Question involving Slenderness Ratio and E.S.R.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gundam404
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ratio
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the slenderness ratio (S.R.) and effective slenderness ratio (E.S.R.) in relation to the buckling and crushing modes of failure for a column. Participants explore how these ratios influence the failure mode based on the column's dimensions and material properties, addressing both theoretical and practical aspects of structural engineering.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to determine the mode of failure using E.S.R. and S.R., noting a discrepancy between the calculated minimum length for buckling and the slenderness ratio.
  • Another participant provides a formula for E.S.R. and suggests that the column will crush instead of buckle if its length is shorter than the minimum buckling length determined at the yield stress of the material.
  • A participant inquires whether the mode of failure changes with different materials, indicating a need for clarification on how material properties affect failure modes.
  • It is noted that while the geometric properties of the column remain constant, the material's modulus of elasticity (E) significantly influences the buckling behavior and failure modes.
  • Discussion includes the observation that wood, having a much lower modulus of elasticity than steel, will buckle at a shorter length compared to steel, which affects the critical buckling load.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between E.S.R., S.R., and the modes of failure. There is no consensus on the implications of these ratios for the specific problem presented, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact conditions under which buckling or crushing will occur.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific formulas and concepts related to slenderness ratios, but there are indications of missing assumptions regarding material properties and boundary conditions that could affect the conclusions drawn.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals in structural engineering, particularly those interested in the behavior of columns under load and the implications of slenderness ratios on failure modes.

Gundam404
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A column has the dimensions shown in the diagram below. (a) What is the minimum length of the column at which buckling is likely to occur? (b) If the column is the length determined in (a), (i) What will be the mode of failure? (ii) At what load would you expect failure to occur?

upload_2015-10-26_15-10-26-png.png


The specific problem I am having with this question is for b)i) how to determine what the mode of failure will be from the E.S.R. and the S.R. Admittedly this question has been asked many times and people seem to say it will buckle at the length determined in a). Now reading my course material, it states that if your E.S.R is below your S.R. then it will be a crushing mode of failure and above will be buckling. Now I have an E.S.R of 118.741 and a S.R. of 237.52. Am I correct in thinking that this will be a crushing mode of failure with the length of 5.938 m as we have just worked out that the minimum length at which buckling is likely to occur is 5.938 m, so how can this length be the minimum for bucking when the slenderness ratio is 237.52. I would like to make sense of this and I feel like I am chasing my own tail at the moment. Thank you very much for any assistance.

Homework Equations


[/B]
Euler's equation. Fc= ((pi^2)*E*I)/Le^2

E.S.R. = Le/k

S.R. = L/K

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
Effective Length = 2.969 m
Length = 5.938 m
k = 0.025
Fc = 306 kN
I = 13.7*10^-7
E.S.R. = 118.741
S.R. = 237.52
 

Attachments

  • upload_2015-10-26_15-10-26-png.png
    upload_2015-10-26_15-10-26-png.png
    19 KB · Views: 786
Physics news on Phys.org
The ESR is
kL/r, where k is a function of the boundary conditions and equal to 0.5 for the fixed-fixed ends, and r is the radius of gyration which is equal to sq rt of (I/A). I don’t know where you are getting your formulas. Also, the SR L/r has no place here. The column will crush instead of buckle when it’s length is shorter than the minimum buckling length determined at the yield stress of the steel.
 
Thank you for the reply and clarification. I have taken a screen shot of a couple of pages from the learning materials which can show you where I get some formulas from and the part about slenderness. In particular the paragraph below the E.S.R. formula on the euler's equation page. This is the one talking about slenderness ratio of a material, i.e. steel, so if I don't know the material being used, does that mean the way it fails will change with different material choices?
upload_2018-9-16_14-9-28.png

upload_2018-9-16_14-9-44.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-9-16_13-58-12.png
    upload_2018-9-16_13-58-12.png
    35 KB · Views: 497
  • upload_2018-9-16_14-9-28.png
    upload_2018-9-16_14-9-28.png
    35 KB · Views: 611
  • upload_2018-9-16_14-9-44.png
    upload_2018-9-16_14-9-44.png
    53.9 KB · Views: 768
Yes. As long as the geometric properties of the column are the same, the material used does not change the ESR. However , since bucking depends on E, and type of failures depends on the yield stress of the material, then it makes a big difference when using other materials. Steel for example has an E modulus about 20 times greater than E for wood, so for a given long length its critical buckling load is 20 times greater than wood. And in terms of the minimum length for buckling at yield stress, the wood , which has a breaking stress about 10 percent that of steel, will buckle at about a half the min length of the steel. Except for short columns, the wood will always buckle before it crushes.
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much PhanthomJay. I feel far more confident with my understanding of this now.

Best regards.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
27K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K