- #1
- 869
- 65
On the topic of structural tubing...
It is my understanding that round tubing is stronger than square tubing, or conversely that, that round tubing is lighter for a tube of the same strength.
Does it necessarily follow that the best possible use of material when making a tube, is to use it all for round tube wall thickness? Or, is it possible I could make a stronger tube of the same weight by using a thinner walled round tube and inscribing a square tube inside it?
One thought experiment is to imagine that I have 3 different tubes. Tube 1 will be a round outer tube, tube 2 will be a round tube which fits snugly inside tube 1, tube 3 will be a square tube which fits snugly inside tube 1. I'm going to make a composite tube by sliding either tube 2 or tube 3, inside tube 1. All 3 tubes have the same weight per unit length.
I really have 2 options in this scenario for a composite tube, 1+2 or 1+3. If the strength of the composite tube is simply the sum of the strengths of the individual tubes, then 1+2 would be stronger because 2 is stronger than 3 and 1 would be the same in both cases. If the strength of the composite is not a simple sum, then it is possible 1+3 may be stronger. It's easy to imagine the straight edges of the square tube acting like internal bracing for the round tube, so I really have no idea which combination would be stronger.
Also: this thought experiment assumes that composite 1+2 would be equivalent to a single round tube of equivalent wall thickness. I don't know if that is true or not.
Further ponderings: What about other internal structures? Suppose I could find a triangular tube to inscribe into my round tube? Or perhaps I could pack my round tube with hollow spheres? Could the answer depend on exactly what type of forces I want the finished tube to resist (bending, denting, stretching, compression, torsion, etc)?
I'm not at all sure if I've explained my question well. I'll clarify if need be.
It is my understanding that round tubing is stronger than square tubing, or conversely that, that round tubing is lighter for a tube of the same strength.
Does it necessarily follow that the best possible use of material when making a tube, is to use it all for round tube wall thickness? Or, is it possible I could make a stronger tube of the same weight by using a thinner walled round tube and inscribing a square tube inside it?
One thought experiment is to imagine that I have 3 different tubes. Tube 1 will be a round outer tube, tube 2 will be a round tube which fits snugly inside tube 1, tube 3 will be a square tube which fits snugly inside tube 1. I'm going to make a composite tube by sliding either tube 2 or tube 3, inside tube 1. All 3 tubes have the same weight per unit length.
I really have 2 options in this scenario for a composite tube, 1+2 or 1+3. If the strength of the composite tube is simply the sum of the strengths of the individual tubes, then 1+2 would be stronger because 2 is stronger than 3 and 1 would be the same in both cases. If the strength of the composite is not a simple sum, then it is possible 1+3 may be stronger. It's easy to imagine the straight edges of the square tube acting like internal bracing for the round tube, so I really have no idea which combination would be stronger.
Also: this thought experiment assumes that composite 1+2 would be equivalent to a single round tube of equivalent wall thickness. I don't know if that is true or not.
Further ponderings: What about other internal structures? Suppose I could find a triangular tube to inscribe into my round tube? Or perhaps I could pack my round tube with hollow spheres? Could the answer depend on exactly what type of forces I want the finished tube to resist (bending, denting, stretching, compression, torsion, etc)?
I'm not at all sure if I've explained my question well. I'll clarify if need be.