Professional Documents
Culture Documents
M5 3-Unified09
M5 3-Unified09
004
Spring, 2009
16.003/004 -- Unified Engineering Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Unit M5-3 p. 2
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Thus far we have talked about the manifestation of yielding in the overall stress-strain response and the mechanisms/origins of yielding. We would like to move forward and be able to predict yielding (and failure) in structures under general (multiaxial) Load/Stress states.
Before we look at two (classic) criteria which have been devised to do this, let us consider two key facts. First the..
Unit M5-3 p. 3
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
This yields the question.. How is this related to yield? --> Consider the uniaxial tensile test
Figure 5.3-1
Unit M5-3 p. 4
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Figure 5.3-2
11
x2
x1
~
Figure 5.3-3
12
22
and maximum shear stresses! Mohrs circle and maximum shear stress for in-plane uniaxial stress state
shear
11
max
90 extensional
11
Paul A. Lagace 2008
Unit M5-3 p. 5
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
yield = 2 yield
What angle does max occur at? 45 to principal stress direction 11
Unit M5-3 p. 6
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Unit M5-3 p. 7
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Conclusion: Any yield criterion must not allow yielding under hydrostatic stress/pressure There are two classic criteria we will consider devised for isotropic materials (yield is one value) The first is the
Tresca Criterion
(1868) Material yields if the maximum shear stress exceeds yield Generalizing this to three dimensions gives:
Unit M5-3 p. 8
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
= yield
or or or
= yield
or
= yield = yield
Recall y = 2y Check case of hydrostatic stress:
= = = C no yield
--> Look at the case of plane stress ( = 0):
Unit M5-3 p. 9
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
= y
= y
= y
| I - II |
Unit M5-3 p. 10
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
) + ( ) + ( ) = 2 2 y
at yield Still the differences of the principal stresses Now sum up the effects Still no yielding for case of hydrostatic stress
--> get a rounded-off Tresca --> Look at case of plane stress ( = 0):
) + 2 + 2 = 2 2 y
2
Paul A. Lagace 2008
+ 2 = 2 y
at yield
Unit M5-3 p. 11
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Comparison of Tresca and von Mises failure criteria for case of plane strain II y
- y
y
- y
Paul A. Lagace 2008
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Finally, consider
Thus far weve concentrated on material failure by yielding. We next look at the phenomenon of fracture.
Paul A. Lagace 2008
Unit M5-3 p. 13
MIT - 16.003/16.004
Spring, 2009
Unit 5.3 (New) Nomenclature yield (y) -- shear yield stress yield -- yield stress , , -- principal stresses
Unit M5-3 p. 14