3-1-Theories of Failure

THEORIES OF FAILURE
References:
h f l th Edition. Pearson.
1. R.C. Hibbeler. Mechanics of Materials. 8
bb l d
2. Ramadas Chennamsetti. Theories of Failure. Presentation Slides
3. Failure Prediction and Avoidance, Experimental Stress Analysis
, p y
Notebook, Issue 22, Dec. 1993, Measurements Group, pp. 6‐11.
1
THEORIES OF FAILURE
• When an engineer is faced with the problem of design using
a specific material it becomes important to place an upper
a specific material, it becomes important to place an upper
limit on the state of stress that defines the material’s failure.
• If the material is ductile, failure is usually specified by the
initiation of yielding, whereas if the material is brittle, it is
specified by fracture.
• These modes of failure are readily defined if the member is
These modes of failure are readily defined if the member is
subjected to a uniaxial state of stress, as in the case of simple
tension; however, if the member is subjected to biaxial or
; , j
triaxial stress, the criterion for failure becomes more difficult
to establish.
2
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education South Asia Pte Ltd
THEORIES OF FAILURE
• Theories of failure of a material subjected to a multiaxial
state of stress
state of stress.
• When using a particular theory of failure, it is first necessary
When using a particular theory of failure, it is first necessary
to calculate the normal and shear stress at points where they
are the largest in the member.
• Once this state of stress is established, the principal stresses
at these critical points are then determined since each of
at these critical points are then determined, since each of
the following theories is based on knowing the principal
stress.
3
THEORIES OF FAILURE (for ductile material)
1. Maximum‐shear‐stress theory (or Tresca yield criterion)
• Yielding by slipping (shear stress)
edges of the
planes of slipping
(slip plane)
Highly polished thin strip
4
• At yield stress, draw the Mohr’s circle.
• Shear stress acts on the plane that coincides with the
Shear stress acts on the plane that coincides with the
direction of the Lüder lines, indicating that indeed failure
occurs by shear.
occurs by shear.
σY
τ max =
2
5
• Yielding begins with the absolute maximum shear stress
reaches the shear stress that causes the same material to
reaches the shear stress that causes the same material to
yield when it is subjected only to axial tension.
• To avoid failure, τabs,max must be less than or equal to σY/2
(σY determined from a simple tension test).
• Recall that: σ1
– Principal stresses of same sign
Principal stresses of same sign τ abs max =
2
(σ 1 − σ 2 )
– Pi i l t
Principal stresses of opposite signs
f it i τ abs max =
2
6
THEORIES OF FAILURE (for ductile material) (cont)
• For plane‐stress cases:
σ 1 = σ Y ⎫⎪
⎬ σ 1 , σ 2 have same signs
σ 2 = σ Y ⎪⎭
σ 1 − σ 2 = σ Y } σ 1 , σ 2 have opposite signs
( i
(Linear line)
li )
Factor of safety:
σY
η=
2τ abs ,max
7
2. Maximum‐principal‐strain theory (or St. Venant criterion):
(rarely used nowadays)
• “Failure
Failure occurs at a point in a body when the maximum strain
occurs at a point in a body when the maximum strain
at that point exceeds the value of the maximum strain in a
uniaxial test of the material at yield point”
y p
• ‘Y’ – yield stress in uniaxial tension, yield strain, εy = Y/E
• The maximum strain developed in the body due to external
p y
loading should be less than this
• Principal stresses => σ1, σ2 and σ3, strains corresponding to
these stress => ε1, ε2 and ε3
8
“Theories of Failure” by Ramadas Chennamsetti
• Strains corresponding to principal stresses –
9
• For 2D case:
• Plotting in stress space:
Failure – equivalent stress
f ll
falls outside yield surface
id i ld f
10
• Biaxial loading:
For onset of yielding
f ld Factor of safety:
Y
η=
σ (1 +ν )
• Pure shear:
Principal stresses corresponding to shear yield stress
Factor of safety:
For onset of yielding
Y
η=
τ y (1 +ν )
11
3. Total‐strain‐energy theory (or Beltrami and Haigh criterion):
• “Failure
Failure at any point in a body subjected to a state of stress
at any point in a body subjected to a state of stress
begins only when the energy density absorbed at that point is
equal to the energy density absorbed by the material when
q gy y y
subjected to elastic limit in a uniaxial stress state.
• In uniaxial stress (yielding)
12
• Body subjected to external loads => principal stresses
Strain energy associated with principal stresses
13
• Yield function –
• For 2D stress state => σ3 = 0 – Yield function becomes
14
• Plotting this in principal stress space
2
Rearrange the terms –
h
15
• Simplifying,
16
• Pure shear
Principal stresses corresponding to
l d
shear yield stress
Strain energy
Y
Factor of safety: η =
τy 2(1 +ν )
17
4. Maximum‐distortion‐energy theory (or Von Mises criterion):
• An external loading deforms a material, causing it to store
energy internally throughout its volume.
energy internally throughout its volume.
• Uniaxial strain‐energy density (energy per unit volume),
1
u = σε
2
1 1 1
• Triaxial strain‐energy density, u = σ 1ε1 + σ 2ε 2 + σ 3ε 3
2 2 2
18
• Applying Hooke’s Law
1 1 1
ε1 = ⎡⎣σ 1 − v (σ 2 + σ 3 ) ⎤⎦ , ε 2 = ⎡⎣σ 2 − v (σ 1 + σ 3 ) ⎤⎦ , ε 3 = ⎡⎣σ 3 − v (σ 1 + σ 2 ) ⎤⎦
E E E
yields
u=
1 2
2E
[
σ 1 + σ 22 + σ 32 − 2v(σ 1σ 2 + σ 1σ 3 + σ 3σ 2 ) ]
• Strain‐energy density = energy needed to cause a volume
change if the element with no change in shape + energy
needed to distort the element
needed to distort the element.
= +
19
• Specifically, the applied stress is the average principal stress
(cause equal principal strains):
(cause equal principal strains):
σ avg = (σ 1 + σ 2 + σ 3 ) / 3
• (σ 1 − σ avg ), (σ 2 − σ avg ), (σ 3 − σ avg )

Hence, causes energy of distortion
20
• When the distortion energy per unit volume equals or
exceeds the distortion energy per unit volume of the same
exceeds the distortion energy per unit volume of the same
material when it is subjected to yielding in a simple tension
test, yielding occurs.
test, yielding occurs.
• (σ 1 − σ avg ), (σ 2 − σ avg ), (σ 3 − σ avg ) σ1,σ 2 ,σ 3
Substituting for and
realising that σ avg = (σ 1 + σ 2 + σ 3 ) / 3
1 +ν
ud = ⎡⎣(σ 1 − σ 2 )2 + (σ 2 − σ 3 )2 + (σ 3 − σ 1 )2 ⎤⎦
6E
• Plane stress
Plane stress σ3 = 0
1 +ν
ud = (σ 12 − σ 1σ 2 + σ 2 2 )
3E
• Uniaxial tension test σ1 = σ Y ,σ 2 = σ 3 = 0
1 +ν 2
(ud )Y = σY
3E
21
• This theory requires ud = (ud )Y
• For plane or biaxial‐stress cases: σ12 − σ 1σ 2 + σ 22 = σ Y2 (ellipse)
Factor of safety:
σY
η=
σ 12 − σ 1σ 2 + σ 22
22
• Pure shear
σY
Factor of safety: η=
τ y / 0.577
0 577
23
Comparison between MSS and MDE theories
• Both theories give the same results when the principal
Both theories give the same results when the principal
stresses are equal, i.e., σ1 = σ2 = σY, or when one of the
principal stresses is 0 and the other has a magnitude of σ
principal stresses is 0 and the other has a magnitude of σY.
24
• If the material is subjected to pure shear, τ, the theories have
the largest discrepancy in predicting failure
the largest discrepancy in predicting failure.
MSS (σ Y / 2, −σ Y / 2) but MDE (σ Y / 3, −σ Y / 3)
• Even MSS is more conservative, torsion tests have shown
that MDE is more accurate by 15%. (σ Y / 3) / (σ Y / 2) = 1.15
25
THEORIES OF FAILURE (for brittle material)
5. Maximum‐normal‐stress theory
(or Rankine criterion)
(or Rankine
(for materials having equal strength
in tension and compression)
σ = σ ult Material’s strength is unaffected by
the associated principal compressive
stress. Hence, tensile stress needed
stress. Hence, tensile stress needed
to fracture a specimen during a
torsion test ≈ same as that needed to
p p
fracture a specimen in simple
tension.
• Maximum principal stress σ1 in the material reaches a limiting
value that is equal to the ultimate normal stress the material can
value that is equal to the ultimate normal stress the material can
sustain when it is subjected to simple tension.
26
THEORIES OF FAILURE (for brittle material) (cont)
σ 1 = σ ult
σ 2 = σ ult
Factor of safety:
σ ult
η=
σ 1,2
27
6. Mohr’s failure criterion (for materials having different
strength in tension and compression)
strength in tension and compression)
• Perform 3 tests (uniaxial tensile test for (σult)t, uniaxial
compressive test for (σult)c and torsion test for τult)
• Circle A represents compression test results: σ1 = σ3 = 0,
σ2 = – (σult)c
• Circle B represents tensile test results: σ
l l l 1 = (σ
( ult)t, σ2 = σ3 = 0
• Circle C represents pure
torsion test results reaching the τult.
torsion test results, reaching the τ
28
Stress Mohr s
Mohr’s Failure Factor of
Region Circle Safety
σ1,2> 0 (σ ult ) t
σ 1 ≥ (σ ult ) t η=
σ1
σ1> 0, σ1 σ2
σ2 < 0 − ≥ 1 1 = σ1 − σ 2
(σ ult ) t (σ ult ) c η (σ ultlt ) t (σ ultlt ) t
σ1,2 ≤ 0 (σ ult ) t
σ 2 ≥ (σ ult ) c η=
σc
η is whichever is the smallest
29
• Limitations of failure theories for brittle materials:
A tensile fracture occurs very suddenly, and its initiation
generally depends on stress concentrations developed at
generally depends on stress concentrations developed at
microscopic imperfections of the material such as inclusions
or voids, surface indentations, and small cracks. Since each of
these irregularities varies from specimen to specimen, it
becomes difficult to specify fracture on the basis of a single
test.
test
30
THEORIES OF FAILURE - SUMMARY
• Of the failure criteria, the
Tresca is the most
conservative for all
materials, the von Mises
the most representative
for ductile materials, and
the Rankine the best fit
for brittle materials.
Failure Prediction and Avoidance, Experimental Stress Analysis Notebook, Issue 22,
31
Dec. 1993, Measurements Group, pp. 6‐11.
THEORIES OF FAILURE - LIMITATIONS
GENERAL LIMITATIONS OF FAILURE THEORIES:
• Elastic failure – failure under elastic loading conditions at an
equivalent stage to that of yielding in a simple tensile test.
equivalent stage to that of yielding in a simple tensile test.
• Should not be applied if the component may fail in service in
a way which cannot easily be related to standard simple
loading tests such as fatigue, creep, buckling and impact.
• If elastic failure can be assumed to be relevant it is necessary
to consider which of the theories is the most appropriate.
pp p
32
E.J. Hearn, Mechanics of Materials 1, 3rd edition, Butterworth‐Heinemann.
EXAMPLE 7
The solid shaft has a radius of 0.5 cm and is made of steel having a
yield stress of σY = 360 MPa. Determine if the loadings cause the
shaft to fail according to the maximum‐shear‐stress theory and the
h f f il di h i h h d h
maximum‐distortion‐energy theory.
33
EXAMPLE 7 (cont)
Solutions
• Since maximum shear stress caused by the torque, we have
P −15kN
σx = = = −191 MPa
A π ( 5mm ) 2
Tc 32500 N .mm ( 5mm )

T
τ xy = = = 165.5 MPa
J π
( 5mm )
4
• Principal stresses can also be obtained using the stress‐transformation equations,
2
σx +σ y ⎛ σ x −σ y ⎞
σ 1,2 = ± ⎜ ⎟ + τ xy
2
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠
⇒ σ1 = 95.6 MPa and σ 2 = −286.6 MPa
34
EXAMPLE 7 (cont)
Solutions
• Since the principal stresses have opposite signs, the absolute maximum shear
stress will occur in the plane
stress will occur in the plane,
σ1 − σ 2 ≤ σ Y
95.6 − (− 286.6) ≤ 360
?
382.2 > 360

• Thus, shear failure of the material will occur according to this theory.
• Using maximum‐distortion‐energy theory,
(σ 2
1 )
− σ 1σ 2 + σ 22 ≤ σ Y2
[95.6 2
− (95.6)(− 286.6) − (− 286.6) ≤ 3602
2 ?
]
118677.9 ≤ 129600
• Using this theory, failure will not occur.
35

3-1-Theories of Failure

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

3-1-Theories of Failure

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

THEORIES OF FAILURE

• For 2D stress state => σ3 = 0 – Yield function becomes

• (σ 1 − σ avg ), (σ 2 − σ avg ), (σ 3 − σ avg )

• For plane or biaxial‐stress cases: σ12 − σ 1σ 2 + σ 22 = σ Y2 (ellipse)

Tc 32500 N .mm ( 5mm )

382.2 > 360

Potrebbero piacerti anche