).

The complete graphical solution for the reciprocal

of the shaft fatigue strength factor is given in section 5.3

in figure (5.3.1. ).

The graph in figure (5.3.1.) combines enlarged

(shaded) part of the graph in figure (A.2.1.) and the

 126

suitably scaled down graph in figure (A.2.2.).

Finally, the yield line added to the figure (5.3.1.)

which gives solution for the equation (A.1.6.) that is the

reciprocal of shaft yield strength factor ( ———---).

str.y,
 127

APPENDIX A.3.

SHAFT DESIGN FORMULAE BASED ON ELASTIC

THEORIES OF FAILURE

The aim of this Appendix is to derive shaft design

formulae based on all elastic theories of failure and

summarise them for reference sake.

In derivation of the formulae we consider a circular

shaft only, subjected to a general load pattern, which can

be resolved into basic load components such as:

symbol - units

(i) bending moment - (M) - (N-m)

(ii) torque - (T) - (N-m)

(iii) axial force - (F) - (N)

(iv) shear force - (V) - (N)

These loads produce the following stresses in the shaft:

(i) normal stress at the surface of the shaft

due to the bending moment.

32 x M
(A.3.1.)
7T X d3

(ii) shear stress due to the torque

16 x T
(A.3.2. )
it x d3

(iii) normal stress due to the axial force

4 x F
(A.3.3. )
TT X d2
 128

(iv) shear stress due to the shear force

16 x V
(A.3.4.)
TV 3 x it x dz

In general practice, the shear stress due to the shear

force can be neglected, because it is very small in com­

parison to other stresses.

Consider example: A rotating cantilevered shaft

carrying load (V) at a distance (L) from support.

The bending moment M = V x L, the shear force is

(V) and corresponding stresses are:

_ 32 x V x L
°M TT X dd

16 x V
TV 3 x u x dz

consider ratio:

°M 6 x L

which shows that >> and hence can be

neglected.

In addition (aTT ) is located at middle of the

v V.max.
shaft, where as the (a,. ) at the surface, therefore the

design can be carried out considering the larger of the two

stresses.

The principal stresses can be shown to be: [Ref. 7 -

ch. VII, §53]

 129

(A.3.5. )

and the maximum shear stress:

T (A.3.6.)
max

where:

a (A.3.7. )
c

Note: At this stage we do not consider the rotation of the

principal stress axes.

With the aid of the above equations we can now derive

shaft diameter formulae for all elastic theories of failure,

namely: GRef. 8 - part 1, Ch. 3, §4]

(i) Maximum principal stress theory

(Rankine's theory).

(ii) Maximum shearing stress theory

(Coulomb's theory or Guest's lav/).

(iii) Maximum strain theory

(St. Venant's theory).

(iv) Total strain energy theory

(Beltrami and Haigh theory).

(v) Strain energy of distortion theory

(Huber, Von Mises and Hencky theory).

(vi) Octohedral shearing stress theory.

 130

(i) SHAFT DIAMETER FORMULA BASED ON MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL

STRESS THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory predicts that inelastic action or yield

failure in the material begins when the maximum principal

stress reaches a value equal to the yield strength of the

material as found in a simple tension (or compression)

test.

That is a-1 = Sy (A.3.8.)

at the point of yield failure.

From equation (A.3.5.) the maximum principal stress

is

o / a T
^ + /t2 + (g2)2 (A.3.9. )

Substitute equations (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.),

(A.3.7.) and (A.3.8.) into equation (A.3.9.) and solve for

(d)

d = {--[M
ttxS
+ (F—|----)
v8'v
+ /(M + ^-^)2 8+T2']}1/3 (A.3.10.)
y
 131

(ii) SHAFT DIAMETER FORMULA BASED ON MAXIMUM SHEARING

STRESS THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory states that inelastic action or yield

failure at a point in a body, at which any state of stress

exists, begins only when the maximum shearing stress on

some plane though the point reaches a value equal to the

maximum shearing stress in a tension specimen when yielding

starts. Since the maximum shearing stress in tension test

equals one half of the yield strength of the material, then

the prediction for the yield failure can be summarised as:

max. y. sh
iS (A.3.11. )

From equation (A.3.6.) the maximum shearing stress at

a point is

max. + (o^) (A.3.12. )

Substitute equations (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.),

(A.3.7.) and (A.3.11.) into equation (A.3.12.) and solve

for (d)

/{m + ^-^)2+ T2}^3 (A.3.13.)

7T X S
 132

(iii) SHAFT DIAMETER FORMULA BASED ON MAXIMUM STRAIN

THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory states that inelastic action at a point

begins only when the maximum strain at the point reaches a

value equal to that which occurs when inelastic action

begins in the material under a uniaxial state of stress,

as occurs in a specimen in the tension test. This strain

(£ ) occurs simultaneously with the tensile yield strength

of the material and can be written as:

e (A.3.14.)
y-

The maximum strain at any point can be shown to be

°1 °2
- y— (A. 3.15. )
max

The above statement of the maximum strain theory of

failure will be satisfied by equating equations (A.3.14.)

and (A.3.15.):

ey. emax.

or (A.3.16)

Simplify equation (A.3.16.) and substitute equations

(A.3.5.), (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.) and (A.3.7.) and

solve for (d):

d = (,T ^6g- [(1 - y) (M + F-|-d) + (1 + y)/(M + F- g-d)2 + T2]}1/3

71 y
(A.3.17.)
 133

(iv) SHAFT DIAMETER BASED ON TOTAL STRAIN ENERGY

THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory states that inelastic action at any point

in a body due to any state of stress begins only when the

energy per unit volume absorbed at the point is equal to

the energy absorbed per unit volume by the material when

subjected to the elastic limit under a uniaxial state of

stress, as occurs in a simple tensile test. The value of

strain energy per unit volume at the elastic limit (yield

strength) is

S 2
“ = i(-f-) (A.3.18.)

The total strain energy for our general load case is

^ 2
2^ T? ) + 2|_ TT J (A.3.19. )
total

The above statement of the total strain energy theory

of failure is satisfied by equating equations (A.3.18.) and

(A.3.19.) :

wtotal

or
i 1-2(1 + M)T2 (A.3.20.)
+ —g----- i

Simplify equations (A.3.20.) and substitute equations

(A.3.7.), (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.) and solve for (d):

d = (~Y + F-g-—)2 + (1 + y)T2}1/3 (A.3.21.)

x by
 134

(v) SHAFT DIAMETER BASED ON STRAIN ENERGY OF DISTORTION

THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory states that inelastic action at any point

in a body begins only when strain energy of distortion per

unit volume absorbed at the point is equal to the strain

energy of distortion absorbed per unit volume at any point

in the bar stressed to the elastic limit under a state of

uniaxial stress as occurs in a simple tension (or compression)

test. The strain energy of distortion as determined from

the tension test is

“d.y. = m (1 + w)Sy2 (A.3.22.)

The strain energy of distortion in a shaft under

general load is

"d. = M(1 + p)(ac2 + 3t2) (A.3.23.)

The statement for the theory above is satisfied by

equating equations (A.3.22.) and (A.3.23.)

M(1 + p)Sy2 = ^E(1 + y)(oc2 + 3t2)

or on simplification:

S 2 = a 2 + 3x2 (A.3.24.)
y c

Substitution of equations (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.),

(A.3.7.) leads to solution for (d):

d = {-- ——q— /(M + ^^)2 + ^T2}1/3 (A.3.25.)

ttxSv 8 7 4 v 7
y
 135

(vi) SHAFT DIAMETER BASED ON OCTAHEDRAL SHEARING STRESS

THEORY OF FAILURE

This theory can be stated as follows: the inelastic

action at any point in a body under any combination of

stresses begins only when the octahedral shearing stress

/2
(x , ) becomes equal to -5- x S where (S ) is tensile
oct. 1 3 y y
yield strength of material as determined from the standard

tension test.

The octahedral shearing stress in terms of the

principal stresses can be written as:

■|/(a1 - a2)2 + (a2 - a3)2 + (a3 - a1)2 (A.3.26.)

oct.

In the general cases of shaft loads = 0 hence

oct
|/(a1 - o2)2 + a22 + C;L2 (A.3.27.)

Substitute equation (A.3.5.) and simplify to obtain

|/6t2 + 8 x (^)2
oct.

4/a 2 + 3t 2 (A.3.28.)
oct. o O

The octahedral shearing stress in the tension test

equals to

oct. y
4s
3 y
(A.3.29.)

The statement of this theory is satisfied by equating

the equations (A.3.28.) and (A.3.29.), which results in:

/a 2 + 3x2 (A.3.30.)
c
 136

Substitute equations (A.3.1.), (A.3.2.), (A.3.3.) and

(A.3.7.) and solve for (d):

d = {—/{M + LJLA)2 + |t2 } V3 (A.3.31.)

7T X O o
y

which is identical to the equation (A.3.25.), the equation

based on the strain energy of distortion theory of failure.

 137

SUMMARY OF SHAFT DESIGN FORMULAE BASED ON

ELASTIC THEORIES OF FAILURE

(i) Maximum principal stress theory:

16 F x d.
d {- [(M + +
7T x S 8 ;
y

/ (M +
F x d, 2
)z + T2]} Vs (A. 3. 10.)

(ii) Maximum shearing stress theory:

\

d = {—
7T X b
A(U + O
+ t2 - (A.3. 13. )
y

(iii) Maximum strain theory:

(i - »)<». *
TT X S

(1 + u)/(M + /; Vs
— )2 + T2]}73 (A.3 17. )

(iv) Total strain energy theory:

d = {16 J{W + —i-^)2 + (1 + lOT2}1/3 (A 3.21. )

7T X b O
y

(v) Strain energy of distortion theory:

d = {—^2
it x S
y
A( M + 8
+ |
4
t2}1/3 (A. 3 25. )

(vi) Octahedral shearing stress theory:

d = (7
y
A M + F- -g- d)2 + |t2>1/3 (A. 3 31. )
 138

APPENDIX A.4.

SHAFT MATERIAL EMBRITTLEMENT UNDER LOW-CYCLE LOAD

The aim of this Appendix is to define and quantify

the phenomenon of material embrittlement with respect to

the shaft design. The embrittlement of material is

described as the loss of ductility because of a physical or

chemical change of the material. [Ref. 3, ch. 2, §2.2.]

The ductility of a material is the ability to acquire

large permanent deformations without fracture. The property
opposite to ductility is brittleness i.e., the ability of

a material to fracture without any appreciable permanent

deformation. The percent elongation is the most widely
used measure of ductility and is defined as:

L - L
% ELONGATION = ---- x 100 (A. 4.1.)
o
where

Lq - original gauge length of tension test specimen.

L^ - distance between gauge length markers measured

on the reassembled specimen after fracture.

[Ref. 13, Ch. 9.]

In terms of the percent elongation, the ductility of

a material is described as:

DUCTILE material - if percent elongation is greater

than 5% in 2 inches gauge.

BRITTLE material - if percent elongation is less than

5% in 2 inches gauge.
[Ref. 3, Ch. 2, §2.2]
 139

However, there is no sharp division line between

ductile and brittle materials and some sources quote (2 to

5) % elongation as the border line. [Ref. 7, Ch. 1, §17. j

The above definition of the ductility classifies most

of the wrought engineering steels as ductile, because the
percent elongation for carbon steels falls within the

limits of (18 to 39) in 2 inches gauge and for alloy

steels, used for shafts (refer to table (5.2.1.) in section

5.2.), the percent elongation is in the order of (10 to 22)
in 2 inches gauge. [Ref. 3, Appendix, Tables AT7, AT8,

AT9. ]

In spite of the ductile characteristics of the steels,

many shafts do experience the brittle fracture, some due to
fatigue, others due to low-cycle overloads, which, in
practice, are the short duration cyclic overloads, that can
be applied to a shaft for various reasons. The life span
of the low-cycle overloads is usually restricted to 103
cycles for a notched specimen, and to 105 cycles for a
plain specimen. [Ref. 12, ch. 5, §6.1.U Since most of the

shafts, in general engineering, are essentially "notched"

members, because of some presence of stress risers, their

low-cycle life span can be taken as 103 cycles.

When the magnitude of the overload stress, generated

in a plain or notched shaft, causes the failure of the

shaft, this failure can be either ductile yielding or

brittle fracture. It had been observed that some materials,

possessing high ductility, display only ductile yielding

when subjected to the overloads, and the overload stresses

 140

for these materials can be as high as the yield strength.

[Ref. 8, part 3, Ch. 2, §122; ref. 12, ch. 6, §6.1; ref. 9,
vol. 1, book 2, ch. 5, p. 454.]

It was also noted, that for the life span of 103

cycles these materials retain their ability to withstand

the overload stresses as high, as the yield strength, even

in the presence of stress risers, and this ability is not

affected by the size factor or the surface factor.

[Ref. 14, ch. 12.]

The shafts with the above material characteristics

have the reserve of strength against ductile yield failure

defined in this work as:

n _ yield strength of material (A 4 2 I

y. equivalent design strength ^ ' ' ‘

The shafts, that fail in brittle manner when subjected

to the short duration cyclic overloads, experience the
failure at the stresses smaller than the yield strength of
material. [Ref. 15, ch. 4, also preceding references.]
This reduction can be attributed to the embrittlement of

the normally ductile material and can be accounted for by

the embrittlement strength reduction factor (Kem^ ) The

formulae for the reserve of strength against brittle

failure (n^ ^ ) can now be proposed as

____yield strength of material____

b.f. Kemb x eQuivalent design strength

(A.4.3.)

For the sake of brevity in this work, it is proposed

to call the shafts characterised by the equation (A.4.2.)

 141

as ductile shafts, and the shafts characterised by the

equation (A.4.3.) as brittle shafts.

The embrittlement strength reduction factor (K , )

combines the effect of all geometrical features of the

shaft, that make the shaft less resistant to the low-cycle

overloads, and lead to the brittle fracture. Similarly to

the fatigue analysis, the geometrical features of a shaft

can be characterised by three factors:

(i) size factor (C ) - refer to section 6.4.

S•

(ii) surface factor (Kgur^ ) refer to section 6.3.

(iii) stress concentration factors (K) refer to

section 6.2.

It was found that the size of a shaft and the surface

finish do not contribute to the embrittlement of the shaft.

[Ref. 14, ch. 12, §§12.3, 12.4.] Hence, the embrittlement

strength reduction factor (Kem^ ) depends only on the

stress concentration factor (K) which characterizes some

stress riser present in the shaft. To emphasise this

aspect the factor (Kemk ) will now be called the effective

stress concentration factor (K ).

e.

R. B. Heywood [Ref. 21] and R. C. Juvinall [Ref. 14,

ch. 13, §13.14.] conclude that

1 <: K £ K (A.4.4. )
e.

where

K - effective stress concentration factor for low

e.
cycle (103 cycles) load,

K - endurance limit reduction factor due to a

stress concentration riser.

142

Kf-1
FOR 10 CYCLES
Kf-1

0 75 100 160 200 300 Sui STEEL

FIGURE A.4.1. (K.s.i.)

SEVERITY OF Kf‘ AT 103 CYCLES
REPRODUCED FROM [ REF. 14 ch. 13 § 13,14 fig 13 26 ]

FIGURE A. 4. 2.

GRAPH OF EFFECTIVE STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTOR

(Ke) AT 103 CYCLES
 143

An empirical relationship between (K ), (K) and

(S i ) is proposed by R. B. Heywood [Ref. 21.], that is:

K - 1
K"~~"~1~ = function of (S ^ ) = a (A.4.5.)

where (a) is a constant of material.

The graphical solution of the equation (A.4.5.) is

reproduced from [Ref. 14, ch. 13, §13.14., figure 13.26.]
in figure (A.4.I.), having retained the symbols and units
used in the book.

From the graph in figure (A.4.1.) the part of the

curve between points (A) and (B) corresponds to the ultimate

tensile strength range:

75 < Sul < 160 (k.s.i.)

or in S.I. units

500 x 106 < S ul. < 1100 x 106 vmz/

(^r)

which is the range of the (S ) values for the high Carbon

steels and Alloy steels, as listed in the table (5.2.1.).

Note: in the original graph (ref. 14) the notation (K^ ')

means (K ) and (K^ ) means (K) in this work.

The equation (A.4.5.) can be written as

K - 1 = a(K -1) (A.4.6.)

It is an equation of straight line with the gradient (a),

which is the material constant found from the graph in the

figure (A.4.I.). A graphical solution of the equation
(A.4.6.) is presented in the figure (A.4.2.), which relates

(K), (K ) and (S ^ ) of the shafts material.

 144

For example: a shaft has stress concentration factor K = 3,

and the material of the shaft has S = 700 x 106 -V,

ul. mz’
then from the graph in the figure (A.4.2.)

K =1.4
e.

This result can be verified from the original graph

in figure (A.4.1.),

Sul = 700 X 106 N//m2 °r 100 k-s*i-

Then, from the graph

and solving for (K_^ ' )

Kf ? = 0.2 x (3 - 1) + 1 = 1.4

Hence, both graphs give the same result, because

In conclusion, we note the approximate empirical

nature of finding the effective stress concentration factor

(Ke ). It is assumed, that steels with (S ^ ) below

500 x 106 N/m2, do fail in the ductile manner only, which

is indicated by the termination of the original curve

in the figure (A.4.1.) at the point (A).

To summarize this Appendix:

(i) the ductile shafts have reserve of strength

against yield failure given by the equation

(A.4.2.)

(ii) the brittle shafts have reserve of strength

 145

against yield failure (or brittle fracture)

given by the equation (A.4.3.)

(iii) the effective stress concentration factor

is found from the graph in figure (A.4.2.)*

 146

APPENDIX A.5.

DERIVATION OF RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN

STRESSES IN SECTIONS 7.3.1 TO 7.3.5 INCLUSIVELY

The five design stress cases considered in this

Appendix are grouped together because of their simplicity.

The first three cases represent essentially constant stress

conditions which can only lead to yield failure, either

ductile or brittle, but these cases do not possess the
reserve of strength against fatigue failure. The other two
cases, namely: -7.3.4 and 7.3.5 - represent most basic
single stress fatigue conditions, which are well researched
by the numerous single stress fatigue tests.

The derivation of the reserve of strength formulae

is based on the definition given in section (7.1) and the
equation (7.1.1). The design stress cases are treated in
the numerical order as shown in the table (7.1.1).

(i) With reference to section (7.3.1) the design stresses

for this case are a = a = t =0 and

a m a
16 x T
Tm T 7T x d3 (A.5.1.)

It should be emphasized that this stress case deals

with a constant torque, or essentially constant torque

conditions. In practice this load pattern can be found
in the slow rotating shafts, where the effects of
starting and stopping overloads are not transmitted to
the shaft. In the fast rotating shafts, where the
 147

starting and stopping torques are limited by some

torque limiting device, such as fluid coupling, eddy

current coupling etc., the torque on those shafts can

be taken as constant.

In the equation (A.5.1) the torsional shear stress

(t) is the constant design sress which is developed

in the shaft of diameter (d) when subjected to the

constant design torque (T). The same shaft will fail

in torsional yielding, when the torsional shear stress

will reach the magnitude of the torsional yield strength

of the material (S ), and the load causing the

failure is the failure torque (T^ ^ ). [Ref. 8 -

Ch. 3, §1 and 4j.

Hence, from basic equation (A.5.I.).

7T 3
x S , x d (A.5.2.)
failure 16 y.sh.

and T, . = i XT x d3 (A.5.3.)
design 16 m

The equations (A.5.2.) and (A.5.3.) can be used

with the equation (7.1.1.) to define the reserve of

strength against yield failure for the above stress

case:

Failure load _ T failure

n
y• Design load T design

(tt/16)x SymShm x d3 y.sh.

(A.5.4.)
(tt/ 16) X T X d3
v ' m

The derived equation (A.5.4.) is valid for ductile

shafts, which are defined in the Appendix A.4., along

with brittle shafts. For the brittle shafts, the

 148

torsional yield strength of the shaft material (S g^ )

in the equation (A.5.4.), must be reduced by the

effective stress concentration factor (K ), as

defined in the Appendix A.4.

Hence, for brittle shafts:

s ,
y.sh.
n (A.5.5.)
y• K x T
e. m

(ii) With reference to section (7.3.2.) the design stresses

for this case are a = t = t =0

a a m
and
4 x F
a (A.5.6.)
m it x d z

The constant normal stress in a rotating shaft is

usually generated by the constant axial force (F).

The axial force can be either tensile or compressive.

Considering the tensile axial force first, the

equation (A.5.6.) relates the normal design stress

(a ) to the design axial force F (design load) which

was used in determining the shaft diameter (d). The

shaft will fail in yielding, when the normal stress in

the shaft will reach the magnitude of the tensile

yield strength of material (S ) being subjected to

the failure load (F^ ^ ). [Ref. 8, Ch. 3, §4j.

From basic equation (A.5.6.):

= x S x d2 (A.5.7.)
Ffailure 4 y.
_7T
and F x a x d2 (A.5.8.)
design 4
 149

Using the equations (A.5.7.) and (A.5.8.) in

conjunction with the equation (7.1.1.) the reserve of

strength against yield failure for the constant normal

stress case is:

_ Failure load _ F failure

y. Design load F design

(tt/4) x S xd2 S
= /— tt\--- ^ T2- =
( tt/4 J xaxdz —
a (A.5.9.)
' ' / m m

which is valid for ductile shafts only.

With reference to the discussion in the Appendix

A.4. the effect of brittleness due to the presence of

the stress risers is allowed for by the effective

stress concentration factor (K^ ), leading to:

S
n = --- —--
tz for brittle shafts (A.5.10.)
y. K x a
J e. m

If the axial force is compressive, then the

lateral stability of the shaft must be also considered.

The measure of the shaft’s lack of stability is the

slenderness ratio (X) which is defined as:

A = ^-2-^ (A.5.11.)

where d - diameter of a shaft which has uniform

(constant diameter), solid, circular

cross-section for the distance (L)

L - distance along the shaft between the point

of the axial force application and the

thrust bearing. [Ref. 7 - Ch. (xiv),

sect. 93j
 150

The reserve of strength for the shafts in

compression fall into two categories:

(A) shafts with A > -g— E (A.5.12.)

y•

(B) shafts with A <: g— ^ (A.5.13.)

y•

[Ref. 9 - vol 1, book 2, ch. (iv) pp. 283-287H

The shafts in category (A) have the reserve of

strength against instability (n^ns ) defined as:

Load causing instability ,. .

ins Design load ^ ;

Load causing instability (Fcr ) is the critical

load defined by Euler's equation, that is

Fcr. = ~ -i7- X 'J (A.5.15.)

where J - moment of inertia of the shaft's cross-

section .

T_7TXd4
J = —^ (A.5.16.)

Design load is

7T X d2
0 X --- A----- (A.5.17.)
m 4

Substitute equations (A.5.15.), (A.5.16.) and

(A.5.17.) into equation (A.5.14.) to get:

it2 x E x d2
(A.5.18.)
ins 16 x Lz x

_ 1C Y T 2
from equation (A.5.11.) A2 = --- — then on

substitution the equation (A.5.18.) becomes:

 151

_ E
77 2 X
(A.5.19.)
nins. Az x a

It can be shown that for shafts in category (A),

(nins ) is always smaller than (n ) as found from

equation (A.5.9.), consider ratio

n S/o S o , ?
y. _ ____ y ./ m______ _ y . x A z _ A z______
nins. (tt2 x E) / ( A 2 x am) tt z x E ( tt z x E)/Sy.

(A.5.20.)

From equation (A.5.12.) it follows that

y 2 77 2 X E
A =• —s—
y•
n
hence in the equation (A.5.20.) the ratio n~ — is
ins.
always greater than 1, and therefore ny > ning for

shafts in category (A).

For the shafts in category (B) the onset of

instability takes place after the design stress (a )

exceeds the yield strength of the material (S ).

Various methods are proposed for determining the

critical stress which brings about this instability,

but the critical stress is of little value in

practical shaft design, because the shaft will fail

in yielding before reaching instability. Therefore,

the shafts in category (B) can be designed in the

same way as the shafts in axial tension. That is,

the equations (A.5.9.) and (A.5.10) are both applicable

and the shaft has the reserve of strength against

instability (n^ns ) equal to, or greater than (n ) as

 152

given by the equation (A.5.9.) [[Ref 9 - vol. 1,

book 2, ch. (iv), pp. 283-287.2

(iii) With reference to section (7.3.3.) the design stresses

for this case are a = x =0 and

a a

4 x F
a
m if x d2

16 x T
(A.5.21.)
Tm if x dj

The above design stress case is the combination

of the two preceding stress cases in this Appendix.

The constant normal stress (a ) in a rotating

shaft is generated by a constant axial force (F),

which can be either tensile, or compressive. The

constant torsional shear stress (t ) is generated by

the essentially constant torque (T) as defined in part

(i) of this Appendix.

The onset of yield failure in the shaft will take

place when the octahedral shear stress at the most

heavily loaded point in the shaft reaches the value

of: [Ref. 8 - part 1, ch. 3 and 4.]

failure 4a
3 y•
(A.5.22.)

This yield failure will be brought about by the

combined effect of both design stresses (a ) and (xm)

In order to satisfy the definition of the reserve of

strength in the formula (7.1.1.), the design stresses

are combined in accordance with the octahedral shear

 153

stress theory of failure. With reference to Appendix

A.3. part (vi), the octahedral shear stress, which

combines both (a ) and (x ), is given by the equation

(A.3.28.), that is:

& 4 + 3 x (A.5.23.)
oct. design 3

Since, both (a ) and (Tm)> as defined by the

equations (A.5.21.), are based on the

actual design loads (F) and (T) then, the combined

octahedral shear stress in the equation (A.5.23.) can

be called design octahedral shear stress.

The reserve of strength against yield failure

can now be expressed in terms of the (Tfai^ure) and

^design^’ as gi-ven by the equations (A.5.22.) and

(A.5.23.).
x« ., (/2/3)s S
failure _ N ' y.______ _ y.
ny. t,
design (/2T/3)
' ' t/o
m + 3 x tm^ a c + 3 x t ‘
J m m

(A.5.24.)

The above derivation makes the equation (A.5.24.)

directly applicable to the ductile shafts with the

normal stress (a ) being tensile. As discussed in

part (i) of this Appendix, when the shaft is brittle,

then the yield strength (S ) must be reduced by the

effective stress concentration factor (K e . ) so that

S
n = ____ _____ _______
y. K /a 2 + 3t (A. 5.25.)
J e. m m
for brittle shafts.

Furthermore, when the axial force (F) is com-

 154

pressive the lateral stability of the shaft must be

checked. There is no experimental evidence to suggest

that the torque (T) makes any contribution to the

stability of the shaft, hence the lateral stability

will only be assessed with respect to the axial

compressive force.

Similarly, to the treatment in part (ii) of this

h2 ^
Appendix, if A < \J—^--- then the shaft is stable, and

its reserve of strength is determined from equation

x E
(A.5.24.) or (A.5.25.). But when A > \^~ then

the shaft can become unstable, and its reserve of

strength against instability (n_^ng ) is

X E
7T 2
(A.5.26.)
ins. A2 x a

The same shaft should also be checked against

yield failure in accordance with equation (A.5.24.)

or (A.5.25.).

(iv) With reference to section (7.3.4.) the design stresses

for this case are a = x = x =0 and

mam

32 x M
(A.5.27.)
tt x dd

where M /,M^2 + M^2 is the resultant bending moment,

acting on a rotating shaft diameter (d) and generating

an alternating, fully reversing normal stress with

magnitude (a ). This cyclic stress can induce a

a
gradual failure in the shaft, which is commonly

referred to as fatigue failure. However, if the

 155

design stress (aa) does not exceed a certain value,

usually referred to as endurance limit (S ), then

the shaft can withstand the design stress (a ) for an

infinite number of cycles. The endurance limits for

most of engineering steels are well investigated

experimentally, and any particular steel can have a

number of endurance limits depending on the test

conditions. Thus, an endurance limit of material

determined in fully reversing bending stress test

conditions (S ^ ) is the limiting value for the

design stress defined in the equation (A.5.27.). We

can now define the reserve of strength against fatigue

failure for the above case as

S
n _ -e-p-- (A.5.28.)
f. a
a

which is applicable to a shaft of the same size and

material as specimen used in determining of (S ^ ).

In practice, however, the shaft diameter is usually

greater than the specimen diameter, and this increase

in size results in reduction of the endurance limit,

and further reduction can be introduced by the stress

risers and poorer quality of shafts surface. Hence,

the more general definition of the reserve of strength

for the above design stress case is:

e .b.
(A.5.29.)
f. a x C , x K, x K
surf.
a s .b .

The reduction factors are defined in section 3,

Notation and Units. The above discussions leading

to the equation (A.5.29.) are deliberately brief,

 156

because this topic is very exhaustively covered in

most text books on fatigue phenomenon, including some

references in this work, namely [Ref. 1, 2, 3, 7, 10H.

In many practical applications the cyclic design stress

(a ) can be greatly exceeded by an occasional overload.

While the overloads are not frequent enough to cause

the fatigue failure, the magnitude of the overload

can cause yield failure and for this reason the

reserve of strength against yield failure is determined

as:
S
n = —^‘ for ductile shafts (A.5.30.)
y. o v
J a
S
and n = --- for brittle shafts (A.5.31.)
y. K x a
J e. a

The difference between ductile and brittle shafts

is explained in the Appendix A.4. along with the

definition of the effective stress concentration

factor ().

(v) With reference to section (7.3.5.) the design stresses

for this case are: a = a = x =0 and

a m m

16 x T
(A.5.32.)
a itx dJ

The fully reversing torsional stress (x ) is

a
generated by the fully reversing torque (T) acting on

on a shaft of diameter (d). Similarly to the part

(iv) in this Appendix, the above stress case is well

researched, and it was found that the limiting stress

level, at which the shaft can withstand an infinite

 157

number of cycles, is the endurance limit (S ')

determined in fully reversing torsional shear stress

test conditions. The endurance limit (S , ) must be

reduced by the appropriate size factor (C g^ ), stress

concentration factor (K ^ ) and surface factor (Kgur^ )

so that geometrical differences between the test

specimen and the shaft may be accounted for. Thus,

the reverse of strength against fatigue failure is

defined as:

S
e . sh
(A.5.33.)
f. i
a
xC ,
s.sh.
x K ,
sh.
xK
surf.

The reduction factors are defined in section 3,

Notation and Units. In the same way as discussed in

part (iv) in this Appendix, the shaft's ability to

take some occasional overloads is measured by the

reserve of strength against yield failure which is

defined as:

S .
n = ^ * s—1 for ductile shafts (A.5.34.)
y. t
17 a

and
s u
y. sh.
for brittle shafts (A.5.35.)
K XT
e. a

Both brittle and ductile shafts are defined in

the Appendix A.4. along with the effective stress

concentration factor (K ).
e.

In conclusion to the Appendix A.5. an apology should

be made for a brief and sketchy treatment of the five simple

stress cases, however the subject matter related to these

 158

cases has been discussed in depth in almost every book on

fatigue studies, which can provide further reading if

required.
159

FIGURE A.6.1.

TYPICAL (da-tfm) DIAGRAM

 160

APPENDIX A.6.

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN STRESSES

aa * °’
a
m
f' 0,
’

The case of alternating normal stress (a ) with super­

imposed mean stress (a ) is well investigated and recorded.

It is common to present the experimental results on

(a - am) diagrams, often referred to as: Gerber's,

Goodman's, Soderberg's failure diagrams. A typical

(a - a ) diagram is shown in Fig. A.6.1. [Ref. 26, ch. 6,

a m
§6-24, fig. 6-36; §6-25, fig. 6-38.]

In the diagram the crosses show the typical experi­

mental combinations at which a fatigue failure takes place

after application of 1 x 107 cycles. Several failure lines

to fit the experimental data are in use and those are listed

below, with reference to the figure A.6.1.

Line 1 - Gerber's parabola which joins the ultimate tensile

strength of material (S ^ ) and the endurance limit (S )

in accordance with equation:

a
a = S [1 - m -)P] where p = 2 for
a e* ul. Gerber's parabola

However, since some of the experimental results fall

inside the Gerber's parabola, a power coefficient p = 1.5

is more appropriate for engineering steels.

Line 2 - Goodman's line, which joins the same points as

Gerber's parabola, but becomes a straight line, representing

equation:
 161

a e.g. p = 1
a Se.C1

The line 2 - being a straight line is more suitable

for engineering design but, also, is more conservative.

Line 3 - Soderberg's line - which joins the yield strength

of the material (S ) and the endurance limit (S ) is

y. e.
represented by equation

a
a Se.[1 ]

Lines 4 and 5 represent the condition when

o =o+o = S
max. am y.

In most practical engineering applications the

yielding of the component is not acceptable, and so the

lines 4 and 5 are limiting lines against failure in

yielding.

Line 6 represents equation a= Sg (constant) for compress­

ive mean stress (a = negative). The experimental results

show a small increase in the endurance limit when the mean

stress is compressive, therefore the line 6 is somewhat

conservative. ERef. 1, part 4, ch. 7, §7.7.j

An actual design stress state is represented by a

design point, for example: point D, where o

= o ^ and
a a
D C C
o = +a , or point C, where a = a and o = -o
m m * * ’ a a mm

A line drawn from origin to a design point is called

a load line, and if extended beyond the design point, then

162

+dm
+Sul
♦ Sy
dm
dm
0
-S y
-S u l

FIGURE A. 6.2.
-d m

(da-6m) DIAGRAM FOR(ny) DERIVATION

 163

the points on the load line extension represent an overload

condition, which is proportional to the original stress

condition at the design point.

For example, line (OD) is the load line for the

stress condition at point (D), and a point (E) is the

overload condition, such that

E
a E
OE m
OVERLOAD RATIO
OD

The point (E), as shown in fig. A.6.1, lies inside

lines 1, 2, 3 and 4 and so the shaft is considered safe to

carry the overload. It is, only, when the overload will be

large enough to take the overload point onto or outside of

the failure lines, that the failure will take place.

Thus the reserve of strength can be defined as the

ratio of the length of the load line from the origin to the

intersection of the failure line, to the length from the

origin to the design point. In the example at point (D)

the reserve of strength (n ) against failure in yielding

is
OF
OD

at point (F) the stress combination is

o = o and a om (Refer to Fig. A.6.2.)

a a m

Hence, from fig. A.6.2.

OF
(A.6.1.)
D OD
 164

From fig. A.6.2

a = S - AB (A.6.2.)
a y.

where AB a x tan 45° (A.6.3.)

m

Substitute equation (A.6.3.) into (A.6.2.)

S - a x tan 45' (A.6.4.)

y• m

Substitute (A.6.4.) into (A.6.1.)

S - a x tan 45°
y. m (A.6.5.)

F D
From equation (A.6.1.) a = a x n which on substitution
^ m m y.
into (A.6.5.) gives
S - a x n x tan 45°
y• m y.___________

and solving for (n )

(A.6.6.)
a a D + a m D x tan 45
„ Ko

Since tan 45° = 1

then the reserve of strength against yield failure at the

design point (D) is

(A.6.7.)
a a D +, a m D

When the mean stress is compressive (negative) then

165

-S ul

FIGURE A.6.3.
-d m

(da-dm) DIAGRAM WITH REDUCED ENDURANCE LIMIT

 166

the design point becomes some point (C), refer to fig.

A.6.1. The derivation of the reserve of strength is similar

but the formula becomes

n (A.6.8.)
y•

which results in positive (n ) when the negative value for

C
(a ) is substituted.

The derivation of the reserve of strength against

fatigue failure is based on Goodman's line for a tensile

mean stress, and line 6 (refer to fig. A.6.1.) for

compressive mean stress.

In both cases the endurance limit must be reduced by

the appropriate strength reduction factors, such as: size

factor (C ), strength reduction factor (K) and surface

S •

factor (K _ ).
surf.

Let C xKxK „ = k (A.6.9.)

s. surf. v 7

Then, a reduced Goodman's line is drawn through points

S0
(—j^-) and (S ^ ). The slope of the reduced Goodman's line

is
S
tan a = t-------- (A.6.10.)
k x S , v

Refer to fig. A.6.3.

The reserve of strength against fatigue at the design

point (D) is

E
a
n
OE m (A.6.11.)
f. OD
a m
 167

e.
but a - AB (A.6.12.)

where AB am x tan a (A.6.13.)

e.
and tan a (A.6.14.)
k x S
ul.

Hence, on substitution equation (A.6.12.) becomes

E e.
a x (A.6.15.)
m k x S
ul.

Substitute (A.6.15.) into equation (A.6.11.)

°aE _ (Se./kMgmE*Se)A * Sul) (A.6.16.)

also from equation (A.6.11.) a n_c x a , which on

f. m ’

substitution into equation (A.6.16.) gives:

_ (Se./k>- nf. x °mD x Se.A x Sul (A.6.17.)

Solving the equation (A.6.17) for n

Se./k
f.
+ am S /k x S
e./v ul.
)

ka^ + a^xs /s, (A.6.18.)

a m e./ ul

For most engineering steels the ratio 0.45,

ul.
[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4, ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.H
 168

hence

(A.6.19.)
ka D + 0.4 5a D
a m

On substitution of equation (A.6.9.) we get:

(A.6.20.)
a xC xKxK „ + 0.45a
a s. surf. m

which is the reserve of strength against fatigue failure,

when the mean normal stress (a ) is tensile.

m

In case of compressive mean normal stress (a -

S0
negative) the line a = —1 = constant is used (refer to
3< K

fig. A.6.3.). Consider some design point (C), with

stresses, a = a ^ and a = a ^.
’ a a mm

The extended line (OC) intersects the a line

a k
at point (F), and the reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is defined as:

F F
n, = §£ = (A.6.21.)
f.

but a
e. hence

S
e. (A.6.22.)
k x a

On substitution of equation (A.6.9.) we get

S
(A.6.23.)
a xC xKxK „
a s. surf

To summarize the results, the reserve of strength for

design stresses a #0, a ^ 0, x = x = 0

& a ' ’ m ' ' a m
 169

(i) for (a ) tensile:

m

n (A.6.20.)
f.
m

n (A.6.7.)

(ii) for (a ) compressive:

(A.6.23.)

-S
n y• (A.6.8.)

The suffix (b) is added to indicate alternating

bending stress condition and the endurance limit

observed in fully reversing bending stress test.

The equations (A.6.7.) and (A.6.8.) as above are

applicable to ductile shafts only and do not allow for the

material embrittlement as defined in the Appendix A.4.

The reserve of strength for the brittle shafts is determined

by reducing the yield strength (S ) of the material by the

effective stress concentration factor (K ), which is

e.
defined in the Appendix A.4.

Hence

for brittle shafts

n (A.6.24.)
with (a ) tensile

for brittle shafts

n
y• + am) with (a ) compressive

(A.6.25.)
 170

An additional check against lateral instability should

be made if (a ) is compressive. With reference to the

Appendix A.5., part (ii), the slenderness ratio (A) for a

circular solid shaft is given as:

, _ 4 x L
~ ~~d~~

and if A £ ft „x ^ , then the shaft is stable.

Az x E
When A > /—g--- , then the reserve of strength
y•
against instability (n^ng ) is found from

7T 2 X E
n. (A.6.26.)
ins. ~kl x a
c

where a = I-a + a | which is the absolute value of

c 1 a m1
the maximum compression stress.

(Note: (°m) is negative value for compressive

stress.)
171

A
D
CO

JZ
in jz
_C
in a> in
cn
ai
cn >.
n CO
o O
r* r-*

+Sy.sh.
Lm
la*

0
- -

co
J? -Sy.sh,
-S y
-S ul

FIGURE A.7.1
- lm

TYPICAL ("la-1m) DIAGRAM

 172

APPENDIX A.7.

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN STRESSES:

T f 0, T f 0,
a ' ’ m ' ’

The experimental results on various materials suggest,

that the mean torsional shear stress (t ), when superimposed

on the alternating torsional shear stress (t ), does not

reduce the life of the component. [Ref. 1, part 4, ch. 7,

§7.7.^] The convenient way to reproduce these results is on

(t - t ) diagram in a similar way as (a - a ) diagrams in

sl m si m
Appendix A.6. A typical (t - t ) is shown in fig. A.7.1.
a m

Consider a design point (D) with stress levels

x = x ^ and t = x D. With reference to Appendix A.6.

a a mm
for similar and detailed derivation, the reserve of strength

against failure in torsional yield in this case can be shown

to be:

n (A.7.1.)
y.

The limiting line for the reserve of strength against

S
e. sh
fatigue failure is t where
Lsh.

C , x K , x K ,
‘sh. s.sh. sh. surf.

The suffix (sh.) indicates shear stress, for example:

C , is a size factor determined for torsional shear

s.sh.
stress condition.

From Fig. (A.7.1.) the reserve of strength against

fatigue failure is defined by:

 173

OE
(A.7.2.)
OD

E g sh
Since x = —----- is constant, the reserve of strength is
a -K i
sh.
fully defined by the alternating stress ratio, that is

E
e . sh e. sh
f. D . D n „ I
T k,XT C , X K , X K n XT
a sh. a s.sh. sh. surf. a

(A.7.3.)

The negative side of the (x - xm) diagram is fully

symmetrical to the positive one, and so the equations

(A.7.1.) and (A.7.3.) are valid for both positive and

negative mean torsional shear stresses.

The equation (A.7.1.) must be limited to the ductile

shafts, whereas for the brittle shafts the torsional yield

strength of material (S ) must be reduced by the

effective stress concentration factor as defined in the

Appendix A.4.

Hence,
y ■ sh.
n (A.7.4.)
y.
<*a°*

for brittle shafts.

To summarize the results for the design stresses

Ta * °. i o a
m
0

(i) the reserve of strength against torsional yield

failure is:

n y. Sh
for ductile shafts (A.7.1.)
y• + x.
 174

’y. sh.
for brittle shafts (A.7.4.)
K ( T + T )
e. a nr

(ii) the reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

e . sh.
(A.7.3.)
f. C ,
s.sh.
x K ,
sh.
xK „
surf.
xt
a
 175

"Im

FIGURE
A.8.1.

TYPICAL (tfa-lm) DIAGRAM

-lm -Sul -Sy j-Sysh. 0 Lm +Sysh. j +Sy +Sul

“ VT Sysh- Y T S^ sh -
 176

APPENDIX A.8.

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN STRESSES

aa * °’
x
m
f' 0,’

The experimental results suggest, that the mean

torsional stress lx ), when superimposed on the fully

reversing bending stress (a ), does not reduce the fatigue

life of the component, even, if the mean torsional stress

exceeds the torsional yield strength (S ) of the

material. [Ref. 1, part 4, ch. 7, §7.7.H The experimental

results, generalized by fatigue failure limiting line and

the yield failure line are shown in (a - x ) diagram in

fig. A.8.1.

Basing the derivation of (n) on the above statement,

se b
the limiting line against fatiecue failure is a = —^—-

where the endurance limit for fully reversing bending stress

is reduced by a fatigue strength factor (k) which is defined

as:

x K x K
's. b. b. surf.

Consider the design stress point (D) with stresses

a = a ^ and x = x D and the load line (OD), extended to

a a g m m ’
line
°a = —k— at (B) •

The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

defined by ratio:
B B
OB
(A.8.1.)
OD
 177

B e.b e. b (A.8.2.)
but o
C , x K, x K „
s.b. b. surf

hence
e.b.
(A.8.3.)
f D
a xC.xK, xK
a s.b. b. surf

The yield failure can be best predicted by application

of the total energy of distortion theory of failure, or the

Octahedral Shear Stress theory of failure. Both theories

relate the yield (tensile) strength of material (S ) to

the design stresses (a ) and (t

sl m ) by the following equation:

S = /T2 + 3(T )2 (A.8.4. )

y. a m v '

by re-arranging this equation, to obtain an elliptical form,

S 2 (a )2 + 3(t )
y• a m
and
(o )2 (t )2
a + 3 — 7— = 1 (A.8.5.)
S
y•
2 Js ^
y.

The yield shear strength (S ) is equal to | of

the yield tensile strength (S ) hence:

(a )2 (t )
v ay , o v m'
S ^ (2 x S . )2
y- y • sh.

(a ) (T )2
v ay nr
+ (A.8.6.)
(4/3XSy.sh.)Z

The equation (A.8.6.) is an equation of an ellipse

constructed on (a - ) diagram between two circles:

t one
v a nr &
2
of radius a = S the other of radius t = — S .
ay. m y.sh.
 178

[Ref 9, §9.7, p. 480.]

A design point on the ellipse given by the equation

(A.8.6.), such as point (C) in figure (A.8.1.), will lead
to yield failure, whereas any design point inside the
ellipse will have some reserve of strength. For example,
the design point (D) can be said to be a point on a "safe"
ellipse, which is drawn between two circles; one with
Sv (2//3)S
radius a = —— , the other x = ------sLj-- - where (n )
an’ m n y.
y• y•
is the reserve of strength against yield failure. The
elliptical equation of the "safe" ellipse through point (D)

is

(aa }
D.2 ( T mD ')' 2
(S (A.8.7.)
[TV7 +(4/31(Sy.Sh./V>

Solving this equation for (n^ ) and substitute

S y.sh.
, = 0.5 S y. leads to:

(a D.2z (x D.2
)
(n
y.
V IS y • F + JZs y • F
and
(A.8.8.)
i/( a ^) 2 + 3( x z

The negative side of the (a - x ) diagram is

symmetrical to the positive one, and both equations (A.8.3.)

and (A.8.8.) are applicable.

The above results are derived without any consideration

of the embrittlement as described in the Appendix A.4. In

accordance with the observations in the Appendix A.4., the
equation (A.8.8.) is applicable to the ductile shafts only,

and for brittle shafts the yield strength of material is

 179

reduced by the effective stress concentration factor (K ),

hence

(A.8.9.)
/(a ^)2 + 3( x ^)2

To summarize the results for the design stresses

a f 0, t f 0, o = x = 0
a ' ’ m ' ’ m a

(i) The reserve of strength against yield failure is

(A.8.8.)
y‘ /(a )2 + 3( t )2’
v a v m
for ductile shafts, and

S
_ ________ y-_______ (A.8.9.)
K /(a Yl + 3( t )2
e. a mx

for brittle shafts

(ii) The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

S
(A.8.3.)
f. axC.xK, xK _
a s.b. b. surf
180

£ <£<£ S

FIGURE A.9.1.

TYPICAL (la -dm) DIAGRAM

 181

APPENDIX A.9.

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN STRESSES

Ta * °’
o m f' 0,
’
0

The small number of experimental data suggest that, a

tensile mean stress (a ) when superimposed on fully reversing

torsional stress (t ), reduces the torsional endurance limit

a
of a component. On the other hand, a compressive mean

stress (-a ) increases the torsional endurance limit. [Ref.

1, part 4, ch. 7, §7.7, fig. 7.10.]

In the above reference the data is collected for 3

materials only and can, hardly, be called conclusive,

however the application of G. Sines criterion to this

design stress case confirms the trend of the graph and

determines the slope of fatigue failure line as (-0.26)

when the results are plotted on (t - am) diagram shown in

figure (A.9.1.). [Ref. Appendix A.11. equation (A.11.23.).]

The intercept of the fatigue failure line on (t ) axis is

(S k ). In "t^ie presence of stress rising features the

torsional endurance limit (S , ) must be reduced by a

factor (k) which is defined as:

k K , x C , x K „ (A.9.1.)
sh. s.sh. surf.

Consider a design point (D) with design stresses

x = t D and a = a ^. The load line drawn through point

a a mm
(D) intersects the reduced fatigue failure line at point

(A). The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

defined by:
 182

A A
t a
OA a m
(A.9.2.)
f. OD D D
t a
a m

From fig. (A.9.1.) it follows that

e;sh- _ 0.26 x a A (A.9.3.)

k m

and on substitution into equation (A.9.2.)

A
k - 0.26 a
(A.9.4.)
f.

also from equation (A.9.2.)

n„ x a (A.9.5.)
f. m

k - 0.26a x n
then (A.9.6.)
f.

Solving equation (A.9.6.) for (nf ) we get

S , /k S
e. sh./ e. sh.
(A.9.7.)
t D + 0.26a D k(t D + 0.26a D)
a m v a m /

and on substitution of equation (A.9.1.)

s e. sh.

K x C , x K „(tDx 0.26a D) (A.9.8.)

sh. s.sh. surf. a m

The above equation (A.9.8.) gives the reserve of

strength for the positive side of the (x - a ) diagram,

a m
that is tensile mean stress (a ).
m

When the mean normal stress is compressive (-a ), the

reserve of strength is also defined as:

 183

e. sh
f.
K x C , x K rT D + 0.26a D)
sh. s.sh. surf. a m y

which is the equation (A.9.8.^ but on substitution of the

negative value of (-a ), the reserve of strength increases

A prediction of the yield failure is made on the

basis of the Total Energy of Distortion Theory of failure,

or the Octahedral Shear Stress Theory of Failure. Both

theories relate the tensile yield strength of a material

(S ) to the design stresses (am) and (t^) by the equation:

[Ref. Appendix A.3. parts (v) and (vi).U

S = /(o )2 + 3(t )2 (A.9.9. )

y. v m a v y

This equation can be re-arranged into elliptical

form as follows:

S 2 + 3t
y•
and
a t
m o a ,
c 2 + (A.9.10.)
S z
y•

Assuming, that the yield shear strength (S , )

y • sn.
equals to i of the tensile yield strength (Sy ) and

substituting into equation (A.9.10.):

+ (A.9.11.)
S z
y- (4/3>(Sv.sh.>

The equation (A.9.11.) represents an ellipse on

(x -a ) diagram, which is constructed between two circles:

am & ’
2
one of radius t = -p? S . , the other of radius a = S
a /3 y. sh. m y.
[Ref. 16, ch. 9, §9.7, p. 480.1 This ellipse represents
 184

the yield failure line and is applicable both to the positive

(tensile) mean normal stress and the negative (compressive)

mean normal stress.

Any point inside the ellipse, such as design point

(D), has a certain reserve of strength (n ) against yield

failure. Any such point can be thought of as lying on a

"safe" ellipse, which is constructed between two circles:

y • sh
one of radius t the other of radius a
73
The equation of this "safe" ellipse becomes:

(a D,2 D)x2
v m )' ( T
a
(A.9.12.)
(S 7n V (4/3( Sy _ sh ./ny. ^
y•/ y-

Substitute S , 0.5 S into equation (A.9.12.) and

y. sh y-
solve for (n ) :
y-

n (A.9.13.)
y- D)2 + 3(T D)2
A

The above equation is derived for a ductile shaft,

where as for brittle shaft the reserve of strength against

brittle failure is:

n
y- (A.9.14.)
'<X?)2 + 3( T D) 2

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of (K ),

the ductile and brittle shafts.

To summarize the results for the design stresses:

x f 0, o f 0, x = o = 0
a ' ’ m ' ’ m a
 185

(i) The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

S
e. sh.
(A.9.8.)
f. KT xC T xK 7Tt + 0.26 a )
sh. s.sh. surf. a nr

(ii) The reserve of strength against yield failure is

stt
for ductile shafts (A.9.13.)
Ao m 2 + 3t 2
a

n for brittle shafts (A.9.14.)

K /a 2 + 3t 2
e. m a
186

Lu
Z

LU
cr
3

Seb. Seb

FIGURE A. 10 1.

TYPICAL (la - da ) DIAGRAM

 187

APPENDIX A.10.

RESERVE OF STRENGTH FORMULAE FOR DESIGN STRESSES

0
°a * °’

H. J. Gough's experiments are summarized by N. E.

Frost, R. J. Marsh and L. P. Pook [Ref. 12, ch. 3, §3.6.1

and it is suggested that the experimental data on the

wrought steels, when plotted on (x -a ) diagram is closely

a a
approximated by an ellipse quadrant. [Ref. 12, ch. 3, §3.6.

fig. 3.8.1 The equation of the ellipse quadrant is:

+ (A.10.1.)
(S
e . sh.

It had also been shown experimentally that the

ellipse quadrant equation (A.10.1.) is applicable to the

case of alternating normal and torsional shear stresses

being out of phase. [Preceding references.!] With reference

to the fig. (A.10.1.) the ellipse quadrant (A.10.1.) is the

fatigue failure line for plain, notch-free, round specimen.

The ellipse quadrant (A.10.1.) is drawn between two

circles: one of radius x = S . , the other of radius

a e. sh.
a = S , . [Ref. 16, ch. 9, §9.7, p. 480.1 In the
a e.d.
presence of stress rising conditions, both (S g^ ) and

(S k ) must be reduced by the appropriate strength

reduction factors (kgh ) and (k^ ), thus for bending

stresses:

x C , x K _ (A.10.2.)
s.b. surf

and for torsional shear stresses:

 188

K , x C ,xK (A.10.3.)
sh. s.sh. surf

The reduced endurance limit in bending becomes

S
e. b.
(A.10.4.)
b.red.
;b.

and the reduced endurance limit in torsion becomes

S
e . sh
(A.10.5. )
sh.red.
‘sh.

The equation of an ellipse quadrant, drawn through

e. sh.
points x and is
cl

1 (A.10.6.)
(S
e

and this ellipse quadrant is called a reduced fatigue

failure line in Fig. (A.10.1.).

Any design point inside the reduced fatigue failure

line, such as point (D), can be considered as a point on a

"safe" ellipse quadrant, which is drawn between two circles:

S s h
one of radius a ———-r— the other of radius x = vf——1
x n„ a K
b. “ “f sh. X nf.
where (n^ ) is the reserve of strength against fatigue

failure. The equation of the "safe” ellipse quadrant through

point (D), where design stresses are a = a^ and xa = x^ is:

(a
a )
)2
(x a Dx
+
(S, .b./kb. x nf.}) (Se.sh./ksh. x nf.))Z

(A.10.7.)

Solving equation (A.10.7.) for (n^ ):

 189

D 2 Dn2
(k, (X XT )Z
x °a } + (A.10.8.)
f. Ts e. ry
b.
Zv
Ts e.sh.7

If the reserve of strength with respect of bending

stresses is defined as

S
e. b
(A.10.9.)
kb. x

and the reserve of strength with respect of torsional shear

stresses is defined as:

S
e . sh
(A.10.10.)
x . D
k . XT
sh. a

then, on substitution of equations (A.10.9.) and (10.10.10.)

into equation (A.10.8.) we get:

n„ z n 7 n 7
f.

n x n
a t
(A.10.11.)
^* /n 7 + n 2-r
a t

where, including equations (A.10.2.) and (A.10.3.)

s e .b.
K
(A.10.12.)
Ofr T7~
K,
b. x C
s.b. , x K
surf.~ x oa D

e . sh.
(A.10.13.)
K , xC . xK x T D
sh. s.sh. surf. a

When the endurance limit for alternating torsional

shear stress (S , ) is not known, it can be assumed for

v e.sh. ’
wrought steels as

0.577 S (A.10.14.)
e . sh e .b.

[Ref. 2, ch. 1, §4, ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.]]

 190

Substitute equation (A.10.14.) into (A.10.8.) we get:

<kb. x °aD)2 <ksh. x TaD)2

(A.10.15.)
(0.577 x S TT7
f. <Se.b.^ e. b.
which on re-arrangement leads to an alternative equation

for (n_£ )

(0.577 x k, x a D)2 + (k x x D)2

v b. a ' v sh. a
(0.577 x S , )z
v e.b.

0.577 x S
e . b.

no.
(0.577 x x aaD)2 + (k _ x x °)2

e . b.
(A.10.16.)
^ x a D)2 + 3(k x xoD)2

The yield failure line in Fig. (A.10.1.) is based on

the Total Energy of Distortion Theory of Failure, or the

Octahedral Shear Stress Theory of Failure. Both theories

relate the tensile yield strength of a material (S ) to

the design stresses (aa) and (x ) by the equation:

/a a 2 + 3t
a
2 (A.10.17.)

a ^ x
a | 0 a (A.10.18.)
c-- Z + *S a
y•

Assume for wrought steel that yield shear strength

(Sy ) equals £ of the tensile yield strength, that is

S , = 0.5 S (A.10.19.)
y.sh. y.

ERef. 2, ch. 1, §4, ref. 3, ch. 4, §4.7.D

then, on substitution into equation (A.10.18.)

 191

a 2
a
(A.10.20.)
s ■z (4/3XSy
y-

The equation (A.10.20.) represents an ellipse quadrant

on (t - a ) diagram, which is constructed between two

a a
2
circles: one of radius x = S , , the other of
a /3 y.sh. ’
radius = Sy . The ellipse quadrant represents the yield

failure line as shown in Fig. (A.10.1.).

Derivation of the reserve of strength against yield

failure is similar to the Appendix A.8., or Appendix A.9.,

which leads to the following result

n (A.10.21.)
y• fa a 2 + 3 T a ^"1

With reference to the Appendix A.4. the equation

(A.10.21.) applies to the ductile shafts only. For brittle

shafts the yield strength of material (Sy ) is reduced by

the effective stress concentration factor (K^ ), so that:

S
n = ---- . y‘ (A.10.22.)
y- K /o 2 + 3t 2'
e. a a

To summarize the results for the design stresses:

a
a
/ 0,
' ’
x
a
f' 0,’ a m = x m = 0

(i) The reserve of strength against fatigue failure is

n x n
Q_______ T
(A.10.11.)
f. /n 2 + n ~
a x

where

e. b. (A.10.12.)
K. xC.xK „xa
b. s.b. surf. a
 192

s. sh.
K x (A.10.13.)
x C
ksh. s. sh. surf.

or, combining equations (A.10.11.,-12.,-13.) and

re-arranging

e. b.
n/CkT xC T xK ~ x~o ) 2 + 3(K , x”c T xK ~ xr )
b. s.b. surf. a sh. s.sh. surf. a

which is the equation (A.10.16.) with equations

(A.10.2.) and (A.10.3.) substituted.

(ii) The reserve of strength against yield failure is

s
n y• for ductile shafts (A.10.21.)
y- f~G 2 + 3t 2
a a

n = ------- ■ -r..:—for brittle shafts (A.10.22.)

y‘ K /o 2 + 3t 2'
e. a a
 193

APPENDIX A.11.

APPLICATION OF G. SINES CRITERION FOR FATIGUE FAILURE

TO SOLUTION OF COMPLEX DESIGN STRESS CASES

The complex design stress cases are the stress

combinations consisting of three or more stress components,

such as, stress cases 7.3.11 to 7.3.15 inclusively, as

listed in the table 7.1.1. These stress cases combine

the alternating stresses and the static (constant)

stresses. G. Sines criterion for fatigue failure simply

states that "the permissible alternation of the octahedral

shear stress is a linear function of the sum of the

orthogonal normal static stresses". [Ref. 1, part 4, ch. 7,

§7.9.H The mathematical expression of the criterion using

the same symbols as in the above reference, can be stated

as:

^[(P-L - P2)2 + (P2 " P3)2 + (P1 ~ P3)2^2 * A “ a(Sx. + Sy. + Sz.}

(A.11.1.)

where

p^, P2, P3 - are the amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses

are orthogonal static stresses.

A a constant for the material, proportional to

the fatigue strength.

a - coefficient, giving the variation of the

permissible range of stress with static

stresses. G. Sines suggests that the values

 194

of (A) and (a), which describe the fatigue

properties for a material, can be determined
from two fatigue stress cases in which the
static stresses are appreciably different.

The G. Sines equation (A.11.1.) can be simplified by

observing that only two principal stresses are possible at
the surface of the shaft and they are given by (A.3.5.) in
the Appendix A.3., that is:

o12 = •§ ± /2 + (§)2 (A.11.2.)

and =0

Hence, changing S x* , S y• , S z • to a x , a y , a z respectively,

the equation (A.11.1.) can be written as:

- a2)2 + a^2 + a22]2 * A - a^ax + °y + ° z? (A-11-3-)

G. Sines puts the following interpretation on the

equation (A.11.1.): "The expression on the left must not
exceed the right hand side, or failure will occur before
the desired lifetime". Obviously, the same interpretation
applies to the equation (A.11.3.). Mathematically it is
legitimate to transfer all stresses to the left hand side
of the equation (A.11.3.), that is:

^C(a1 - a2)2+a12 + n22H2 + a(ax + ay + az) - A (A.11.4.)

The meaning of this equation can be stated as:

"The sum of the octahedral shear stress

and some portion of the sum of the
orthogonal static stresses must not
exceed the constant property of the
material (A), or failure will occur
before the desired lifetime".

This interpretation can be re-stated in terms of the

reserve of strength definition, that is:
"The ratio by which the right hand side
of the equation (A.11.4.) exceeds the
the left hand side is the reserve of
 195

strength against fatigue failure'

Hence,

U
3;(oi - °2)2 + 0
+ cr, + a (a
v x
+ a
y
+ a )
z'

(A.11.5.)

The constant (A) in the above equation can be

determined by considering the fully reversing bending

stress case (7.3.4.) as described in the section (7.3.)

and listed in the table (7.1.1.). The design stresses

for the case are

32 x M
and a
TT X d3

In terms of the notation in the equation (A.11.5.)

the stresses are:

o. = a
1 a

and on, o , o , o - are all zero.

2’ x y’ z

Hence, equation (A.11.5.) becomes:

(A.11.6.)
/2
i/a + a ^
3 a a 3 °a

Comparing the equation (A.5.28.) from Appendix A.5.

which is based on experimental data, to the equation

(A.11.6.) it's clear that

/2 „
(A.11.7.)
3 e.b.

The constant (a) can be found by considering the

zero-compression, pulsating bending stress cases, similar

 196

to the design stress case (7.3.6.) as described in the

section (7.3.) and listed in the table (7.1.1.). The

design stresses for the case are:

32 x M 4 x F
a = ---- tt : a = ---- -ry ; x = x = 0
a irxd'3 m TTxdz a m

In terms of the notation in the equation (A.11.5.)

the stresses are:

°1 = °a ; °2 = 0

and 0=0 ; a=a=0

x m ’ y z

then equation (A.11.5.) becomes:

f.
U
3 a
+o 2 + a(a ) -5- x a
3 a
+ a x a
m
(A.11.8.)
v '

Substitute the equation (A.11.7.) into above equation:

(/2/3) x S
!e.b.
(A.11.9.)
(1/2/3) x a + a x a
' ' 1 a m

Comparing the equation (A.6.20.) from Appendix A.6.,

which is based on the experimental date, to the equation

(A.11.9.) it is clear that,

a & x 0.45 (A.11.10.)

3

G. Sines [Ref. 1, part 4, ch. 7, §7.10.] uses the

fully reversing axial test to derive the constant (A) and

the zero-tension, pulsating axial test to derive the

constant (a). His result for the constant (A) is

A (A.11.11.)

where (f^) is the amplitude of the reversed axial stresss,

 197

which causes failure at the desired cyclic lifetime. If

the infinite lifetime is selected, then (f^) becomes the

endurance limit of the material, which is also (S . ) -

endurance limit of the material determined in fully reversing

bending test, when applied to shaft design. Therefore the

G. Sines constant (A) and the constant (A) in the equation

(A.11.7.) are equivalent.

G. Sines constant (a) is given as:

a (A.11.12.)

where f^ - as defined above, and when applied to shafts

f-, = S . .

f^' - is the amplitude of the pulsating stress which

would cause failure at the same lifetime as the reversed

stress (f^). When applied to shafts, (f^') is the endurance

limit of the material determined in the pulsating bending

stress test. For general engineering steels the ratio

q
—-) is found to be
11

(1.4 to 1.6) (A.11.13.)

[Ref. 11, ch. 5, p. 278.H

Substitute the equation (A.11.13.) into the equation

(A.11.12.):

J2 X 0.40 < a 0.60 (A.11.14.)

3

The result obtained in the preceding derivation, as

given in the equation (A.11.10.) falls within the limits of

 198

equation (A.11.14.), and hence in the following work the

magnitude of the constant (a) as shown in the equation

(A.11.10.) will be used.

Before considering the complex stress cases, the G.

Sines criterion is applied to the two-stress cases namely:

the design stress combinations 7.3.6. to 7.3.10. inclusively,

as listed in the table (7.1.1.)

(i) The design stress combination (7.3.6.) was used in

deriving the constant (a) and the results are agreeable

with those in section (7.3.6.) and the relevant

derivation in Appendix A.6.

(ii) The design stress combination (7.3.7.) consists of:

t ¥ 0, t ¥0,o = a = 0
a ' ’ m ' ’a m

The amplitudes of the alternating principal stresses

are

a / a
-9: + /T 2 + (_*)2
1.2 2 a K 2 ;

which, on substitution, reduces to

-T (A.11.15.)
+V °2

The orthogonal static stresses are

a
“ ± /x/m 2 a
+ ( ®)2
x, y 2 v 2 '

which, on substitution, reduces to

v -T (A.11.16.)

Using the equations (A.11.5.), (A.11.7.), (A.11.10.)

and the stresses in the equations (A.11.15.) and

 199

(A.11.16.) the reserve of strength against fatigue

failure is:

(/2/3)X Se.b.
nf. = r-------- -------- 7------------------------
f/(Ta + Ta)2 + Ta2 + (-Ta)2 +(/2/3)x 0.45(Tm - Tm)

(^>3)x se.b. = Se. b. = °'577 * Se.b .

[/213) X /i* X T /T XT a Ta
\ 1 a

(A.11.17.)

We note, that the torsional endurance limit

(Se ^ ) equals to (0.5 to 0.6) of the (Sg ^ ), [Ref.

3, ch. 4, §4.7; ref. 2, ch. 1, §4], hence

S . = 0.577 x S , can be taken,

e.sh. e.b.

Then on substitution, the equation (A.11.17.)

becomes:

n = (A.11.18.)
f. T
a

The same result was obtained in the Appendix A.7.,

thus confirming the validity of G. Sines criterion.

(iii) The design stress combination (7.3.8.) consists of:

a
a '
f 0;’ x m f' 0;’ a x
a
=0

The amplitudes of the alternating principal stresses

are a- = a ; a0 = 0 (A.11.19.)

The orthogonal static stresses are:

a a - T (A.11.20.)
x m’ y m

Substitute equations (A.11.19.) and (A.11.20.)

into the equation (A.11.5.), also use equations

 200

(A.11.7.) and (A.11.10.) to obtain:

nf = — —-------------------------
^vo 2 + a 2 + (V2"/3) x 0.45(t - x )
3 a a ' ' mm

S
= (A.11.21.)
a

The same result was derived in the Appendix A.8.,

thus confirming the validity of G. Sines criterion.

(iv) The design stress combination (7.3.9.) consists of:

x f 0; a f 0; t = t = 0

In the interest of brevity, only the equations

will be presented, in the same procedural order as

the preceding parts (ii) and (iii) in this Appendix.

a
1,2
= — +
2 “ /
/t ^2 + (—-)
a v(^:
2 ;
2

hence
x ; an = -x
a’ 2 a

a;
m’ ay = az = 0

then
(1/2/3) S
e .b.

|/Ta + Ta)2 + Ta2 + (-Ta)2 + (>^/3) x 0.45(am)

____________ (^/3)Se.b.______________
(1/2/3) x /3 x T + (1/2/3) x 0.45 x a

e .b
(A.11.22.)
/3t + 0.45 a
a m

From part (ii) in this Appendix, Sg = 0.577 x Sg ^

then on substitution, the equation (A.11.22.) becomes:

 201

u .____
s e. sh
n (A.11.23. )
f. T + 0.26 x a
a m

Note, when (a ) is compressive, that is negative,

then the presence of (-o ) increases (n^ ).

(v) The design stress combination (7.3.10.) consists of:

a 7*0; x 7*0; a = t = 0
a ' ’ sl 1 ’ m m

then, the amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses are

+ A a, 2
2 + (-2:) (A.11.24.)
1,2 2 a K 2 }

and a o = o
y z

Hence, from equation (A.11.5.):

(/2/3) S
!e.b.
J# / r

- a2)2 + + Og2 + (/^"/3) x 0.45 x (0)

having substituted the equation (A.11.24.) and

simplifying:

S
e . b.
(A.11.25.)
f.
Ja 2 + 3 x i 2
a a

The above result is consistent with the equation

(A.10.16.) in the Appendix A.10., thus confirming the

validity of G. Sines criterion.

In conclusion to the above study of the two-stress

cases, it is clear that the G. Sines criterion for fatigue

failure gives valid and consistent results in comparison

to the experimental data. The criterion can now be applied

to the complex, three or more stress case, for which little

experimental data is available.

 202

A.11.1 The design stress combination (7.3.11.) consists of:

o f 0; a ^ 0; x ^ 0; and x =0

The amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses are:

a and o0 = 0 (A.11.26.)
a 2

The orthogonal static stresses are

/ 2 + (V2' (A.11.27.)
x, y m 2

Substitute equations (A.11.26.) and (A.11.27.)

into the equation (A.11.5.) and also use equations

(A.11.7.) and (A.11.10.) for the constants (A) and

( a) :

(V2"/ 3) s
_____ e.b ._____________
(A.11.28.)
l/o
o'ra “
3 a
+ a * + (/2/3) x O.45(0x + o )
a

Note: (a + a ) reduces to (a ), and then equation

x y m
(A.11.28.) simplifies to:

S
e. b. (A.11.29.)
a + 0.45a
a m

which is the reserve of strength against fatigue

failure for an ideal test specimen subjected to

the design stress case (7.3.11.). For a real

shaft an allowance must be made for the size

effect, stress risers and surface finish. We

note, that the result in the equation (A.11.29.)

is similar to the equation (A.6.20.) in the Appendix

A.6. where, it was shown, that the strength

reduction factors (Cg , K, ) are applied to

 203

(a ) only. Hence, the equation (A.11.29.) can be

a
written as:

e. b.
(A.11.30.)
f. a x K. x C x K + 0.45a
a b. s. b. surf.

The above assumption is valid, because the

constant torsional shear stress has no effect on

the reserve of strength against fatigue failure,

as expressed in the equation (A.11.29.), therefore

the stress case (7.3.11.) is identical to (A.3.6.)

with respect to the fatigue strength.

The yield failure for this stress case can be

predicted by the Octahedral shear stress theory of

failure as set out in the Appendix A.3., part (vi)

using equations (A.3.28.) and (A.3.29.).

Hence, the design octahedral shear stress is:

oct. design
a /or
~3
(A.11.31.)

where

a + [a ] (A.11.32.)
a m

[a ] - represents absolute value

The octahedral shear stress in a tension test

at the point of failure is

(A.11.33.)
oct. failure 3 y

The reserve of strength against yield failure

is defined by the equation (7.1.7.) in section

(7.1.).
 204

Hence,
Toct. failure
n
Toct. design

which on substitution of the equations (A.11.31.)

(A.11.32.) and (A.11.33.) becomes:

n (A.11.34.)

which is the reserve of strength against yield

failure for a ductile shaft.

With reference to the Appendix A.4. the

reserve of strength against yield failure for a

brittle shaft is

n (A.11.35.)
y• K /(a + [a ])2 + 3x 2
e. a m m
 205

A.11.2 The design stress combination (7.3.12.) consists of:

a / 0; x f 0; t f 0; and a =0
m ' ’ a ' ’ m ' a

The amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses are:

1,2 / 2 + (^r

or a1 = +t ; and a0 -a (A.11.36.)
-La

The orthogonal static stresses are:

o
/ 2 + (^
(^)2 (A.11.37.)
X, y

The equations (A.11.7.), (A.11.10.), (A.11.36.)

and (A.11.37.) can be substituted in the equation

(A.11.5.) to give the reserve of strength against

fatigue failure for an ideal test specimen:

(S2/3) S
e .b.

f- i/(x + t)2 + t2+t2 + (/2/3) x 0.45(a + a )

ay a a. ^ ' vx y

(A.11.38.)

We note: (a + a ) reduced to (a ) and then the

x y' m
equation (A.11.38.) simplifies to:

S
e .b.
(A.11.39.)
f.
v/S’t + 0.45a
a m

Further substitution can be made, that is

S , 0.577 x S [Ref. part (ii) in this

G•sn• 0.D #
Appendix.]

Then
S
e . sh.
(A.11.40.)
nf. ~ t + 0.26 a
a m
 206

The above equation is similar to the equation

(A.9.8.) in the Appendix A.9. Because of this

similarity the strength reduction factors are

applied to the equation (A.11.40.) in the same

way, as in the formula (A.9.8.), leading to the

reserve of strength against fatigue failure for

the stress case (7.3.12.):

e. sh.
(A.11.41.)
f. xC , xK _p ( t + 0.26 a)
s.sh. surf. a nr

Note: negative (am) increases the (nf ).

The reserve of strength against yield failure

can be found from the Octahedral shear stress

theory of failure, as presented in the Appendix

A.3., part (vi) and using equations (A.3.28.) and

(A.3.29.).

The design octahedral shear stress is:

+ 3T 2 (A.11.42. )
Toct. design c

where
T T + T
C a m

The octahedral shear stress in a tension test

at the point of failure is

q Sy (A.11.43.)
oct. failure 3

From the equation (7.1-7) in section (7.1.)

the reserve of strength against yielding is

defined as:

Toct. failure
Toct. design
 207

which, on substitution of the equations (A.11.42.)

and (A.11.43.) becomes:

n (A.11.44.)
y•
+ 3(Ta +

The above equation is suitable for the ductile

shafts, as described in the Appendix A.4. whereas

for the brittle shafts the following equation

applies:

S
n y• (A.11.45. )
V .
X VO ^ + 3( T + T
m v a m'
 208

A.11.3 The design stress combination (7.3.13.) consists of:

a / 0; a 7 *0 ; x 9* 0; and x =0
a ' m ' a ' m

The amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses are:

^ 2 + (-ft) 2 (A.11.46. )
1.2

The orthogonal static stresses are:

a = a and a = 0 (A.11.47)
x m y

From equation (A.11.5.), and on substitution

of equations (A.11.46.), (A.11.47.), (A.11.7.)

and (A.11.10.), the reserve of strength against

fatigue failure for an ideal test specimen is:

(/2/3)s
e .b
f.
- a2)2 + 0 ^2 + aq2 + (^/s) x 0.45(a^ + av)

which reduces to:

e. b .
(A.11.48.)
+3x 2 +0.45xa
a a m

The strength reduction factors can be applied

in the following way:

e .b .
C , xK, xK .pX Vo 2 + 3 x 2 + 0.45 x o
s .b. b. surf a a m

(A.11.49.)

The above equation applies to tensile (a )

only. When (a ) is compressive the equation

becomes:
 209

(A.11.50.)

There is no experimental indication for

applying the strength reduction factors in this

manner, but the theoretical justification can be

seen from similarity to stress cases (7.3.6.) in

the Appendix A.6. and stress case (7.3.10.) in the

Appendix A.10.

The reserve of strength against yield failure

can be found from the Octahedral shear stress

theory of failure, as presented in the Appendix

A.3., part (vi), equations (A.3.28.) and (A.3.29.).

The derivation of the formulae is similar to the

preceding section (A.11.1.) in this Appendix, hence

only the main equations and the results will be

given as follows:

T + 3t 2
oct. design a

where

a
c

[a ] - denotes absolute value

m

Toct. failure 3 ^y.

then

n for ductile shafts (A.11.51.)

S
n ------ .=, for brittle (A.11.52.)
K /(o + a )2 + 3t o 2 shafts
e. a m '
a
 210

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for definition of

(K ), and also of ductile, and brittle shafts.

 211

A.11.4 The design stress combination (7.3.14.) consists of:

a t^O; x ^ 0; t / 0; and a =0
a ' ’ a ' m ' ’ m

The amplitudes of the alternating principal

stresses are:

*^2 + (-ft)2 (A.11.53.)

1 2

The orthogonal static stresses are:

a / a
x,y 2 m l2j

+x and a -T (A.11.54.)
m y

The reserve of strength against fatigue

failure, for an ideal test specimen, based on the

equation (A.11.5.) can be shown to be:

e. b. (A.11.55.)
f.
Joa ^+3 t^
a

Because of similarity to the stress case

(7.3.10.) in the Appendix A.10., the application

of the strength reduction factors leads to:

e. b
(A.11.56.)
C ,
s.b.
x K,
b.
x K „ x
surf.
Jo a 2 + 3x 2
a

The yield failure is predicted in the same

way as in the preceding parts of this Appendix.

for ductile
n (A.11.57.)
y• shafts
+ 3( t +
a

y. for brittle
y. (A.11.58.)
4 2 + 3( x + shafts
 212

A.11.5. The design stress combination (7.3.15.) is the

most complex, 4-stress case consisting of:

of 0; a f 0) t f 0; x^O

With reference to the equation (A.11.5.) the

amplitudes of the alternating principal stresses

are:

°1,2 = +
- ^a2 + > (A.11.59.)

The orthogonal static stresses are:

a = -pr- ± t/x 2 + (-^)2 (A.11.60.)

x,y 2 m v 2 7 v 7

Combining equations (A.11.5.), (A.11.7.),

(A.11.10.) and (A.11.59.), (A.11.60) and solving for

(nf ) :

S
n = ------------ (A.11.61.)
/a 2 + 3x 2 + 0.45 x a
a a m

The above result is identical to the equation

(A.11.48.) in section (A.11.3.), which, on

substitution of the strength reduction factors,

leads to

e. b
f.
C , x K, x K .pX Vo ^ + 3x 2 + 0.45 x o
s.b. b. surf. a a m
(A.11.62.)

which is applicable to tensile (a ) only. When

(g ) is compressive, then the reserve of strength

against fatigue failure becomes:

e .b.
, (A.11.63.)
lf. C , x K, x K .pX Vo 2 + 3x 2
s.b. b. surf. a a
 213

Refer to the justifications following the

equation (A.11.50.) in section (A.11.3.).

The reserve of strength against yield failure can

be found from the Octahedral shear stress theory

of failure as in the preceding section of this

Appendix.

+ (A.11.64.)
Toct. design

where
a a + [a ]
c a m

- denotes absolute value

T + T
c a m

then

n
(A.11.65.)
/(a + Co])2+ 3( t +r
v a m ' v a m

for ductile shafts

and

y- (A.11.66.)
K /(a + Eo' j) 2 + 3( t + t )2
e.a my va my

for brittle shafts

Refer to the Appendix A.4. for the definition

of the ductile and brittle shafts, and (K ).

In conclusion to this Appendix it should be noted,

that last five complex stress cases lack experimental data,

however, the small number of tests conducted by Gough and

others [Ref. 1, part 4, ch. 7, §7.12] closely support the

G. Sines criterion for fatigue failure.

214

SHAFT 4

—r

t—
LU

CJ
0
DC
01
ud
Lli

FLEXIBLE COUPLING
.

in n in (£>

FIGURE A 12.1.

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF CHAIN SCRAPER DRIVE

 215

APPENDIX A.12.

WORKED EXAMPLE - DESIGN OF SHAFTS FOR CHAIN SCRAPER DRIVE

The aim of this Appendix is to illustrate the process

of shaft design, using, as an example, a complete design of
the drive unit for a coal transporting chain scraper in

accordance with the schematic diagram shown in figure

(A.12.1.) and the basic design data below.

The design of shafts is an integral part of the

overall design and, hence, it cannot be treated separately.

For the sake of brevity, but without loosing the continuity,
an abridged version of the design is presented here with
emphasis on the design of shafts 1 and 2 for the gearbox
only.

BASIC DESIGN DATA:

P = 17500 N - required pulling effort in the scraper

chain.

v = 0.45 m/sec - linear speed of the scraper chain

zg = 8 - number of teeth on the scraper chain drive

sprocket.

pg = 0.1 m - pitch of the scraper chain.

DESIGN CONTENTS

(i) Motor selection.

(ii) Kinematic design of drive.

(iii) Design of bevel and spur gears.

(iv) Assessment of major dimensions.

 216

(v) Preliminary design of shaft 1.

(vi) Preliminary design of shaft 2.

(vii) Geometrical design of shaft 2.

(viii) Verification of shaft 2.

(i) MOTOR SELECTION

The required power of the drive motor is calculated

from equation

N = P x v x —
n

where n = n^2 x rig4 x ^3

n - overall efficiency of the drive.

= 0.97 - efficiency of a gear pair operating in

oil bath.

ng = 0.99 - efficiency of one pair of rolling

bearings.

rig = 0.94 - efficiency of chain drive.

Hence, the power of the motor:

N = 17500 x 0.45 x 0.97z x 0.994 x 0.94 = 9270 watts

The nearest bigger motor is:

11 KW - 3 phase A.C. motor - frame D160L with

full load speed 00^ = 960 rev/min. nominal full

load torque (T ) is
nom.

T N x 60 _ 11000 x 60 iinN-
nom. 00-^ x 2 x it 960 x 2 x 7t ~ m

"Direct on line" starting torque (T ^ ) is

T 225% of T 2.25 x 110 = 248 N-m

st. nom.
 217

"Pull out" torque (T p.o. ) is also 225% of Tnom.’ , hence

T = 248 n-m
p.o.

Motor shaft diameter is 42 x 10 3 m.

(ii) KINEMATIC DESIGN OF DRIVE

With reference to figure (A.12.1.) the shafts in the

drive are numbered: shaft 1, 2, 3, 4, and the parameters,

specific to the shaft, will be given suffix of the shaft

number.

The required angular velocity of the scraper chain

sprocket and also shaft 4, can be found from the basic data

v x 60 0.45 x 60 34 rev/min
p x z 0.1 x 8
. s.

The overall ratio of the drive is

960 28.2

This overall ratio consists of:

h x i2 x H
Where, the individual ratios can be taken as:

i —
X1 oog = 3 - reduction ratio of bevel gears

first stage of the gearbox.

i0 = w2
— = 4 - reduction ratio of thesecond
2 <o3
stage - spur gears

0)3

iQ3 = —
a) .
= 2.35 - reduction ratio of chain drive.
 218

The angular speed of each shaft can be determined now

960 rev/min

960 320 rev/min

3

960 80 rev/min
3x4

34 rev/min

The nominal torque applied to the shafts can be calculated

T nom. = 110 N-m

T1 x i1 x r)1 x n2 317 N-m

T^ x i^ x ig x n^2 x n22 = 1200 N-m

T^ = T^ x i^ x ±2 x ig x n-^2 x n23 x = 2660 N-m

(iii) DESIGN OF BEVEL AND SPUR GEARS

From the data in the preceding sections, the major

dimensions of the gears can be calculated and the materials
for the gears chosen. The actual calculations are omitted
here, but the results are given below:

(a) straight level gears -

The pinion material - ’60' Carbon Chromium steel

En 11 or equivalent - hardened and tempered to

800 - 840 x 106 N/m2

ul.

Wheel material - '50' Carbon steel - En 9 or equiv­

alent - Normalised -

670 - 700 x 106 N/m2

ul.
 219

Number of teeth - pinion zi = 20

Ip
wheel - Z lu) = 60
Maximum module - mmax. = 4 mm

Face width - pinion = 42 mm

- %.
wheel 42 mm
- bl(0 =
Cone distance - L 126.4 mm
c.
Pitch cone angle -3 p. 18°25'

3 0) 71° 35'
Pressure angle « 20°

Peripheral force on the mean diameter of pinion

F = _F 2 x T2 2 x 317
0.2 = 3170 N
Ip. 1 CO Dlco

Mean diameter of pinion = 66.6 mm

Mean diameter of wheel lw = 200 mm

(b) spur gears

Pinion material - '60' Carbon - Chromium steel -

En 11 or equivalent - hardened and tempered -

Sul = 800 - 840 x 106 N/m2

Wheel material - '50' Carbon steel - En 9 or

equivalent - normalised -

Sul = 670 " 700 X 106 N/m2

Number of teeth - pinion - z02p. = 20

wheel - z02o) = 80
Module - m = 4.5 mm

Face width - pinion - bo2p. = 75 mm

wheel 70 mm
 220

Pressure angle a,

Centre distance - = 225 mm

Pitch diameter of pinion - = 90 mm

Pitch diameter of wheel - D0 = 360 mm
2u)
Tangential force on the pitch diameter
2 x
-F 2oo 2 x 1200
0.36 6700 N
2p 2u)

(iv) ASSESSMENT OF MAJOR DIMENSIONS

The major dimensions of the drive, required for the

design of shafts, are shown in figure (A.12.1.) as to

^11’ Some of the dimensions are already found in preceding

sections and these are re-stated below for reference, while
others are calculated or assessed from experience.

- bearings centre distance for the cantilevered

bevel gear shaft.

- Cantilever distance of the mean diameter of

bevel gear to the first bearing.

Li
The ratio of — = 1.5 to 2.5 gives most
L2
economical proportions for the shaft and the

bearings.
[Ref. 11, ch. 4, p. 220.j

The dimension should be as small as possible, and

is usually, taken to be the value between face width and

the mean diameter of the bevel gear. In this example:
b., = 42 mm, D. =66.6 mm, hence L0 = 55 mm is selected.

L = 90 mm is taken, which satisfies the recommended ratio

 221

range

^1 = 90 1.64
L2 55

Lg - half of the mean diameter of bevel wheel, that

is L3 = a/2)D1 = (1/2) x 200 = 100 mm.

L^ = 225 mm - centre distance for spur gears as

found earlier.

Lc = 1000 mm - centre distance assumed for drive

5
chain sprockets.

Lg = Lrj - position of scraper chain drive sprocket

from the supporting bearings.

Lg - Cantilever distance of the drive sprocket in

the drive chain stage.

The dimensions Lg, L^, Lg are related to shaft 4 only,

and can be omitted, because the design of shaft 4 is not
included in this example.

Lg = 95 - cantilever distance of the driving sprocket

in the drive chain stage; the selected

dimension is based on one sided sprocket
hub.

L^g and L^ are selected to suit components on the

shaft 2.

L^ - distance from the centre of spur gear to the

nearest bearing is usually in the order of
the gear face width or less.
222

l} = 90 DIMENSIONS IN (mm)

AY-a BY-r

T, =110 N-m

BY-a

FIGURE A.12.2.

DIAGRAM OF LOADS ACTING ON SHAFT 1

 223

In this example the pinion face width is 75 mm, hence

= 70 mm is selected.

= 130 mm is taken, by adding: 1/2 the width of

spur gear (37 mm), 1/2 the mean diameter of the

bevel pinion (33 mm) and bevel wheel hub

allowance (60 mm).

NOTE: overall width of the gearbox is based on bearings

centre distance = 200 mm, and the shaft 1 is
positioned centrally between these bearings.

(v) PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF SHAFT 1

The design procedure (flow diagram), as set out in

section 4, in this work, is closely followed to derive the
preliminary shaft diameters for this shaft. With reference
to the figure (A.12.2.), where the loads acting on the
shaft 1 are shown graphically, the calculations are made

as follows.

Material for this shaft is already selected, because

the shaft and the bevel pinion are made in one piece; the
material is ’60' Carbon-Chromium steel with
Sul = 800 - 840 N/m2.

Shaft strength factor depends on (S ^ )as well as

(Cg ) and (K). Take Cg = 1.4, assuming that shaft diameter

will be less than 60 mm, and most likely the shaft diameter
will be equal or less than the diameter of motor shaft, which

is 42 mm. Take K = 2.5, in view of large change in section

between the bearing and the bevel pinion. From the figure
 224

(5.3.1.) the reciprocal of the shaft fatigue strength

factor is determined:

-— --- = 4.5 x 10-3

str.f.

Similarly, the shaft yield strength factor is:

1
2.4 x 10"3
K str.y.
+

The loads acting on shaft 1 are found as follows:

Torque T^ = 110 N-m

Maximum bending moment due to (F^ ) - tangential force (or

peripheral force (F^ ) is (My ):

My _ = F x L2 = 3170 x 55 x 10~3 = 175 N-m

Maximum bending moment due to radial force (F ) acting on

bevel pinion is:

Mv = F x L0
X.-r. r. 2

where F = F, x tan a. x cos 3

r. t. 1 p.

= 3170 x tan 20° x cos 18°25’ = 1095 N

then M„ = 1095 x 55 x 10“3 = 60 N-m

X. -r.

Maximum bending moment due to axial force (F ) acting on

a.
the bevel pinion is:

where F F,
a. t. x tan a.1 x sin 3 p.
3170 x tan 20 x sin 18 25' 364 N

n., 66.6 x 10“3

then 364 x ----- ~----- = 12 N-m
-a.
 225

The combined maximum bending moment (M) occurs at the shaft

support - B and is found as follows:

Mv = Mv - Mv = 60 - 12 = 48 N-m
X. X.-r. X.-a.

and M = 2 + My _t 2 = /482 + 1752 = 182 N-m

The most heavily loaded part of the shaft is at the support

B where:

M = 182 N-m

T = 110 N-m

and axial Force F = F = 364 N (compression).

a.

From section 5.4.

[LOAD] = /(M - F -g—d)2 + T2

= /(182 - 364 * 0 ‘ °4 )2 + 1102 = 215 N-m

o

We note, that component -F—p- -- = 1.82 (where d = 0.04 m

o

is assumed), is very small and can be omitted.

The cubic root of load [LOAD] ^ = 6.0

Finally, from section 5.5. and table 5.5.1. the service

factor Kger = 1.19 for scraping conveyor, with rapid

starting against load.

The preliminary diameter based on fatigue failure

conditions is found as:

d „ ^— --- x [LOAD]1/3 x K
p. f. K , „ ser.
* str.f.

= 4.5 x 10-3 x 6.0 x 1.19 =32 x 10-3 m or

32 mm.
 226

This diameter seems small, which is the result of the

high strength material being used for the integral bevel

pinion. The other consideration for the shaft diameter is

its ability to withstand yield failure which can be brought

about by the pull out torque (or starting against stationary

load). The pull out torque T^ q = 248 N-m, which is 2.25

times the nominal torque. Since all bending moments and

forces will increase in the same proportion as torque

increase, then the yield load is

[LOAD] 2.25 x 215 488 N-m

y-

and [LOAD] Vs 7.85

The preliminary shaft diameter, based on yield failure is

d = t?— --- x [LOAD]1/3 x K

P.y. Kstr.y. y. ser.

= 2.4 x 10“3 x 7.85 x 1.19

= 22.4 x 1CT3 m or 22.4 mm

Hence, the diameter of shaft should be based on the

fatigue failure conditions.

Further consideration should be given to compatibility

of the motor shaft diameter and the shaft diameter at the

coupling. These two diameters are usually made about the

same size, hence (d ) at coupling is taken as 35 mm, then

P-
to satisfy the assembly and machining requirements (d ) at

supports A and B are made 40 mm.

227

Ln = 70 DIMENSIONS IN (mm)

POINT 2 POINT 1

rotation
AZ-a "A ‘BY-a

FIGURE A.12. 3.

DIAGRAM OF LOADS ACTING ON SHAFT 2

 228

(vi) PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF SHAFT 2

The design procedure (flow diagram), as set out in

section 4, in this work, is closely followed to derive

the preliminary shaft diameters for the shaft.

Material is selected from table (5.2.1.): '40'

Carbon steel with S = 540 x 106 N/m2. Assume that

shaft diameter will be under 60 mm, hence let C =1.5,

also K = 2.5 is taken due to presence of keyseats in the

critical cross-sections (at bevel wheel and spur pinion)

and press-fitted components.

From figure (5.3.1.):

tf------ = 5.4 x 10"3

str.f.

and 7 ?——--- = 2.75 x 10“3

str.y.

The loads acting on the shaft 2 are shown graphically

in figure (A.12.3.) and their magnitudes are found below.

Torque T2 = 317 N-m

Tangential force on the mean diameter of bevel gear

F^ = 3170 N and the axial and radial forces are:

F = 1095 N (also radial force on bevel pinion)

a.
F^ = 364 N (also axial force on bevel pinion)

Tangential force on the pitch diameter of spur pinion:

2 x T^ 2 x 317
2-t. 0.090 7050 N
2P.
 229

and the radial component due to F2 is

?2_t = F2-t X ^an a2 = ^050 x tan 20° = 2570 N

Maximum bending moment due to tangential forces occurs at

point -2 on the shaft and its magnitude is M2Z-t = ^95 N-m

and the bending moment at point -1, due to the same forces

is M^z_t = 307 N-m. Maximum bending moment due to radial

forces occurs at point -2 - Mov = 108 N-m, and the

bending moment at point -1 is M^x = 44 N-m.

Maximum bending moment due to axial force occurs at

point -1 and has value of:

M1v = 108 N-m, and the bending moment at point -2 is

-LX—a.

Mov = 38 N-m.
/a- a.

By observation from figure (A.12.3.) it is clear that

the critical sections of the shaft are points 1 and 2.

Summarizing loads at point -1:

T2 = 317 N-m

Mlz-t. = 307 N-m

M. v =44 N-m

M- v = 108 N-m
lX-a.

From section 5.4

[LOAD] = /(Mlz_t>)2 + (Mlx_r> f Mlx_a-)* + T*'

= VZ072 + (44 + 108)2 + 3172 = 470 N-m

The service factor K =1.19 which was applied to

ser. ^
the shaft - 1, can be reduced, because the inertial (dynamic)

effects on the secondary shaft are greatly reduced due to

 2 30

smaller speed, hence let K =1.14.

ser.

Then the preliminary shaft diameter at point -1 based

on fatigue failure conditions is:

x [LOAD] lk
/3 x K
p.f kstr. f.
ser

V
5.4 x 10 3 x [470] /33 x 1.14 = 48 x 10 3 m

Similarly, loads at point -2

317 N-m

395 N-m
2Z-t
108 N-m
2X-r.
38 N-m
2X-a

[LOAD] = /(H2z.t.)2 + (M2x_a_ + M2X_^)2 + T2

/ 3952 + (38 + 108)2 + 3172 = 530 N-m

The preliminary shaft diameter at point -2 based on

fatigue failure conditions is

=-- ---- x [LOAD]1/3 x K

lp.f. ser
str.f.

5.4 x 10"3 x [530]1/3 x 1.14 49.8 x 10-3 m

Based on the above results, the preliminary diameter

at both points 1 and 2 is taken as 50 mm. It can be shown

that the shaft diameter to satisfy yield criteria brought

about by pull-out torque is

231

0 45 m 6
BEVEL WHEEL FACE
(T

0 50 s6
SPUR PINION

0 50 s6

------ ,--4:
BOTH ENDS

FIGURE A.12.4. DETAIL DRAWING OF SHAFT 2

 232

dp = 2.75 x lCT3 x (2.25)1/3 x [530]1/3 x 1.14

= 33.3 x 10-3 m

which is less than (d ~ ) and hence does not affect the

v p.f.
selection.

(vii) GEOMETRICAL DESIGN OF SHAFT 2

The geometrical design was carried out in accordance

with the bevel and spur gear data in part (iii) of this

design and the major dimensions determined in the part (iv).

The detail drawing of the shaft 2 is presented in figure

(A.12.4.). The functional requirements placed on the

shaft can be described as follows:

(a) provide axial location for the bevel wheel and

the spur pinion, which is achieved by shoulders

E and D respectively.

(b) provide torque transmitting devices for both

bevel wheel and spur pinion, which is done by

end-milled keyseats and press-fit H7/s6.

(c) provide thrust bearings at each support to insure

correct operating clearances at bevel gear

pair, which is done by a spacer with appropriate

clearance for proper bearings operation.

The shaft as shown in the figure (A.12.4.) appears

to be well proportioned, it requires no special machining

techniques and it will be produced economically. Unless

the verification will show some strength deficiency, the

drawing will be issued for production without modifications.

 233

(viii) VERIFICATION OF SHAFT 2

With reference to the figure (A.12.4.) the verification

will be carried at the critically loaded point, which is the

centre line of spur pinion, and then at all cross-sectional

changes, which are designated C, D, E, F in the figure.

(a) The loads at the centre line of spur pinion, point

(2) in figure (A.12.3.), are summarised in the part

(vi) of this example. The combined bending moment

(M2) is

M2 = ^M2X-r + M2X-a)2 + M2Z-t^

= [(108 + 38)2 + 3952 [P = 421 N-m

Torque = = 317 N-m

The design stresses are

32 x M2 = 32 x 421
34.3 x 106 N/m2
°a "tt x d0 d 7t x 0.050d

a = t = 0
m a

16 x T2
16 x 317
12.9 x 106 N/m2
Tm "tt x d0 d tt x 0.050 6

From the table (7.1.1.) the relevant verification

section is (7.3.8.), and from this section the

reserve of strength factors are found as follows:

e. b
n
f. x C , x K _ x a
T>. s.b. surf a
 234

where

Se = 0.45 x 540 x 106 = 243 x 106 N/m2

from part (vi) in this example.

= 2.3 x 1.1 =2.53 from figure (6.1.11.) for

S ^ = 540 x 106 N/m2, and H7/S6 fit with end milled

keyseat.

Cg = 1.45 from figure (6.4.1.)

Kgurf = 1.18 from figure (6.3.1.)

then

243 x 106
n 1.64
f. 2.53 x 1.45 x 1.18 x 34.3 x 106

and

n for ductile shaft

y.

where

S 0.7 x S = 0.7 x 540 x 106 378 x 106 N/m

y• ul.

then

_________378 x 106___________
n 9.23
y• /( 34.32 + 3 x 12.92) x 1012'

(b) Point C - diameter change from 50 mm to 45 mm, with

fillet radius r = 2.5 mm.

There is no torque at point C, and the combined

bending moment can be found by proportion from load

at point (2), thus

421 x 32.5
M 195.5 N-m
c 70

The design stresses are

 235

32 x M
_______c 32 x 195.5
a 21.8 x 106 N/m2
a 7T X d 7 7T x 0.045 3
c

From the table (7.1.1.) the relevant verification

section is (7.3.4.).

Then
e. b.
K. x C , x K . x a
b. s.b. surf

where

S , 243 x 106 N/m2

e.b. '

Kb. = q(Kt. ~ D + 1

where

1. 8 from figure (6.1.1.) for

2.5 2.5
0.06 and — 1
2.5

q = 0.8 from figure (6.2.1.) for

r = 2.5 mm

then

Kb = 0.8 (1.8 - 1) + 1 = 1.64

and

Cg b = 1.4 from figure (6.4.1.)

Ksurf = 1-18 from figure (6.3.1.).

Hence
243 x 106
4.11
f. 1.64 x 1.4 x 1.18 x 21.8 x 10b

also

y. _ 378 x 106 17.34

21.8 x 10b
 236

(c) Point D - diameter change from 58 mm to 50 mm, with

fillet radius r = 2 mm. The proximity of point E is

10 mm, which is greater than ^ = 8.33, but less

than = 12.5, hence the factor (K^ ) should be

increased by 10%. (Refer to section 6.2.)

Note: the effect of the keyseat can be neglected

because the proximity is about (^).

The loads at the point D are calculated by

proportioning the loads at point 1 and 2.

395 + 307
M 351 N-m
DZ-t 2

108 + 44
M 76 N-m
DX-t 2

108 + 38
M 73 N-m
DX-a 2

T 317 N-m
2

Hence

Md = /(73 + 76)2 + 35l2 1 = 381 N-m

The design stresses are:

32 x Md
32 x 381
31 x 106 N/m2
aa i x dp^ tt x 0.050 3

a - x - 0
m a

16 x 317
12.9 x 106 N/m2
Tm it x 0.0503

From the table (7.1.1.) the relevant verification

section is (7.3.8.) then

 237

e. b .
n
f. K,
b.
x C ,
s.b .
x K x a
a
surf

where

S , = 243 x 106 N/m2

e.b. '

Kb. = q (Kt.~ + 1

2 from figure (6.1.1.)

Kt.
r 2 h = 4
for = 0.04 and 2
d 50 r 2

q 0.78 from figure (6.2.1.)

for r = 2 mm

then

= 0.78 (2 - 1) + 1 = 1.78
Kb.

and to allow for second shoulder

=r 1.1 x 1.78 = 1.96

Kb.

and = 1.4 from figure (6.4.1.)

Cs.b.
K = 1.18 from figure (6.3.1.)
surf

hence
___________ 243 x IQ6_________
n 2.42
f. 1.96 x 1.4 x 1.18 x 31 x 10b

Since the magnitude of stresses at this point are

smaller than at the point 2, the (n ) at point D is

greater than 9.23 as found in part (a) of verification

design.

(d) Point E has slightly smaller stresses, but otherwise

the results should be the same as for point D.

(e) Point 1, at the centre line of the bevel wheel, has

press fitted hub H7/S6 with end milled keyseat.

 238

The combined bending moment is

M1 = V{ 108 + 44)2 + 3072 = 340 N-m

T1 = 317 N-m

F1 = 1080 N

The design stresses are

32 x 340
a = 27.7 x 106 N/m2
a tt x 0.050 J
4 x F1
4 x 1080
a 0.55 x 106 N/m2
m TT X d * = tt x 0.0502

16 x 317
12.9 x 106 N/m2
Tm "tt x 0.0506

T 0
a

From the table (7.1.1.) the relevant verification

section is (7.3.11.), hence

S
e. Vvb.
K. xC.xK _p x o + 0.45a
b. s.b. surf. a m

where

= 243 x 106 N/m2

Se.b.

= 2.53 (similar to part (a) in this design)

Kb.

c s. u = 1.45 (similar to part (a) in this design)

b.

K , = 1.18 (similar to part (a) in this design)

surf.

then

______________________ 243 x 106 _____________________

nf. 2.53 x 1.45 x 1.18 x 27.7 x 10b + 0.45 x 0.55 x 10b

= 2.02

and ) will be about equal to the one at point 1.

 239

(f) Point F should produce about equivalent results to

the point C.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Point 1 - = 2.02, n > 9.23

nf . y•
Point 2 - = 1.64, n = 9.23
nf . y•
Point C - = 4.11, n = 17.34
nf . y•
Point D - = 2.42, n > 9.23
nf . y•
Point E - same as point D
Point F - same as point C

The critically loaded part of the shaft is at the

point 2, however the reserve of strength against fatigue is
adequate. The (n ) value at point 2 seems excessive but
with 2.25 times possible pull out torque the reserve of
9 23
strength during overload reduces to ( ’ = 4.10

The other points are overdesigned from strength

point of view, but the correct proportions and the long
service life required from the bearings justifies bigger
than necessary shaft diameters.
 240

10. CONCLUSION

The prime objective of this thesis is best summarized

by DESIGN PROCEDURE - (FLOW DIAGRAM) given in section 4,
page 17. The design procedure incorporates the concept of

"preliminary-geometric-verification" design and the "reserve

of strength" concept. Both concepts are combined and

developed, so that, the resultant design procedure will

become a useful tool, which will enable designer to do shaft

calculations with greater accuracy and confidence. As with

other tools, its proper use has to be learned, and with
practice its usefulness will be found to increase.

Sections 5, 6 and 7 in this work are especially set-

out to familiarize designers with the design procedure.
However after first reading, several short cuts can be

adopted in order to speed up the calculations. For example:

a designer of an extensive belt conveyor system

which contains large number of shafts can simplify
his preliminary calculations by restricting his
material selection to one type (say ’40' carbon
steel). An assumption can also be made that the
majority of shafts in the conveyor system will be

greater than 60 mm in diameter. By further assuming

that the stress rising factor (K) will be kept
below value 2.5, the reciprocal shaft strength
factor for all shafts in the system becomes
_3
5.5 x 10 . Similarly, the service factor (Kger)
for the belt conveyor system can be taken as 1.10.
With these generalizations the formula for prelim-
 241

inary shaft diameter (refer to equation 5.1.1.)

reduces to:

d x [LOAD] ^ x K
p.f. ser.

6 x 10 3 x [LOAD] 1/3

Clearly, the designer's preliminary calculations

are reduced to determining of loads on shafts, as

set-out in section 5.4., and the use of the simple

equation just derived.

It should be noted at this stage, that the design

procedure is no substitute for that mixture of engineering

insight and well applied experience which is called design

ability. This point is particularly valid in case of

geometric design and is highlighted by the worked example

in the Appendix A.12.

The verification stage of design depends on the

designer's understanding of the nature and distribution of

stresses in a loaded shaft, and a knowledge of the methods

of stress calculations. A familiarization with contents of

Appendices A.3. to A.11. inclusively will assist the designer

in appreciation of "verification design" and "Reserve of

strength" concepts.

As discussed in section 7.1., the measure of shafts

suitability for a specific application is its reserve of

strength against failure, which can be due to fatigue, yield,

 242

deflection, dynamic suitability etc. At this stage the

designer will be greatly assisted by availability of accept­

able or recommended reserve of strength values, which can

be aimed at in design.

The designer, with his knowledge of the specific shaft

application, can set his own standards of the acceptable

reserve of strength values. Most industries and designers

have developed and accumulated the preferred and acceptable

reserve of strength values for the shafts in their equipment.

However, for the sake of uniformity, it will be desirable,

if the Standards Assocations would have compiled and published

a comprehensive list of the reserve of strength values for

various industrial applications.

It is hoped that the design procedure presented in this

thesis will get favourable response from the designers, who

will in turn verify and enrich the method and data, provided

here, by their comments.