Calculating Shear Stress & Safety Factor for Double Shear Pins

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating shear stress and safety factors for pins in double shear with a circular cross-section. Participants explore different equations for shear stress and their implications for safety factor calculations, addressing both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants use the equation stress = 2F/pi*d^2 for double shear and relate it to the general equation stress = F/A.
  • There is a suggestion that the equation stress = 4F/3A represents 'max' shear stress for circular cross-sections, raising questions about its derivation and applicability in safety factor calculations.
  • One participant notes that F/A can be considered as 'average' shear stress, while others argue that it may also be treated as 'max' stress depending on context.
  • Concerns are raised about the use of different safety factors, with some suggesting a factor of 0.4 times the yield stress as a safe shear stress.
  • Another participant clarifies that the quantity 0.6*f_y is related to the Von Mises yield surface and not directly to safety factors, and mentions the use of a resistance factor in LRFD.
  • There is a distinction made between average shear stress and peak shear stress, with a participant stating that average shear stress should be used for safety factor calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate equations for shear stress and safety factors, indicating that multiple competing models and interpretations exist. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to calculating these values.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various assumptions, such as the absence of threads in the shear plane and the nature of the applied shear load, which may affect the calculations. There is also a reference to the context of LRFD and the application of resistance factors.

gomerpyle
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I just want to know the difference between certain equations for shear stress. I'm trying to find the factor of safety for pins that are in double shear and have a circular cross section.

Homework Equations



So far I've used stress = 2F/pi*d^2 for double shear. Following what I found on this website: http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Screws/Bolted_Joint.html. This comes from the general equation stress = F/A. Then I used n = 0.6*UTS/stress for safety factor.

The Attempt at a Solution



I've also seen the equation stress = 4F/3A defined as 'max' shear stress when dealing with a circular cross section. So then is F/A just 'average' shear stress? The website I used seems to use F/A as a max stress though. How is 4F/3A derived, and should it be used for safety factor calculations since its a maximum? Also, since it is double shear would it be written differently?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
gomerpyle said:

Homework Statement



I just want to know the difference between certain equations for shear stress. I'm trying to find the factor of safety for pins that are in double shear and have a circular cross section.

Homework Equations



So far I've used stress = 2F/pi*d^2 for double shear. Following what I found on this website: http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Screws/Bolted_Joint.html. This comes from the general equation stress = F/A.
this is correct
Then I used n = 0.6*UTS/stress for safety factor.
This is largely a matter of Code requirements..I usually use 0.4 * (Yield Stress) as a safe shear stress

The Attempt at a Solution



I've also seen the equation stress = 4F/3A defined as 'max' shear stress when dealing with a circular cross section.
This is for a circular cross section subject to bending stresses and shear. The shears are maximum at the neutral axis and zero at the top and bottom points for this case.
So then is F/A just 'average' shear stress? The website I used seems to use F/A as a max stress though.
For a bolt in direct shear, F/A (or F/2A in double shear) is considered as uniform throughout the cross section (average can be considered as max , or simply 'shear stress'.
a) How is 4F/3A derived, and should it be used for safety factor calculations since its a maximum? Also, since it is double shear would it be written differently?
the shear stress formula VQ/It is not used for bolts subject to shear forces only, with allowable max shear stresses (.4*Yield stress).
 
PhanthomJay gave a very good reply already, but I would clarify one detail:

The quantity .6*f_y has nothing to due with safety factors.
It comes from the assumption of a Von Mises yield surface.
In LRFD, the "resistance factor" is taken as .75 for direct shear. This is to be applied to the quantity .6*f_y.


Extra credit:
If you're interested, one way of describing your total stress demand would be in matrix form (maybe you've seen this before?). For direct shear of magnitude \tau:

stress \sigma = deviatoric stress \sigma ' = \begin{bmatrix}0 & \tau & 0\\ \tau & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0\end{bmatrix}

The Von Mises formula is then:

\sqrt{\frac{1}{2} \sigma_{ij}' \sigma_{ij}'}=\frac{f_y}{\sqrt{3}}

If you like, you can prove that the LHS of the above equation becomes \tau, and the RHS of the equation can be rounded to .6*f_y. This is the equation you are using, where you are taking \tau equal to \frac{F}{A}
:)

note: You would still need to apply some sort of safety factor.. perhaps a resistance factor, \phi, of .75 if you are using LRFD.
 
gomerpyle: In response to post 1, as mentioned by PhanthomJay, for pins (bolts), you usually use average shear stress, tau_av = F/A, not peak shear stress, tau_pk = 1.3333*F/A, where A = 0.50*pi*d^2 for double shear.
gomerpyle (paraphrased) said:
I used n = 0.60*UTS/tau_av, for safety factor.
This is correct, if you ensure n = 2.4, provided you do not have threads in the shear plane, and assuming F = unfactored, applied shear load.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all for the responses, I understand it now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
810
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K