Question on hoop stress tension in rotating objects

Click For Summary
Hoop stress in rotating objects, such as flywheels, is a result of internal forces that resist deformation caused by radial (centrifugal) forces. The discussion centers on whether hoop stress is directly caused by these radial forces or if it exists independently due to molecular bonds. If a force greater than the outward radial force acts inward, it would lead to a net compression rather than hoop tension. The debate highlights differing interpretations of how radial forces relate to hoop stress, with one view asserting that hoop stress can exist without radial forces. Ultimately, understanding these stress states is crucial for analyzing the structural integrity of rotating bodies.
  • #31
LT Judd said:
Good Day Chester,
I thought I would have a crack at the FBD. see attached- does that look right?
Being a ring rather than a disk I assumed that there is no inward radial force, not sure if that's correct.
So based on the FBD and the arising formula, it appears that the hoop forces could be huge.
Note this is based on a general thin ring, not for the "earth case", in that case you would also include gravity, as an inward force, I guess.
so given that there is a sineis also very small, it, i i small, View attachment 297052
I guess the only mistake here is that there should have been a 2##d\theta## in the numerator instead of just ##d\theta##
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
Sorry , totally lost me there.
Is the units of T Newtons ( or kN) ?
and does ## i_r ## means the unit tension vector in the radial direction?
I also don't understand the notation ##i_\theta (\theta)##.
Why is ## \(theta) ## written twice and which one refers to the direction and what does the other refer to?
 
  • #33
LT Judd said:
Sorry , totally lost me there.
Is the units of T Newtons ( or kN) ?
and does ## i_r ## means the unit tension vector in the radial direction?
I also don't understand the notation ##i_\theta (\theta)##.
Why is ## \(theta) ## written twice and which one refers to the direction and what does the other refer to?
##i_r## is the unit vector (radial direction) in cylindrical polar coordinates and ##i_{\theta}## is the unit vector (angular direction ##\theta##). Geometrically, both these unit vectors depend on the polar angle ##\theta##: $$\frac{di_r}{d\theta}=i_{\theta}$$ and $$\frac{di_{\theta}}{d\theta}=-i_r$$

Are you not familiar with polar coordinates and use of unit vectors which change in spatial position?
 
  • #34
paulsterx said:
Yes agreed, his diatribe is that because hoop stress is a tangential force and gravity is a radial force, there’s no way that gravity could oppose hoop stress. My point is that for (tensional) hoop stress to exist, there must be a net force acting away from the axis of rotation and that due to gravity, the net force is towards the axis, therefore there is no tension stress, rather compression.
You don't need to calculate the tangential force to see that it is compressive: if it were not then the oceans would part.

There is no point arguing with a flat Earther with facts as they have already opted to ignore certain facts that do not support their delusion.
 
  • #35
Chestermiller said:
##i_r## is the unit vector (radial direction) in cylindrical polar coordinates and ##i_{\theta}## is the unit vector (angular direction ##\theta##). Geometrically, both these unit vectors depend on the polar angle ##\theta##: $$\frac{di_r}{d\theta}=i_{\theta}$$ and $$\frac{di_{\theta}}{d\theta}=-i_r$$

Are you not familiar with polar coordinates and use of unit vectors which change in spatial position?
Hi Chester,
Sorry for the late reply, I wanted to have a long think about it. Yes I am familiar with polar co-ordinates and unit vectors , but I dare say not as much as you are. I just struggled with some of your notations and sign conventions.

Anyhow , I decided to look at this another way however and realized that I should have accounted for gravity in my FBD as it turn out that has a far greater effect that an any centripetal force or hoop stress.

You can deduce a formula for centripetal acceleration on a spinning sphere with some elementary physics: a=V^2/R, where V = linear speed at equator and R is the radius
For earth, V is 465 m/s ( circumeference of Earth divided by length of day), and the radius of the Earth is 6.4 million metres.
This gives a centripetal acceleration of 0.03 m/s^2 . Considering gravity at 9.8 m/s^2 is about 300 times greater and in the opposite direction, there is obviously no risk of anything flying outward and I think I can also conclude that there are no net hoop stresses on the Earth's crust. Rather the Earth's crust (and oceans) would be overall in compression.

As the previous poster noted , simple observation can tell you that , but it's been a good mental excersize to look into the physics behind it .
 
  • #36
LT Judd said:
Hi Chester,
Sorry for the late reply, I wanted to have a long think about it. Yes I am familiar with polar co-ordinates and unit vectors , but I dare say not as much as you are. I just struggled with some of your notations and sign conventions.

Anyhow , I decided to look at this another way however and realized that I should have accounted for gravity in my FBD as it turn out that has a far greater effect that an any centripetal force or hoop stress.
You are aware that you can cause a ring to rotate about its axis as fast as you want, and this can create centripetal accelerations far exceeding g, with associated huge hoop tensions, right?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
511