Question About Shear Stress Naming Convention

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the naming convention for shear stress (\tau_{ij}) in the context of a cylindrical shaft subjected to torque. Participants explore how to assign indices to shear stress components and the implications of using different coordinate systems, particularly in relation to differential elements versus entire cross sections.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to assign indices i and j for shear stress in a circular shaft under torque, suggesting it relates to the plane containing the cross-section.
  • Another participant asks why the naming convention for shear stress would differ from that of normal stress.
  • A participant references a 3D infinitesimal element and describes the shear stress components as off-diagonal elements, proposing a mnemonic for remembering the index assignment.
  • Some participants suggest that using cylindrical coordinates might simplify the discussion, while noting that the differential element in cylindrical coordinates still resembles a square.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding an instructor's definition of shear stress indices, indicating that it may only apply to differential elements rather than the entire cross section.
  • Another participant clarifies that stress states are defined for differential elements to maintain equilibrium, suggesting that trying to define a single stress state for the entire cross section leads to confusion.
  • Participants discuss the shear stress induced by torque, with one noting that it can be expressed as \tau_{z\theta}=\tau_{\theta z} proportional to the applied torque.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying interpretations of the shear stress naming convention, with some agreeing on the need to focus on differential elements while others remain uncertain about the application of definitions to entire cross sections. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the correct approach.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of applying definitions to entire cross sections, emphasizing that stress states are typically defined for differential elements. There is also mention of the potential confusion arising from different coordinate systems.

Saladsamurai
Messages
3,009
Reaction score
7
Question About Shear Stress "Naming" Convention

I cannot seem to find this in any of my texts.

For a shaft of circular cross-section, how do you name the shear stress \tau_{ij} caused by a Torque?

That is, how do you assign the indices i j ? Is it the plane that contains the cross-section?

That is the only way I can make any sense of it.

Silly question, but it is driving me nuts.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


Why would it be any different than normal?
 


None of your text show a 3D infinitesimal element?

http://ic.ucsc.edu/%7Ecasey/eart150/Lectures/Stress/Fig3.6.jpg
In this naming convention, the taus are the off diagonal elements.

I always remember it as...and this is just me...

\tau_{ij} = in the "j" axis direction, perpendicular to "i" axis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Since this is a cylindrical shaft, wouldn't it be easier to use cylindrical coordinates? That could be the origin of the OP's question...
 


cristo said:
Since this is a cylindrical shaft, wouldn't it be easier to use cylindrical coordinates? That could be the origin of the OP's question...

That doesn't change things because a differential element in cylindrical coordinates looks like a square.
 


It really is the same thing, but if cylindrical coordinates are what one wants to deal with then how about this...

http://web.mse.uiuc.edu/courses/mse280/Handouts/Example_Stress_Cyl_Coord.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Perhaps I am either wording this incorrectly, or I am more confused than I thought.

I was told by my instructor that when speaking of a shear stress \tau_{ij} that i is the direction normal to the plane, and j is the direction of the shear.

That description doesn't make sense to me. But that might be because I am applying that definition to the entire cross section instead of just a differential element.

Let's take an example. If a torque T is applied clockwise to a cylindrical shaft whose longitudinal axis coincides with the z-axis. How do we name the shear stress that is induced?

If you look at the entire cross section, z is normal to the plane but in which direction do you say the shear acts? Does it even make sense to ask that question since it acts in ALL directions tangent to any radial distance?

If you look at a differential element at the top of the shaft then we can certainly assign a direction to the shear, i.e., to the "right" in the x-direction.
Is my question any clearer? Is that definition that I was given in naming tau correct? I think it only makes sense when talking about an element of the shaft.

Thanks :smile:
 


"That description doesn't make sense to me. But that might be because I am applying that definition to the entire cross section instead of just a differential element."

Stress states are defined for differential elements so that equilibrium is met.

You tried to define a single stress state for the entire cross sectional area. This resulted in some craziness that certainly didn't jive with your intuition.
 


Saladsamurai said:
Let's take an example. If a torque T is applied clockwise to a cylindrical shaft whose longitudinal axis coincides with the z-axis. How do we name the shear stress that is induced?

If you look at the entire cross section, z is normal to the plane but in which direction do you say the shear acts?

The torque induces a shear stress \tau_{z\theta}=\tau_{\theta z}\propto T, as cristo indicated.
 
  • #10


Rybose said:
"That description doesn't make sense to me. But that might be because I am applying that definition to the entire cross section instead of just a differential element."

Stress states are defined for differential elements so that equilibrium is met.

You tried to define a single stress state for the entire cross sectional area. This resulted in some craziness that certainly didn't jive with your intuition.

That's what I thought :smile: My confusion stemmed from my misinterpretation of the definition.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K