Optimizing Cantilever Design: Solving for Minimum Mass and Maximum Strength

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on optimizing the design of a cantilever beam to achieve minimum mass while ensuring maximum strength under various loading conditions. The user is tasked with analyzing a 1.2m long cylindrical cantilever made from aluminum, with a focus on axial, shear, bending, and torsional stresses. Initial calculations for a 2-cm radius aluminum rod indicate it can withstand 120 kN, which raises concerns about the accuracy of the stress calculations. The consensus is that combined loading effects must be considered, as they significantly influence the overall strength and stability of the beam.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of mechanics of materials principles
  • Familiarity with stress calculations (axial, shear, bending, torsional)
  • Knowledge of theories of failure in structural engineering
  • Proficiency in using Excel for engineering calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research combined loading analysis in cantilever beams
  • Learn about theories of failure, including von Mises and Tresca criteria
  • Explore material properties of aluminum, steel, and titanium for structural applications
  • Investigate the effects of buckling in cantilever beam design
USEFUL FOR

Engineering students, structural engineers, and anyone involved in the design and analysis of cantilever beams or similar structural elements.

Vircona
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I'm in a sophomore-level general engineering class (mechanics of materials), and I was assigned a project that I had a good idea on how to tackle, but I'm running into an error.

The project: I'm given a 1.2m long cylindrical cantilever with forces acting on it; one axial tensile force, and two forces producing torque/shear along the outside edge of the beam. I can choose either a solid, hollow, or composite rod, and can choose from steel, aluminum, or titanium. I can also vary my outer radius (and inner/boundary radii in the cases of hollow or composite rods). I need to find the rod of the least mass that can still resist the forces without YIELDING (not failing) given a 1.5 factor of safety.

My approach: I wrote up the equations for axial, shear, torsional, and bending stresses in excel. I just dragged and dropped the formula for each down the columns with varying radii in the first column (only for solid rods so far; once I get past this hiccup I'll be working on composites).

My problem: Using a type of aluminum with a ~250 MPa tensile yield strength and 2.7 g/cm^3 density, my equations show that a 2-cm radius aluminum rod can resist a force of 120 kN (diagram shows 80 kN --> 120 kN accounting for the FoS). This definitely sounds wrong, obviously, and the equations for just the tensile force is exceedingly simple. I still, for some reason, can't figure out where I've gone wrong.

My Calculations: Without going into all of the different radii I used, I'll show what I did for the 2-cm radius rod. Axial stress = F/A; the force is 120 kN. Area is (obviously) pi*r^2 --> pi*(0.02)^2 --> 0.001256637. F/A = 120,000/0.001256637 = 95.5 x 10^6 N/m^2 = 95.5 MPa. So the rod is experiencing 95.5 MPa of stress, but its tensile yield strength is 250 MPa, so this 2-cm radius aluminum rod can hold 120 kN (or roughly 27,000 lbs) of force (according to my surely-wrong calculations).

I know this should be very easy, but I honestly can't figure out where I'm going wrong. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
It's not clear why you think this obviously simple tensile stress calculation must be wrong. (Note: it isn't)

Since the bar must withstand not only axial, but a combination of axial, bending, torsional, and shear stresses, it is unlikely that applying a purely axial load is going to be the limiting factor in the selection of the size of the rod or the material from which the rod is fabricated.

Apply several different loads to your bar and see what the combined stresses are. If you haven't covered theories of failure (besides loading things up to the tensile yield point), then these theories are likely going to come into play once you have bending stresses combined with shear stresses.
 
Sorry, I should have specified in the original post. I was only concerned with axial forces for now because it seems strange that an aluminum rod 2-cm in radius could hold 27,000 lbf. However, I do have the calculations written for shear, bending, and torsional stresses as well.

I did forget about combined loadings, though. We just went over them, and I'd started this project before combined loading was discussed in class, so I hadn't really put the two together yet. I'll take a look at that and should be able to figure it out using that. Thanks!
 
Vircona said:
Sorry, I should have specified in the original post. I was only concerned with axial forces for now because it seems strange that an aluminum rod 2-cm in diameter could hold 27,000 lbf. However, I do have the calculations written for shear, bending, and torsional stresses as well.

I did forget about combined loadings, though. We just went over them, and I'd started this project before combined loading was discussed in class, so I hadn't really put the two together yet. I'll take a look at that and should be able to figure it out using that. Thanks!

According to your OP, the rod is not 2 cm in diameter; the radius of the rod is 2 cm. The diameter of the rod is ... ?

In any event, tensile loads are some of the easiest to support. Compressive loads, and the possibility of structural instability (i.e., buckling), are much more interesting (and complicated) to analyze.
 
Edited my post; I meant radius, typed diameter. Oops.

Luckily, there's not a compressive loading on the beam. I guess I'm just surprised to find that such a small rod can hold that much force, so I assumed my calculations had to have been off.

Anyway, I'll start analyzing the combined loadings and see if I can tinker with my formulas to get them to work for me. Thanks for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K