How Much Load Can a Captive 316 Stainless Steel Pin Withstand Before Failing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ragley
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanical
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the load capacity of a captive 316 stainless steel pin, measuring 2.5mm in diameter and 12mm long, with a 2.5mm unsupported section. The pin is expected to fail primarily in shear due to the load applied through a fishing swivel, which exerts a force attempting to shear the pin. Participants suggest that both shear and bending stresses should be considered, as bending may also play a role despite the pin being captivated at both ends. The importance of understanding the relationship between shear strength and tensile strength is emphasized, along with the potential need for calculations using Mohr's circle to assess principal stresses. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure the pin's strength exceeds that of the swivel to prevent failure.
Ragley
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi

I'm a product designer, with little knowledge of mechanics. I've designed a product in which there is a captive Pin 2.5mm diameter x 12mm Long, made from Half-hard 316 Stainless Steel. The Pin is totally captivated for 4.75mm at each end, leaving an unsupported length of 2.5 mm in the centre. At this point, a load is applied. I can see that bending can't take place because of the captivation at each end, so with my limited knowledge it seems that the Pin will fail in Shear, What is the maximum load it can take before failure?

Can anyone help me please?

Thanks in anticipation
Ragley
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this equivalent to the following?:

Put two metal slabs on the table, on on top of the other. Then drill a vertical hole through both. Insert at metal rod. Then try to slide one metal slab to the side. There would be a force that attemps to cut the rod, assuming that the slabs are much harder than the rod.

Is this the same kind of force that will be acting on each sides of the central 2.7mm section of the pin? Maybe this is one possible idealization that makes it possible to estimate the strength, because these properties must be documented somewhere. Maybe somewhere related to metal cutting? At least, in this simplification, the strength will be proportional to the cross-sectional area of the pin.

This picture might be completely wrong if the load acting on the pin is not sufficiently uniform along the whole 2.75mm. In addition, there is the danger that it gives an over-estimate for the strength.

Torquil
 
Hi Ragley, welcome to the board. This really should go in the mechanical engineering forum, just FYI.

Shear strength is related to tensile and yield strength as given here:
http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Matter/shear_tensile.htm

However, as torquil eludes to, whether or not this is truly in shear only is doubtful. As I understand you, the pin is 2.5 mm in diam and unsupported along a length of 2.5 mm. Bending stresses will be significant, so I'd suggest looking at both bending and shear then applying Mohr's circle to get the principal stresses. If you're unsure how to determine the bending moment, you should be able to find that in most texts or better yet, use http://www.roarksformulas.com/" .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Torquil

Thanks for the reply.

Effectively, your understanding is correct. The device operates in a horizontal orientation, and is quite a simple device that is conected to a fishing swivel. It is the load applied through the swivel onto the Pin that will cause it to shear. It can bend very slightly, but with both ends captivated and clamped by hydraulic pressure when assembling, the swivel is trying to tear through the central 2.5mm of the Pin. As long as the Pin is stronger than the swivel, the swivel will fail first.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top