Kwame Nkrumah University of
Science & Technology, Kumasi,
Ghana
ME 274: Design Project II
Ing. Prof. Prince Yaw Andoh, PhD; MGhIE
Mobile: 0507970658
WhatsApp: 0507970658
Email: [Link]@[Link]
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Faculty of Mechanical and Chemical Engineering
College of Engineering
MODULE 3
FAILURES RESULTING
FROM STATIC LOADING
[Link].g
h
Module Outline
Introduction
Part I: Design Principle for Ductile Failure
Part II: Design Principle for Brittle Materials
[Link].g
h
Introduction-Failure Examples
• Failure of truck driveshaft spline due to corrosion
fatigue
[Link].g
h
Introduction-Failure Examples
• Impact failure of a lawn-mower blade driver hub.
• The blade impacted a surveying pipe marker.
[Link].g
h
Introduction-Failure Examples
• Failure of an overhead-pulley retaining bolt on a
weightlifting machine.
• A manufacturing error caused a gap that forced the
[Link].g
bolt to take the entire moment load.
h
Introduction-Failure Examples
Chain test fixture that failed in one cycle.
To alleviate complaints of excessive wear, the manufacturer decided to
case-harden the material
(a) Two halves showing brittle fracture initiated by stress concentration
[Link].g
(b) Enlarged view showing cracks induced by stress concentration
h at the
support-pin holes
Required Background-Stress Analysis
[Link].g
h
Required Background- Design Philosophy
[Link].g
h
Basic Design Concepts
⮚ Determination of a feasible part configuration (geometry), safe sizes
(dimensions), and suitable material.
⮚ Stress is applied to or induced in a part through loading conditions.
⮚ Strength is an intrinsic property of a material. A part with no load
possesses its strength.
⮚ A part is said to have failed if it is stressed to a value that exceeds its
strength.
⮚ Failure means that the design stress in the machine member has
reached the design strength of the material.
[Link].g
h
Ductile Versus Brittle Behavior
⮚ Consider a test specimen length L and cross-section area, A
⮚ subjected to a tensile direct normal loading, F
A
F=0 F F
L L+
ΔL
Engineering (Nominal) Stress, S = F/A (Ignores the change in the
cross-section
Area)
Engineering (Nominal) Strain, e = ΔL/L
[Link].g
h
Ductile Versus Brittle Behavior
[Link].g
h
Part I: Design Principle for Ductile
Failure
1. Fundamental Design Equation for Ductile Failure
2. Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSS)
3. Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
4. Von-Mises Theory (VMT)
5. Ductile Coulomb Mohr Theory (DCMT)
6. Shear Strength Predictions
[Link].g
h
Fundamental Design Equation for
Ductile Failure
⮚ n = design factor or factor of safety (where n>1)
⮚ Design stress = τmax (maximum shear stress )
⮚ Design strength = Sys (yield strength in shear)
⮚ At the verge of failure: τmax = Sys
⮚ The part is safe when: τmax < Sys
n = Sys /
⮚ (Fundamental Design Equation)
τmax [Link].g
h
Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSS)
⮚ Based on Uniaxial Tensile Strength Test
[Link].g
h
Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSS)
⮚ Theory:
❖ Yielding begins when the maximum shear stress in a stress
element exceeds the maximum shear stress in a tension test
specimen of the same material when that specimen begins to
yield.
❖ For a tension test specimen, the maximum shear stress is s1 /2.
❖ At yielding, when s1 = Sy, the maximum shear stress is Sy /2 .
⮚ Could restate the theory as follows:
⮚ Theory:
❖ Yielding begins when the maximum shear stress in a stress
[Link].g
element exceeds Sy/2. h
Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSS)
⮚ Ordering the principal stresses such that s1 ≥ s2 ≥ s3,
⮚ Incorporating a factor of safety n
⮚ Or solving for factor of safety
[Link].g
h
Maximum Shear Stress Theory (MSS)
⮚ Let s1 and s2 represent the two non-zero principal stresses, such
that s1 ≥ s2, there are three cases to consider
❖ Case 1: s1 ≥ s2 ≥ 0
❖ Case 2: s1 ≥ 0 ≥ s2
❖ Case 3: 0 ≥ s1 ≥ s2
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
⮚ Originated from observation that ductile materials stressed
hydrostatically (equal principal stresses) exhibited yield strengths
greatly in excess of expected values.
⮚ Theorizes that if strain energy is divided into hydrostatic volume
changing energy and angular distortion energy, the yielding is
primarily affected by the distortion energy.
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
❑ Theory:
⮚ Yielding occurs when the distortion strain energy per unit
volume reaches the distortion strain energy per unit volume
for yield in simple tension or compression of the same
material.
⮚ Hydrostatic stress is average of principal stresses
⮚ Strain energy per unit volume,
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
⮚But
⮚Therefore the strain energy equation is
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
⮚ Strain energy for producing only volume change is obtained by
substituting sav for s1, s2, and s3
⮚ Strain energy for producing only volume change is obtained by
substituting s1, s2, and s3 for sav
⮚ Obtain distortion energy by subtracting volume changing energy,
from total strain energy
[Link].g
h Eq. i
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
• Tension test specimen at yield has s1 = Sy and s2 = s3 =0
• Applying to Ud, distortion energy for tension test specimen is
Eq. ii
• DE theory predicts failure when distortion energy, Eq. (i), exceeds
distortion energy of tension test specimen, Eq. (ii)
Eq. iii
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
• Left hand side of Eq. iii is defined as von Mises stress
• For plane stress, simplifies to
• In terms of xyz components, in three dimensions
[Link].g
h
Distortion Energy (DE) Failure Theory
• In terms of xyz components, for plane stress
• Distortion Energy failure theory simply compares von Mises stress to
yield strength.
• Introducing a design factor,
• Expressing as factor of safety, [Link].g
h
Von-Mises Theory (VMT)
[Link].g
h
Ductile Coulomb Mohr Theory (DCMT)
⮚ The above theories are good for most ductile materials where the
tensile yield strength (Syt) and compressive yield strength (Syc) are
equal.
[Link].g
h
Example 3-1
The stress element is obtained from the critical section of a machine
member made of plain carbon steel. The part is to be designed with a
factor of safety of 2.5. Specify a material for the part using:
a. Tresca theory (maximum shear stress theory)
b. Von-Mises theory, and
c. Maximum distortion
[Link].g
h
Example 3-1 (Continued)
Principal Stresses:
σ1 = σavg + R = 90 + 50 = 140 MPa
σ1 = σavg - R = 90 - 50 = 40 MPa
τmax = σ1 /2 = 70 MPa
2. Design Equations and Solution
Tresca Failure Theory: n = 0.5Sy/τmax
Design Equation: 2.5 = 0.5Sy/70
Solution: Sy = 350 MPa
ii. Von-Mises Failure Theory: n = 0.577Sy/τmax
Design Equation: 2.5 = 0.577Sy/70
[Link].g
Solution: Sy = 303 MPa h
Example 3-1 (Continued)
iii. Maximum Distortion Energy Theory (MDET)
Design Theory: n = Sy / σe
von-Mises stress: σe = [σ12 - σ1 σ2 + σ22 ]1/2
= [1402 – (140)(40) + 402]½ = 125 MPa
Design Equation: 2.5 = Sy/125
Solution: Sy = 313 MPa
[Link].g
h
Example 3-2
A steel rod 500 mm long and square cross-section supports a 100 kg load
as shown. Complete the design of the rod by specifying the type of steel
and a reasonable factor of safety.
[Link].g
h
Example 3-2 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3-2 (Continued)
C. Material Type: Steel 🡪 Exact Specification is Unknown
🡪 Ductile Material
D. Von-Mises Design Theory: n = 0.577Sy/τmax
Design Equation: n = 0.577Sy/ [1472 x 103/b3]
n = 0.577b3Sy/ (1472 x 103)
E. Solution: Select: AISI 1040 CD Steel, Sy = 490 MPa
Assume: Normal Operating Conditions, n = 2.0
Calculate: b = 21.84 mm [Link].g
Specify: b = 22 mm (standard size) h
Final: n = 2.04 (close to desired value-accept)
Example 3-3
Consider a simply-supported rectangular beam AB. The beam is
designed for hanging loads at C and D. For the loads shown, find the
factor of safety if the material is AISI CD 1040 steel.
Tensile strength = 590 MPa
Yield Strength = 490 MPa
Elongation = 12%
[Link].g
h
Example 3-3 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3-3 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3-4
The solid cylindrical steel non-rotating shaft (axle) AB supports of two
pulleys as shown. A design factor of 2.5 is desired. Provide missing
information for the shaft.
[Link].g
h
Example 3-4 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3-4 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3-4 (Continued)
[Link].g
h
Shear Strength Predictions
⮚ For pure shear loading, Mohr’s circle shows that sA = −sB = t
⮚ Plotting this equation on principal stress axes gives load line for pure
shear case
⮚ Intersection of pure shear load line with failure curve indicates shear
strength has been reached
⮚ Each failure theory
predicts shear strength to
be some fraction of
normal strength
[Link].g
h
Shear Strength Predictions
⮚ For MSS theory, intersecting pure shear load line with failure line
results in
⮚ For DE theory, intersection pure shear load line with failure curve
gives
⮚ Therefore, DE theory predicts shear strength as
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–5 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Part II: Design Principle for Brittle
Materials
Introduction
MNST-Effective Failure Boundaries and Load Lines
MNST Design Equation – 1st Quadrant (L1)
MNST Design Equation – 3rd Quadrant (L4)
MNST Design Equation – 4th Quadrant (L2 & L2)
Selection of Failure Criteria
[Link].g
h
Introduction
⮚ Brittle failure is due to excessive principal normal stresses σ 1 and σ2.
⮚ Prevailing material properties are the ultimate tensile strength (S ut)
and the ultimate compressive strength (Suc).
⮚ Combination of σ1 and σ2 determine the failure characteristics and
hence the appropriate design strength.
[Link].g
h
MNST-Effective Failure Boundaries and Load
Lines
[Link].g
h
MNST Design Equation – 1st Quadrant (L1)
[Link].g
h
MNST Design Equation – 3rd Quadrant (L4)
[Link].g
h
MSNT Design Equation – 4th Quadrant (L2 and L3)
[Link].g
h
MNST Design Equations
[Link].g
h
Example 3-6
Each stress element is obtained from the critical section of machine
members made of ASTM Class 40 Gray Cast Iron. Find the factor of
safety for each situation using MNST.
[Link].g
h
Example 3–6 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–6 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–6 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–6 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Experimental Verification of MNST Failure Boundaries
[Link].g
h
Brittle Coulomb Mohr Theory (BCMT) – 4th
Quadrant
[Link].g
h
Modified Mohr – 1 Theory (MM1T) : 4th
Quadrant
[Link].g
h
Example 3-7
Each stress element is obtained from the critical section of machine
members made of ASTM Class 40 Gray Cast Iron. Find the factor of
safety for each situation using:
a. Brittle Coulomb-Mohr Theory
b. Modified Mohr-1 Theory
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–7 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3–8
The solid cylindrical shaft AB supports of two pulleys as shown. The
material is cast iron. A design factor of 2.5 is desired. Assume steady
conditions. Provide missing information to complete the design of the
shaft.
[Link].g
h
Example 3–8 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3−9
[Link].g
h
Example 3−9 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Example 3−9 (continued)
[Link].g
h
Selection of Failure Criteria
First determine ductile vs. brittle
For ductile
⮚ MSS is conservative, often used for design where higher
reliability is desired
⮚ DE is typical, often used for analysis where agreement with
experimental data is desired
⮚ If tensile and compressive strengths differ, use Ductile Coulomb-
Mohr
For brittle
⮚ Mohr theory is best, but difficult to use
⮚ Brittle Coulomb-Mohr is very conservative in 4th quadrant
[Link].g
⮚ Modified Mohr is still slightly conservative in 4 quadrant, but
thh
closer to typical
Selection of Failure Criteria
[Link].g
h
Assignment 1- Design of Axle
The axle shown above is to be designed to have the same diameter.
Using the design process, provide complete specification for:
a. steel axle and
b. for cast iron axle
[Link].g
h
THANK YOU
[Link].g
h