A Fatigue Failure in Structural Elements: Axial, Shear & Torsional Loads

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Junior19
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fatigue
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of stresses in structural elements under various loading conditions, specifically focusing on axial, shear, and torsional loads versus bending loads. It is noted that axial, shear, and torsional stresses remain constant in direction and do not produce alternating stresses, unlike bending loads that vary in magnitude and direction, leading to fatigue failure. Participants emphasize the importance of understanding basic principles of stress calculations and fatigue in engineering, suggesting that reliance on AI-generated content can be misleading. A reference to Timoshenko's "Strength of Materials" is provided as a credible source for further study. Overall, the conversation highlights the need for academic rigor in understanding shear stresses in dynamic loading scenarios.
Junior19
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Shear Stresses
"The stresses acting on a structural element subjected to axial, shear or torsional loads are constant and do not change sign throughout the loading cycle. Therefore, alternating stresses, which cause fatigue, do not occur in these cases. On the other hand, in a beam subjected to bending load, the stresses vary in magnitude and direction during a loading cycle, thus producing alternating stresses that can cause fatigue failure."

Does anyone know of any academic paragraph that supports this idea? specifically the part related to shear stresses. Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Maybe we need some context here.
Where is that quote from, a link or a reference would help.
 
Hello and thank you for replying. I am doing a research project related to power transmission shafts and unlike others, I don't want to ignore the shear stresses generated by the forces acting on the shaft. I have already done the analysis in terms of static stresses and deformations, however, in the dynamic stresses (fatigue), I do not have much information related to the shear stresses I mentioned. In my opinion, axial, torsional and shear stresses have a constant behavior, in terms of direction, so their alternating stress is equal to 0, however, this is not the case of bending forces, which do present alternating stresses. In the books, all this is mentioned, except the part related to shear stresses, of which nothing is mentioned, so I am not sure if what I think is correct. That is why I consulted with Chat GPT, I gave him all the context and what I think, and he confirmed it with the paragraph I put at the top (it is as he wrote it), however, I think it is something generated from his knowledge, since he could not give me a specific reference of the book or article from where he extracted it. I think it is not appropriate to cite GPT chat in research projects, because it is something new, and for all this I am looking for an academic reference to support this idea that shear stresses do not have alternating stresses, although its magnitude does vary, but not its direction. That is all.
 
The ChatGPT answer is technobabble. And a perfect example of why ChatGPT is not a reliable source for engineering and physics questions.

You need to learn for yourself how to calculate loads, calculate stresses, and what loading conditions cause fatigue. After that, you learn how to calculate fatigue stresses. This is all basic learning that is found in textbooks on strength of materials and machine design.

This is an area where you need to learn the basics. Attempting to cheat using ChatGPT will just get you into trouble.
 
  • Like
Likes nsaspook, berkeman and russ_watters
Welcome, @Junior19 !

Take for example the fatigue that the fuselage of commercial airplanes suffers, only by cycles of pressurization.
That refutes the first part of the idea's statement.
The tubular fuselage is a structural element subjected to pressure load that does not change sign throughout the loading cycle.

Regarding a high rpm's shaft transferring constant torque, but suffering bending deformation and shear loads due to non-balanced masses, misalignment of bearings, couplings, etc., is a rotating beam subjected to constant bending and shearing loads.

As the cross section of that beam rotates about its neutral axis, those stresses vary in magnitude and direction in a rapid cycling manner.
That confirms the second part of the idea's statement.

I am sure that Internet searches could bring back to you a lot of research work on this problem.
The only reference that I know and can share is both chapters IX of Timoshenko's books (parts 1 and 2) on Strength of Materials.

Please, see:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bw8...Zjg/edit?resourcekey=0-GEkdRBIXq66OFnCBnteVSw

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bw8...Y28/view?resourcekey=0-NDWpBrvRWodj29L7tZAt2Q
 
Last edited:
Junior19 said:
I don't want to ignore the shear stresses generated by the forces acting on the shaft.
If you have specific forces in mind, then it should be obvious if they are rotating with the shaft or not. If the shear forces are constant in the rotating rest frame of the shaft (magnitude & direction), then the shear stresses are constant too. Otherwise they are alternating.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top