Chapter 6 Solutions 2

www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com © www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.
com ©
Chapter 6
6-1 Eq. (2-21): Sut  3.4 H B  3.4(300)  1020 MPa

Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5Sut  0.5(1020)  510 MPa
Table 6-2: a  1.58, b  0.085
Eq. (6-19): ka  aSutb  1.58(1020) 0.085  0.877
Eq. (6-20): kb  1.24d 0.107  1.24(10) 0.107  0.969
Eq. (6-18): Se  ka kb Se  (0.877)(0.969)(510)  433 MPa Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
6-2 (a) Table A-20: S ut = 80 kpsi

Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(80)  40 kpsi Ans.
(b) Table A-20: S ut = 90 kpsi
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(90)  45 kpsi Ans.
‫مهندسی مکانیک و ساخت و تولید مرجع تخصصی دروس و نرمافزارهای مهندسی‬

(c) Aluminum has no endurance limit. Ans.
(d) Eq. (6-8): S ut > 200 kpsi, Se  100 kpsi Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
:‫کانال ما در تلگرام‬
6-3 Sut  120 kpsi,  rev  70 kpsi
Fig. 6-18: f  0.82
telegram.me/iranmanufacturing
Eq. (6-8): Se  Se  0.5(120)  60 kpsi
:‫صفحه ما در اینستاگرام‬ ( f Sut ) 2  0.82(120) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   161.4 kpsi

Se 60
www.instagram.com/iranmanufacturing 1  f Sut  1  0.82(120) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.0716
 
:‫صفحه ما در فیسبوک‬  Se 
3 3 60
1
 
1/ b
 70  0.0716
Eq. (6-16):N   rev      116 700 cycles Ans.
www.facebook.com/iranmanufacturing  a   161.4 
______________________________________________________________________________
:‫فروشگاه سایت‬ 6-4 Sut  1600 MPa,  rev  900 MPa
iranmanufacturing.sellfile.ir Fig. 6-18: S ut = 1600 MPa = 232 kpsi. Off the graph, so estimate f = 0.77.
Eq. (6-8): S ut > 1400 MPa, so S e = 700 MPa
( f Sut ) 2  0.77(1600) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   2168.3 MPa

Se 700
Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 1/66

www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com © www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com ©
log  0.798  /3
1  f Sut
b   log 
 1  0.77(1600)  Eq. (6-17): S f  Sut N  log f  /3  150  500    122 kpsi Ans.
Eq. (6-15):    log    0.081838
3  Se  3  700 
1 The testing should be done at a completely reversed stress of 122 kpsi, which is below
 
1/ b
 900  0.081838
the yield strength, so it is possible. Ans.
Eq. (6-16): N   rev      46 400 cycles Ans.
 a   2168.3  ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
6-8 The general equation for a line on a log S f - log N scale is S f = aNb, which is Eq. (6-13).
By taking the log of both sides, we can get the equation of the line in slope-intercept
6-5 Sut  230 kpsi, N  150 000 cycles form.
Fig. 6-18, point is off the graph, so estimate: f = 0.77 log S f  b log N  log a
Eq. (6-8): S ut > 200 kpsi, so Se  Se  100 kpsi Substitute the two known points to solve for unknowns a and b. Substituting point (1,
S ut ),
( f Sut ) 2  0.77(230) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   313.6 kpsi

Se 100 log Sut  b log(1)  log a
1  f Sut  1  0.77(230)  From which a  Sut . Substituting point (103 , f Sut ) and a  Sut
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.08274
3  Se  3  100 
log f Sut  b log103  log Sut
Eq. (6-13): S f  aN b  313.6(150 000)0.08274  117.0 kpsi Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________ From which b  1/ 3 log f
 S f  Sut N (log f )/3 1  N  103

6-6 Sut  1100 MPa = 160 kpsi
______________________________________________________________________________
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.79
Eq. (6-8): Se  Se  0.5(1100)  550 MPa 6-9 Read from graph: 103 ,90  and (106 ,50). From S  aN b
log S1  log a  b log N1

( f Sut ) 2  0.79(1100) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   1373 MPa log S2  log a  b log N 2

Se 550
1  f Sut  1  0.79(1100)  From which
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.06622
  log S1 log N 2  log S 2 log N1
3  Se  3 550 log a 
log N 2 / N1
Eq. (6-13): S f  aN b  1373(150 000)0.06622  624 MPa Ans.
log 90 log106  log 50 log103
______________________________________________________________________________ 
log106 /103
 2.2095
6-7 Sut  150 kpsi, S yt  135 kpsi, N  500 cycles
a  10log a  102.2095  162.0 kpsi
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.798 log 50 / 90
b  0.0851
3
From Fig. 6-10, we note that below 103 cycles on the S-N diagram constitutes the low-
( S f ) ax  162 N 0.0851 103  N  106 in kpsi Ans.
cycle region, in which Eq. (6-17) is applicable.
Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 2/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 3/66

Check: 6-12 D = 1 in, d = 0.8 in, T = 1800 lbfin, f = 0.9, and from Table A-20 for AISI 1020 CD,
S ut = 68 kpsi, and S y = 57 kpsi.
 ( S f ) ax 103  162(10 )
3 0.0851
 90 kpsi
r 0.1 D 1
(a) Fig. A-15-15:   0.125,   1.25, K ts  1.40
 ( S f ) ax  6  162(106 ) 0.0851  50 kpsi d 0.8 d 0.8
10
The end points agree. Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-21, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and
______________________________________________________________________________ (6-35b). We’ll use the equations.
d = 1.5 in, S ut = 110 kpsi a  0.190  2.51103   68  1.35 105   68   2.67 108  683   0.07335
6-10 2
Se  0.5(110)  55 kpsi 1 1

Eq. (6-8): qs    0.812
a = 2.70, b =  0.265 a 1  0.07335
Table 6-2: 1
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSut b  2.70(110) 0.265  0.777 r 0.1
Since the loading situation is not specified, we’ll assume rotating bending or torsion so Eq. (6-32): K fs = 1 + q s (K ts  1) = 1 + 0.812(1.40  1) = 1.32
Eq. (6-20) is applicable. This would be the worst case.
For a purely reversing torque of T = 1800 lbfin,
kb  0.879d 0.107  0.879(1.5) 0.107  0.842 Tr K fs 16T 1.32(16)(1800)

 a  K fs    23 635 psi  23.6 kpsi
Eq. (6-18): Se  ka kb Se  0.777(0.842)(55)  36.0 kpsi Ans. J d3  (0.8)3
______________________________________________________________________________
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(68)  34 kpsi
6-11 For AISI 4340 as-forged steel,
Eq. (6-19): k a = 2.70(68)0.265 = 0.883
Eq. (6-8): S e = 100 kpsi
Table 6-2: a = 39.9, b =  0.995 Eq. (6-20): k b = 0.879(0.8)0.107 = 0.900
Eq. (6-19): k a = 39.9(260)0.995 = 0.158
0.107 Eq. (6-26): k c = 0.59
 0.75 
Eq. (6-20): kb     0.907
 0.30  Eq. (6-18) (labeling for shear): S se = 0.883(0.900)(0.59)(34) = 15.9 kpsi
Each of the other modifying factors is unity.
S e = 0.158(0.907)(100) = 14.3 kpsi For purely reversing torsion, use Eq. (6-54) for the ultimate strength in shear.
For AISI 1040: Eq. (6-54): S su = 0.67 S ut = 0.67(68) = 45.6 kpsi

Se  0.5(113)  56.5 kpsi
Adjusting the fatigue strength equations for shear,
0.995
ka  39.9(113)  0.362
 f Ssu   0.9(45.6)  105.9 kpsi
2 2
kb  0.907 (same as 4340) Eq. (6-14): a

S se 15.9
Each of the other modifying factors is unity 1  f S su  1  0.9(45.6) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.137 27
3  S se  3  15.9 
Se  0.362(0.907)(56.5)  18.6 kpsi 1 1
   b  23.3  0.137 27
Not only is AISI 1040 steel a contender, it has a superior endurance strength.
Eq. (6-16): N  a  
 a   105.9 
  61.7 103 cycles   Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________

(b) For an operating temperature of 750 F, the temperature modification factor, Sf 403 106 
n   1.5
from Table 6-4 is k d = 0.90. a 7200 / b3
S se = 0.883(0.900)(0.59)(0.9)(34) = 14.3 kpsi
b = 0.0299 m Select b = 30 mm.
 f Ssu   0.9(45.6)
2 2
Since the size factor was guessed, go back and check it now.
a   117.8 kpsi
d e  0.808  hb   0.808b  0.808  30   24.24 mm
1/ 2
S se 14.3 Eq. (6-25):
0.107
1  f S su  1  0.9(45.6)   24.2 
b   log     log    0.152 62 Eq. (6-20): kb     0.88
3  S se  3  14.3   7.62 
1 1 Our guess of 0.85 was slightly conservative, so we will accept the result of
   b  23.3  0.152 62
N  a  
 a   117.8 
  40.9 103 cycles Ans.   b = 30 mm. Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
Checking yield,
6-13 L  0.6 m, Fa  2 kN, n  1.5, N  104 cycles, Sut  770 MPa, S y  420 MPa (Table A-20)  max 
7200
0.0303
106   267 MPa
First evaluate the fatigue strength.
S 420
Se  0.5(770)  385 MPa ny  y   1.57
 max 267
ka  57.7(770) 0.718  0.488
______________________________________________________________________________
Since the size is not yet known, assume a
6-14 Given: w =2.5 in, t = 3/8 in, d = 0.5 in, n d = 2. From Table A-20, for AISI 1020 CD,
typical value of k b = 0.85 and check later.
S ut = 68 kpsi and S y = 57 kpsi.
All other modifiers are equal to one.
Eq. (6-18): S e = 0.488(0.85)(385) = 160 MPa Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(68)  34 kpsi
Table 6-2: ka  2.70(68) 0.265  0.88
In kpsi, S ut = 770/6.89 = 112 kpsi Eq. (6-21): k b = 1 (axial loading)
Eq. (6-26): k c = 0.85
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.83
 f Sut   0.83(770)  2553 MPa
2 2
Eq. (6-18): S e = 0.88(1)(0.85)(34) = 25.4 kpsi
Eq. (6-14): a
Se 160 Table A-15-1: d / w  0.5 / 2.5  0.2, K t  2.5
1  f Sut  1  0.83(770)  Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-20, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.2005
3  Se  3  160  (6-35a). The relatively large radius is off the graph of Fig. 6-20, so we’ll assume the
4 0.2005 curves continue according to the same trend and use the equations to estimate the notch
Eq. (6-13): S f  aN  2553(10 )
b
 403 MPa
sensitivity.
Now evaluate the stress. a  0.246  3.08 103   68   1.51105   68   2.67 108  683   0.09799
2
M max  (2000 N)(0.6 m)  1200 N  m

1 1
Mc M  b / 2  6M 6 1200  7200 q   0.836
 a   max      3 Pa, with b in m. a 1  0.09799
I b(b3 ) /12 b3 b3 b 1
r 0.25
Compare strength to stress and solve for the necessary b. Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.836(2.5  1)  2.25

Fa 2.25 Fa m  K f
 max   min
 1.96 
 43.7  0   42.8 kpsi
a  K f =  3Fa Eq. (6-36):
A (3 / 8)(2.5  0.5) 2 2
Since a finite life was not mentioned, we’ll assume infinite life is desired, so the
 max   min  43.7  0 
completely reversed stress must stay below the endurance limit. a  K f  1.96   42.8 kpsi
2 2
Se
25.4
nf  2 
 a 3Fa 1  a  m 42.8 42.8
Eq. (6-46):    
Fa  4.23 kips Ans. nf Se Sut 42.0 120
______________________________________________________________________________
n f  0.73 Ans.
6-15 Given: D  2 in, d  1.8 in, r  0.1 in, M max  25 000 lbf  in, M min  0.
From Table A-20, for AISI 1095 HR, S ut = 120 kpsi and S y = 66 kpsi. A factor of safety less than unity indicates a finite life.
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5Sut  0.5 120   60 kpsi Check for yielding. It is not necessary to include the stress concentration for static
yielding of a ductile material.
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(120) 0.265  0.76 S 66
Eq. (6-24): d e  0.370d  0.370(1.8)  0.666 in ny  y   1.51 Ans.
 max 43.7
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.666) 0.107  0.92 ______________________________________________________________________________
Eq. (6-26): kc  1 6-16 From a free-body diagram analysis, the bearing reaction forces are found to be 2.1 kN at
Eq. (6-18): Se  ka kb kc Se  (0.76)(0.92)(1)(60)  42.0 kpsi the left bearing and 3.9 kN at the right bearing. The critical location will be at the
shoulder fillet between the 35 mm and the 50 mm diameters, where the bending moment
is large, the diameter is smaller, and the stress concentration exists. The bending moment
Fig. A-15-14: D / d  2 / 1.8  1.11, r / d  0.1 / 1.8  0.056  Kt  2.1 at this point is M = 2.1(200) = 420 kN·mm. With a rotating shaft, the bending stress will
be completely reversed.
Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-20, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and Mc 420 (35 / 2)
 rev    0.09978 kN/mm 2  99.8 MPa
(6-35a). We’ll use the equations. I ( / 64)(35)4
This stress is far below the yield strength of 390 MPa, so yielding is not predicted. Find
a  0.246  3.08 103  120   1.51105  120   2.67 108 1203   0.04770
2
the stress concentration factor for the fatigue analysis.
1 1
q   0.87
a 1  0.04770 Fig. A-15-9: r/d = 3/35 = 0.086, D/d = 50/35 = 1.43, K t =1.7
1
r 0.1
Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-20, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.87(2.1  1)  1.96 (6-35a). We’ll use the equations, with S ut = 470 MPa = 68.2 kpsi and r = 3 mm = 0.118
in.
I  ( / 64)d 4  ( / 64)(1.8)4  0.5153 in 4
a  0.246  3.08 103   68.2   1.51105   68.2   2.67 108   68.2   0.09771
2 3
Mc 25 000(1.8 / 2) 1 1
 max    43 664 psi  43.7 kpsi q   0.78
I 0.5153 a 1  0.09771
 min 0 1
r 0.118
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.78(1.7  1)  1.55

Eq. (6-8): S e'  0.5Sut  0.5(470)  235 MPa Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(85) 0.265  0.832
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  4.51(470) 0.265  0.88 Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879d 0.107  0.879(1.625) 0.107  0.835
Eq. (6-24): kb  1.24d 0.107  1.24(35) 0.107  0.85 Eq. (6-26): kc  1
Eq. (6-26): kc  1 Eq. (6-18): S e  k a kb kc S e'  (0.832)(0.835)(1)(42.5)  29.5 kpsi
Eq. (6-18): S e  k a kb kc S  (0.88)(0.85)(1)(235)  176 MPa
'
e
Se 29.5
nf    0.49 Ans.
Se 176 K f  rev 1.72  35.0 
nf    1.14 Infinite life is predicted. Ans.
K f  rev 1.55  99.8  Infinite life is not predicted. Use the S-N diagram to estimate the life.
______________________________________________________________________________ Fig. 6-18: f = 0.867
 f Sut   0.867(85)
2 2
6-17 From a free-body diagram analysis, the Eq. (6-14): a   184.1
bearing reaction forces are found to be R A = Se 29.5
2000 lbf and R B = 1500 lbf. The shear-force  f Sut 
1 1  0.867(85) 
and bending-moment diagrams are shown. Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1325
The critical location will be at the shoulder 3  Se  3  29.5 
fillet between the 1-5/8 in and the 1-7/8 in 1 1
diameters, where the bending moment is  K   b  (1.72)(35.0)  0.1325
large, the diameter is smaller, and the stress Eq. (6-16): N   f rev      4611 cycles
concentration exists.  a   184.1 
N = 4600 cycles Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
6-18 From a free-body diagram analysis, the

M = 16 000 – 500 (2.5) = 14 750 lbf · in bearing reaction forces are found to be R A =
1600 lbf and R B = 2000 lbf. The shear-force
With a rotating shaft, the bending stress will and bending-moment diagrams are shown.
be completely reversed. The critical location will be at the shoulder
Mc 14 750(1.625 / 2) fillet between the 1-5/8 in and the 1-7/8 in
 rev    35.0 kpsi
I ( / 64)(1.625) 4 diameters, where the bending moment is
This stress is far below the yield strength of 71 kpsi, so yielding is not predicted. large, the diameter is smaller, and the stress
concentration exists.
Fig. A-15-9: r/d = 0.0625/1.625 = 0.04, D/d = 1.875/1.625 = 1.15, K t =1.95
M = 12 800 + 400 (2.5) = 13 800 lbf · in
Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-20, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and
(6-35a). We will use the equations. With a rotating shaft, the bending stress will
a  0.246  3.08 103   85   1.51105   85  2.67 108   85  0.07690
2 3
be completely reversed.
Mc 13 800(1.625 / 2)
1 1  rev    32.8 kpsi
q   0.76 . I ( / 64)(1.625) 4
a 1  0.07690
1
r 0.0625
This stress is far below the yield strength of 71 kpsi, so yielding is not predicted.
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.76(1.95  1)  1.72
Fig. A-15-9: r/d = 0.0625/1.625 = 0.04, D/d = 1.875/1.625 = 1.15, K t =1.95
Eq. (6-8): S e'  0.5Sut  0.5(85)  42.5 kpsi

Get the notch sensitivity either from Fig. 6-20, or from the curve-fit Eqs. (6-34) and First, we’ll evaluate the stress. From a free-body diagram analysis, the reaction forces at
(6-35a). We will use the equations the bearings are R 1 = 2 kips and R 2 = 6 kips. The critical stress location is in the middle
of the span at the shoulder, where the bending moment is high, the shaft diameter is
a  0.246  3.08 103   85   1.51105   85  2.67 108   85  0.07690
2 3 smaller, and a stress concentration factor exists. If the critical location is not obvious,
prepare a complete bending moment diagram and evaluate at any potentially critical
1 1 locations. Evaluating at the critical shoulder,
q   0.76
a 1  0.07690
1 M  2 kip 10 in   20 kip  in
r 0.0625
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.76(1.95  1)  1.72 Mc M  d / 2  32 M 32  20  203.7
 rev      kpsi
I  d 4 / 64  d 3 d3 d3
Eq. (6-8): S  0.5Sut  0.5(85)  42.5 kpsi
'
e Now we’ll get the notch sensitivity and stress concentration factor. The notch sensitivity
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(85) 0.265  0.832 depends on the fillet radius, which depends on the unknown diameter. For now, we’ll
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879d 0.107  0.879(1.625) 0.107  0.835 estimate a value for q = 0.85 from observation of Fig. 6-20, and check it later.
Eq. (6-26): kc  1
Fig. A-15-9: D / d  1.4d / d  1.4, r / d  0.1d / d  0.1, Kt  1.65
Eq. (6-18): S e  k a kb kc S e'  (0.832)(0.835)(1)(42.5)  29.5 kpsi
Se 29.5 Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.85(1.65  1)  1.55

nf    0.52 Ans.
K f  rev 1.72  32.8 
Infinite life is not predicted. Use the S-N diagram to estimate the life. Now we will evaluate the fatigue strength.
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.867
Se'  0.5(120)  60 kpsi
 f Sut    0.867(85)  184.1
2 2
Eq. (6-14): a ka  2.70(120)0.265  0.76

Se 29.5
1  f Sut  1  0.867(85) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1325
Since the diameter is not yet known, assume a typical value of k b = 0.85 and check later.
3  Se  3  29.5  All other modifiers are equal to one.
1 1 S e = (0.76)(0.85)(60) = 38.8 kpsi
 K   b  (1.72)(32.8)  0.1325
Eq. (6-16):N   f rev      7527 cycles
 a   184.1  Determine the desired fatigue strength from the S-N diagram.
______________________________________________________________________________ Fig. 6-18: f = 0.82
 f Sut    0.82(120)  249.6
2 2
6-19 Table A-20: Sut  120 kpsi, S y  66 kpsi Eq. (6-14): a

Se 38.8
N = (950 rev/min)(10 hr)(60 min/hr) = 570 000 cycles
1  f Sut  1  0.82(120) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1347
One approach is to guess a diameter and solve the problem as an iterative analysis 3  Se  3  38.8 
problem. Alternatively, we can estimate the few modifying parameters that are dependent
on the diameter and solve the stress equation for the diameter, then iterate to check the Eq. (6-13): S f  aN b  249.6(570 000)0.1347  41.9 kpsi
estimates. We’ll use the second approach since it should require only one iteration, since
the estimates on the modifying parameters should be pretty close. Compare strength to stress and solve for the necessary d.

Sf 41.9 (c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8
nf    1.6
K f  rev 1.55  203.7 / d 3  1
nf   1.32 Ans.
d = 2.29 in (25.00 / 40) 2  (25.98 / 60) 2
______________________________________________________________________________
Since the size factor and notch sensitivity were guessed, go back and check them now.
6-21 Se  40 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, Sut  80 kpsi,  m  20 kpsi,  a  10 kpsi,  m   a  0
kb  0.91d 0.157  0.91 2.29 
0.157
Eq. (6-20):  0.80 Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
 a    a2  3 a2   102  3  0  
1/ 2 2 1/2
 10.00 kpsi
Our guess of 0.85 was conservative. From Fig. 6-20 with r = d/10 = 0.229 in, we are off  
the graph, but it appears our guess for q is low. Assuming the trend of the graph
 m     3  2 1/2
  0  3  20  
1/2
2 2 2
 34.64 kpsi
continues, we’ll choose q = 0.91 and iterate the problem with the new values of k b and q. m m
 
Intermediate results are S e = 36.5 kpsi, S f = 39.6 kpsi, and K f = 1.59. This gives
    max    a   m 2  3  a   m 2 
1/2 1/2
 max 2
 3 max
2
 
Sf
 
39.6 1/2
nf    1.6  10  3 20   36.06 kpsi
2 2
K f  rev 1.59   203.7 / d 3 
Sy 60
d = 2.36 in Ans. ny    1.66 Ans.
 max
 36.06
A quick check of k b and q show that our estimates are still reasonable for this diameter.
______________________________________________________________________________ (a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6
1
nf   1.46 Ans.
6-20 Se  40 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, Sut  80 kpsi,  m  15 kpsi,  a  25 kpsi,  m   a  0 (10.00 / 40)  (34.64 / 80)
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses. (b) Gerber, Table 6-7
 a    a2  3a2 
1/2
  252  3  0  
1/2 2
 25.00 kpsi  2
  2
1  80   10.00    2(34.64)(40)  
nf       1  1      1.74 Ans.
 m     3  2 1/2
2 2 1/2
  0  3 15  
2
 25.98 kpsi 2  34.64   40    80(10.00)  

m m
  
    2 1/ 2
  a   m   3  a   m  
1/ 2
 max  3
2 2 2
max max
  (c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8
 
1/ 2
  252  3 152   36.06 kpsi 1
nf   1.59 Ans.
S 60 (10.00 / 40) 2  (34.64 / 60) 2
ny  y   1.66 Ans.
 max
 36.06 ______________________________________________________________________________
(a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6 6-22 S e  40 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, Sut  80 kpsi,  a  10 kpsi,  m  15 kpsi,  a  12 kpsi,  m  0
1 Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
nf   1.05
 a    a2  3 a2 
Ans. 1/ 2
 122  3 10  
1/2 2
(25.00 / 40)  (25.98 / 80)  21.07 kpsi
 
 m    m2  3 m2 
2 1/ 2
  02  3 15  
1/2
(b) Gerber, Table 6-7  25.98 kpsi
 
 2 
 2(25.98)(40)  
2
1  80   25.00  
nf      1  1     1.31 Ans.
2  25.98   40    80(25.00)  
 

    max
 a

1/ 2
Se 40
  a   m   3  a   m  
1/ 2
 max  3 max
2 2
1  nf    0.77
2 2
nf Ans.
  Se  a 51.96
2 1/ 2
 12  0   3 10  15    44.93 kpsi
2
  (c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8

Sy 60
ny    1.34 Ans.
 max
 44.93 nf 
1
 0.77 Ans.
(51.96 / 40) 2
(a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. Since ' m = 0,
1 the stress state is completely reversed and the S-N diagram is applicable for ' a .
nf   1.17 Ans. Fig. 6-18: f = 0.875
(21.07 / 40)  (25.98 / 80)
( f Sut ) 2  0.875(80) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   122.5

(b) Gerber, Table 6-7 Se 40
 2 
 f Sut   0.875(80) 
 2(25.98)(40)   1 1
2
1  80   21.07   b   log 
nf       1  1      1.47 Ans. Eq. (6-15):    log    0.08101
2  25.98   40    80(21.07)  
3  Se  3  40 
  1
 
1/ b
(c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8  51.96  0.08101
Eq. (6-16):N   rev      39 600 cycles Ans.
 a   122.5 
1 ______________________________________________________________________________
nf   1.47 Ans.
(21.07 / 40) 2  (25.98 / 60) 2
______________________________________________________________________________ 6-24 S e  40 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, Sut  80 kpsi,  a  15 kpsi,  m  15 kpsi,  m   a  0
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
S e  40 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, Sut  80 kpsi,  a  30 kpsi,  m   a   a  0
 a    a2  3a2 
1/2
 02  3 15  
6-23 1/2 2
 25.98 kpsi
 
 m     3 
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses. 2 1/ 2
 15  3  0  
1/2
2 2 2
 15.00 kpsi
 
 a   a2  3 a2   02  3  30  
1/2 2 1/2 m m
 51.96 kpsi
 
    max 
1/ 2
  a   m   3  a   m  
1/ 2
2 2 2 2
 
 m     3 
1/2
2
m
2
m  0 kpsi
1/2
 15   3 15    30.00 kpsi
2 2
    max  2 1/ 2
  a   m   3  a   m    
1/ 2
2 2 2
  Sy 60
1/ 2 ny    2.00 Ans.
 3  30    51.96 kpsi
2
   max
 30
Sy 60
ny    1.15 Ans. (a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6
 max
 51.96
1
(a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6 nf   1.19 Ans.
(25.98 / 40)  (15.00 / 80)
1
nf   0.77 Ans. (b) Gerber, Table 6-7
(51.96 / 40)
 2 
 2(15.00)(40)  
2
1  80   25.98  
(b) Gerber criterion of Table 6-7 is only valid for m > 0; therefore use Eq. (6-47). nf       1  1      1.43 Ans.
2  15.00   40    80(25.98)  
 

(c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8 ( f Sut )2  0.87(590)
2
Eq. (6-14): a   1263

Se 208.6
1
nf   1.44 Ans. 1  f Sut  1  0.87(590) 
(25.98 / 40) 2  (15.00 / 60) 2 Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1304
______________________________________________________________________________ 3  Se  3  208.6 
1
 
1/ b
 324.2  0.1304
6-25 Given: Fmax  28 kN, Fmin  28 kN . From Table A-20, for AISI 1040 Eq. (6-16):N   rev      33 812 cycles
 a   1263 
CD, Sut  590 MPa, S y  490 MPa,
N = 34 000 cycles Ans.
Check for yielding
________________________________________________________________________
F 28 000
 max  max   147.4 N/mm2  147.4 MPa
A 10(25  6) 6-26 Sut  590 MPa, S y  490 MPa, Fmax  28 kN, Fmin  12 kN
Sy 490 Check for yielding
ny    3.32 Ans.
 max 147.4 Fmax 28 000
Determine the fatigue factor of safety based on infinite life  max    147.4 N/mm2  147.4 MPa
A 10(25  6)
Sy 490
Eq. (6-8): S e'  0.5(590)  295 MPa ny    3.32 Ans.
 max 147.4
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  4.51(590) 0.265  0.832
Eq. (6-21): kb  1 (axial) Determine the fatigue factor of safety based on infinite life.
Eq. (6-26): kc  0.85 From Prob. 6-25: S e  208.6 MPa, K f  2.2
Eq. (6-18): S e  k a kb kc S e'  (0.832)(1)(0.85)(295)  208.6 MPa Fmax  Fmin 28 000  12 000 
a  K f  2.2  92.63 MPa
2A 2(10)(25  6)
Fig. 6-20: q = 0.83
Fig. A-15-1: d / w  0.24, K t  2.44 Fmax  Fmin  28 000  12 000 
m  K f  2.2    231.6 MPa
K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.83(2.44  1)  2.20 2A  2(10)(25  6) 
Modified Goodman criteria:
Fmax  Fmin 28 000   28 000 
a  K f  2.2  324.2 MPa 1  a  m 92.63 231.6
2A 2(10)(25  6)    
n f Se Sut 208.6 590
Fmax  Fmin
m  K f 0
2A n f  1.20 Ans.
1  a  m 324.2 0
    Gerber criteria:
n f Se Sut 208.6 590
2  2
n f  0.64 1S    2 S 
Ans. n f   ut  a  1  1   m e  
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. Since m = 0, 2   m  Se   Sut  a  
 
the stress state is completely reversed and the S-N diagram is applicable for a .
 2
 2(231.6)(208.6)  
2
1  590  92.63 
   1  1   
S ut = 590/6.89 = 85.6 kpsi 2  231.6  208.6   590(92.63)  
 
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.87 n f  1.49 Ans.

ASME-Elliptic criteria: 1  f Sut  1  0.87(590) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1304
3  Se  3  208.6 
1 1
nf   1
 
1/ b
( a / Se ) 2  ( m / S y ) 2 (92.63 / 208.6)2  (231.6 / 490)2 N   rev 
 223.5  0.1304
  586 000 cycles
Eq. (6-16):  Ans.
 a   1263 
= 1.54 Ans.
The results are consistent with Fig. 6-27, where for a mean stress that is about half of the (b) Fmax  28 kN, Fmin  12 kN
yield strength, the Modified Goodman line should predict failure significantly before the
The maximum load is the same as in part (a), so
other two.
______________________________________________________________________________  max  147.4 MPa
n y  3.32 Ans.
6-27 Sut  590 MPa, S y  490 MPa
Factor of safety based on infinite life:
(a) Fmax  28 kN, Fmin  0 kN
Fmax  Fmin 28 000  12 000
a  K f  2.2  92.63 MPa
Check for yielding 2A 2(10)(25  6)
F F  28 000  12 000 
 max 
Fmax

28 000
 147.4 N/mm2  147.4 MPa  m  K f max min  2.2    231.6 MPa
A 10(25  6) 2A  2(10)(25  6) 
1  a  m 92.63 231.6
Sy 490    
ny    3.32 Ans. n f Se Sut 208.6 590
 max 147.4
n f  1.20 Ans.
From Prob. 6-25: S e  208.6 MPa, K f  2.2
F F 28 000  0 (c) Fmax  12 kN, Fmin  28 kN
 a  K f max min  2.2  162.1 MPa
2A 2(10)(25  6)
The compressive load is the largest, so check it for yielding.
Fmax  Fmin  28 000  0 
m  K f  2.2    162.1 MPa Fmin 28 000
2A  2(10)(25  6)   min    147.4 MPa
A 10(25  6)
1  a  m 162.1 162.1
   
nf Se Sut 208.6 590 S yc 490
ny    3.32 Ans.
 min 147.4
n f  0.95 Ans.
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an Factor of safety based on infinite life:
equivalent completely reversed stress (See Ex. 6-12).
Fmax  Fmin 12 000   28 000 
a  K f  2.2  231.6 MPa
a 162.1 2A 2(10)(25  6)
 rev    223.5 MPa
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (162.1 / 590) Fmax  Fmin 12 000   28 000  
m  K f  2.2    92.63 MPa
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.87
2A  2(10)(25  6) 
( f Sut )2  0.87(590)
2
Eq. (6-14): a   1263 For m < 0, nf 

Se

208.6
 0.90 Ans.
Se 208.6 a 231.6

Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. For a negative 1  f Sut  1  0.775(200) 
mean stress, we shall assume the equivalent completely reversed stress is the same as the Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.228
actual alternating stress. Get a and b from part (a).
3  Se  3  32.1 
1 1
 
1/ b
   35.54  0.228
1/ b
 231.6  0.1304 N   rev    637 000 cycles
Eq. (6-16):N   rev      446 000 cycles Ans. Eq. (6-16):  Ans.
 a   1263   a   748.4 
______________________________________________________________________________
(b) Gerber criterion, Table 6-7
6-28 Eq. (2-21): S ut = 0.5(400) = 200 kpsi
2  2
1S    2 S 
n f   ut  a  1  1   m e  
S e'  0.5(200)  100 kpsi 2   m  Se   Sut  a  
Eq. (6-8):
 
Eq. (6-19): ka  aSutb  14.4(200) 0.718  0.321
 2 
 2(69.54)(32.1)  
2
Eq. (6-25): de  0.37d  0.37(0.375)  0.1388 in 1  200  23.18 
   1  1   
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879d e 0.107  0.879(0.1388) 0.107  1.09 2  69.54  32.1   200(23.18)  
 
 1.16 Infinite life is predicted Ans.
Since we have used the equivalent diameter method to get the size factor, and in doing so
introduced greater uncertainties, we will choose not to use a size factor greater than one. ______________________________________________________________________________
Let k b = 1.
6-29 E  207.0 GPa
Se  (0.321)(1)(100)  32.1 kpsi 1
Eq. (6-18): (a) I  (20)(43 )  106.7 mm 4
40  20 40  20 12
Fa   10 lb Fm   30 lb Fl 3 3EIy
2 2 y  F 3
32 M a 32(10)(12) 3EI l
a    23.18 kpsi 3(207)(109 )(106.7)(1012 )(2)(103 )
d3  (0.375)3 Fmin   48.3 N Ans.
140 (109 )
3
32 M m 32(30)(12)
m    69.54 kpsi
d 3
 (0.375) 3
3(207)(109 )(106.7)(10 12 )(6)(103 )
Fmax   144.9 N Ans.
1403 (10 9 )
(a) Modified Goodman criterion
(b) Get the fatigue strength information.
1  a  m 23.18 69.54
    Eq. (2-21): S ut = =3.4H B = 3.4(490) = 1666 MPa
nf Se Sut 32.1 200 From problem statement: S y = 0.9S ut = 0.9(1666) = 1499 MPa
n f  0.94 Ans. Eq. (6-8): Se  700 MPa
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an Eq. (6-19): k a = 1.58(1666)-0.085 = 0.84
equivalent completely reversed stress (See Ex. 6-12). Eq. (6-25): d e = 0.808[20(4)]1/2 = 7.23 mm
Eq. (6-20): k b = 1.24(7.23)-0.107 = 1.00
a 23.18 Eq. (6-18): S e = 0.84(1)(700) = 588 MPa
 rev    35.54 kpsi
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (69.54 / 200)
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.775 This is a relatively thick curved beam, so
use the method in Sect. 3-18 to find the
( f Sut ) 2  0.775(200) 
2
Eq. (6-14): a   748.4 stresses. The maximum bending moment

Se 32.1 will be to the centroid of the section as
shown.

Outer radius:
M = 142F N·mm, A = 4(20) = 80 mm2, h = 4 mm, r i = 4 mm, r o = r i + h = 8 mm, Since m > 0, we will use the Modified Goodman line.
r c = r i + h/2 = 6 mm   103.6 207.2
1/ n f  a  m  
h 4 Se Sut 588 1666
Table 3-4: rn    5.7708 mm n f  3.33
ln(ro / ri ) ln(8 / 4)
e  rc  rn  6  5.7708  0.2292 mm Infinite life is predicted at both inner and outer radii. Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
ci  rn  ri  5.7708  4  1.7708 mm
co  ro  rn  8  5.7708  2.2292 mm 6-30 From Table A-20, for AISI 1018 CD, Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
Get the stresses at the inner and outer surfaces from Eq. (3-65) with the axial stresses
added. The signs have been set to account for tension and compression as appropriate. Eq. (6-8): Se'  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
Eq. (6-19): k a  2.70(64) 0.265  0.897
i  
Mci F
 
(142 F )(1.7708) F
  3.441F MPa Eq. (6-20): kb  1 (axial)
Aeri A 80(0.2292)(4) 80 Eq. (6-26): kc  0.85
Mco F (142 F )(2.2292) F Se  (0.897)(1)(0.85)(32)  24.4 kpsi
o      2.145F MPa Eq. (6-18):
Aero A 80(0.2292)(8) 80
( i )min  3.441(144.9)  498.6 MPa Fillet:
( i )max  3.441(48.3)  166.2 MPa Fig. A-15-5: D / d  3.5 / 3  1.17, r / d  0.25 / 3  0.083, K t  1.85
( o )min  2.145(48.3)  103.6 MPa Use Fig. 6-20 or Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a) for q. Estimate a little high since it is off the
graph. q = 0.85
( o )max  2.145(144.9)  310.8 MPa
K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.85(1.85  1)  1.72
166.2   498.6 
( i ) a   166.2 MPa
2 Fmax 5
 max    3.33 kpsi
166.2   498.6  w2 h 3.0(0.5)
( i ) m   332.4 MPa 16
2  min   10.67 kpsi
310.8  103.6 3.0(0.5)
( o )a   103.6 MPa
2  max   min 3.33  ( 10.67)
a  K f  1.72  12.0 kpsi
310.8  103.6 2 2
( o ) m   207.2 MPa
2     min   3.33  (10.67) 
 m  K f  max   1.72    6.31 kpsi
To check for yielding, we note that the largest stress is –498.6 MPa (compression) on the  2   2 
inner radius. This is considerably less than the estimated yield strength of 1499 MPa, so
yielding is not predicted. Sy 54
ny    5.06  Does not yield.
 min 10.67
Check for fatigue on both inner and outer radii since one has a compressive mean stress
and the other has a tensile mean stress. Since the midrange stress is negative,
Inner radius: Se 24.4
nf    2.03
S
Since m < 0, n f  e 
588
 3.54 a 12.0
 a 166.2

Hole: Fmax 16
Fig. A-15-1: d / w1  0.4 / 3.5  0.11  K t  2.68
 max    21.3 kpsi
w2 h 1.5(0.5)
Use Fig. 6-20 or Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a) for q. Estimate a little high since it is off the 4
graph. q = 0.85  min   5.33 kpsi
1.5(0.5)
K f  1  0.85(2.68  1)  2.43  max   min 21.3  ( 5.33)
a  K f  1.94  25.8 kpsi
2 2
Fmax 5
 max    3.226 kpsi   max   min   21.3  ( 5.33) 
h  w1  d  0.5(3.5  0.4) m  K f    1.94    15.5 kpsi
 2   2 
Fmin 16
 min    10.32 kpsi
h  w1  d  0.5(3.5  0.4) Sy 54
 max 21.3
 max   min 3.226  ( 10.32)
a  K f  2.43  16.5 kpsi
2 2 Using Modified Goodman criteria,
  max   min   3.226  (10.32)  1  a  m 25.8 15.5
m  K f    2.43    8.62 kpsi    
 2   2  nf Se Sut 24.4 64
Sy 54 n f  0.77
ny    5.23  does not yield
 min 10.32 Hole:
Fig. A-15-1: d / w1  0.4 / 2.5  0.16  K t  2.55
Since the midrange stress is negative, Use Fig. 6-20 or Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a) for q. Estimate a little high since it is off the
graph. q = 0.85
Se 24.4
nf    1.48
a 16.5 K f  1  0.85(2.55  1)  2.32
Thus the design is controlled by the threat of fatigue at the hole with a minimum factor of Fmax 16
safety of n f  1.48. Ans.  max    15.2 kpsi
h  w1  d  0.5(2.5  0.4)
______________________________________________________________________________
Fmin 4
 min    3.81 kpsi
6-31 Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi h  w1  d  0.5(2.5  0.4)
Eq. (6-8): S  0.5(64)  32 kpsi

'
e  max   min  15.2  (3.81) 
a  K f  2.32    22.1 kpsi
Eq. (6-19): k a  2.70(64) 0.265  0.897 2  2 
Eq. (6-20): kb  1 (axial)     min   15.2  (3.81) 
 m  K f  max   2.32    13.2 kpsi
Eq. (6-26): kc  0.85  2   2 
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.897)(1)(0.85)(32)  24.4 kpsi Sy 54
 max 15.2
Fillet:
Fig. A-15-5: D / d  2.5 /1.5  1.67, r / d  0.25 /1.5  0.17, K t  2.1 Using Modified Goodman criteria
Use Fig. 6-20 or Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a) for q. Estimate a little high since it is off the 1  a  m 22.1 13.2
graph. q = 0.85    
nf Se Sut 24.4 64
K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.85(2.1  1)  1.94 n f  0.90

Thus the design is controlled by the threat of fatigue at the fillet with a minimum factor h 3 / 16
rn    0.74608 in
of safety of n f  0.77 Ans. ro 0.84375
ln ln
______________________________________________________________________________ ri 0.65625
6-32 Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi e  rc  rn  0.75  0.74608  0.00392 in

From Prob. 6-30, the fatigue factor of safety at the hole is n f = 1.48. To match this at the ci  rn  ri  0.74608  0.65625  0.08983
fillet,  3  3 
S S 24.4 A       0.035156 in 2
nf  e  a  e   16.5 kpsi  16   16 
a n f 1.48
Eq. (3-65), p. 119,
where S e is unchanged from Prob. 6-30. The only aspect of a that is affected by the
fillet radius is the fatigue stress concentration factor. Obtaining a in terms of K f , Mci T (0.08983)
i    993.3T
 max   min Aeri (0.035156)(0.00392)(0.65625)
3.33  ( 10.67)
a  K f  Kf  7.00 K f
2 2 where T is in lbf·in and  i is in psi.
Equating to the desired stress, and solving for K f , 1

 m  (993.3)T  496.7T
2
 a  7.00 K f  16.5  K f  2.36  a  496.7T
Eq. (6-8): Se'  0.5 110   55 kpsi
Assume since we are expecting to get a smaller fillet radius than the original, that q will
be back on the graph of Fig. 6-20, so we’ll estimate q = 0.8. Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(110) 0.265  0.777
d e  0.808  3 /16  3 /16  
1/2
K f  1  0.80( K t  1)  2.36  K t  2.7 Eq. (6-25):  0.1515 in
kb  0.879  0.1515 
0.107
From Fig. A-15-5, with D / d = 3.5/3 = 1.17 and K t = 2.6, find r / d. Choosing r / d = Eq. (6-20):  1.08 (round to 1)
0.03, and with d = w 2 = 3.0, Eq. (6-19): Se  (0.777)(1)(55)  42.7 kpsi
r  0.03w2  0.03  3.0   0.09 in
For a compressive midrange component,  a  Se / n f . Thus,
At this small radius, our estimate for q is too high. From Fig. 6-20, with r = 0.09, q
should be about 0.75. Iterating, we get K t = 2.8. This is at a difficult range on Fig. A-15- 42.7
0.4967T 
5 to read the graph with any confidence, but we’ll estimate r / d = 0.02, giving r = 0.06 3
in. This is a very rough estimate, but it clearly demonstrates that the fillet radius can be T  28.7 lbf  in
relatively sharp to match the fatigue factor of safety of the hole. Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________ Outer fiber where rc  2.5 in
3
6-33 S y  60 kpsi, Sut  110 kpsi ro  2.5   2.59375
32
Inner fiber where rc  3 / 4 in ri  2.5 
3
 2.40625
3 3 32
ro    0.84375 3 / 16
4 16(2) rn   2.49883
2.59375
3 3 ln
ri    0.65625 2.40625
4 32 e  2.5  2.49883  0.00117 in
co  2.59375  2.49883  0.09492 in
Table 3-4, p. 121,

Mco T (0.09492) Sy 60
o    889.7T psi (c) ny    2.39 Ans.
Aero (0.035156)(0.00117)(2.59375)  max 0.9102(27.6)
1 ______________________________________________________________________________
 m   a  (889.7T )  444.9T psi
2 6-35 K f ,bend  1.4, K f ,axial  1.1, K f ,tors  2.0, S y  300 MPa, Sut  400 MPa, S e  200 MPa
(a) Using Eq. (6-46), for modified Goodman, we have Bending:  m  0,  a  60 MPa
a m 1
  Axial:  m  20 MPa,  a  0
Se Sut n
Torsion:  m  25 MPa,  a  25 MPa
0.4449T 0.4449T 1
  Eqs. (6-55) and (6-56):
42.7 110 3
 a  1.4(60)  0  3 2.0(25)  120.6 MPa

2 2
T  23.0 lbf  in Ans.
 m  0  1.1(20)  3 2.0(25)  89.35 MPa

2 2
(b) Gerber, Eq. (6-47), at the outer fiber,
2
n a  n m  Using Modified Goodman, Eq. (6-46),
  1
Se  Sut  1  a  m 120.6 89.35
   
3(0.4449T )  3(0.4449T ) 
2 nf Se Sut 200 400
  1
42.7  110  n f  1.21 Ans.
Check for yielding, using the conservative  max
   a   m ,
(c) To guard against yield, use T of part (b) and the inner stress.
Sy60 300 Sy
ny    2.14 Ans. ny  
 1.43 Ans.
i
0.9933(28.2)  a   m
120.6  89.35
______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________
6-34 From Prob. 6-33, S e  42.7 kpsi, S y  60 kpsi, and Sut  110 kpsi 6-36 K f ,bend  1.4, K f ,tors  2.0, S y  300 MPa, Sut  400 MPa, Se  200 MPa
Bending:  max  150 MPa,  min  40 MPa,  m  55 MPa,  a  95 MPa
(a) Assuming the beam is straight,
Torsion:  m  90 MPa,  a  9 MPa
Mc M  h / 2  6M 6T Eqs. (6-55) and (6-56):
 max      910.2T
I bh3 /12 bh2 (3 /16)3
 a  1.4(95)  3 2.0(9)  136.6 MPa
2 2
0.4551T 0.4551T 1
   m  1.4(55)  3 2.0(90)  321.1 MPa
2 2
Goodman:
42.7 110 3
Using Modified Goodman,
1  a  m 136.6 321.1
3(0.4551T )  3(0.4551T ) 
2    
 n f Se Sut 200 400
(b) Gerber:  1
42.7  110  n f  0.67 Ans.
   a   m ,

Sy 300 Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
ny    0.66 Ans.
 a   m
136.6  321.1 Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(1.25) 0.107  0.86
Since the conservative yield check indicates yielding, we will check more carefully with Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.86)(32)  24.8 kpsi
with  max
 obtained directly from the maximum stresses, using the distortion energy Using Modified Goodman,
failure theory, without stress concentrations. Note that this is exactly the method used for
static failure in Ch. 5. 1  a  m 15.3 7.67
   
nf Se Sut 24.8 64
 max
   max   3  max   150   3  90  9   227.8 MPa
2 2 2 2
n f  1.36 Ans.
Sy 300 ______________________________________________________________________________
ny    1.32 Ans.
 max
 227.8
Since yielding is not predicted, and infinite life is not predicted, we would like to 6-38 Table A-20: S ut  440 MPa, S y  370 MPa
estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an equivalent completely reversed stress From Prob. 3-69, the critical stress element experiences  = 263 MPa and  = 57.7 MPa.
(See Ex. 6-12). The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving
a = 263 MPa, m = 0, a = 0 MPa, m = 57.7 MPa. Obtain von Mises stresses for the
 a 136.6
 rev    692.5 MPa alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (321.1/ 400)
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
  2632  3  0  
1/ 2
This stress is much higher than the ultimate strength, rendering it impractical for the S-N 2
 263 MPa
diagram. We must conclude that the stresses from the combination loading, when  
 m     3 
1/ 2
 02  3  57.7  
increased by the stress concentration factors, produce such a high midrange stress that the 2 1/ 2 2
2
 99.9 MPa
equivalent completely reversed stress method is not practical to use. Without testing, we m m
 
    max 
are unable to predict a life. 1/2
  2632  3  57.7  
1/ 2
2
2 2
 281 MPa
______________________________________________________________________________  
6-37 Table A-20: S ut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory.
From Prob. 3-68, the critical stress element experiences  = 15.3 kpsi and  = 4.43 kpsi. Sy 370
The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving ny   1.32
 max
 281
a = 15.3 kpsi, m = 0 kpsi, a = 0 kpsi, m = 4.43 kpsi. Obtain von Mises stresses for
the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses. Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5  440   220 MPa

 a    a2  3 a2 
1/2
 15.32  3  0  
1/2 2
 15.3 kpsi
  Eq. (6-19): ka  4.51(440) 0.265  0.90
 m     3 
1/2
  0 2  3  4.43 
1/2
2 2 2
 7.67 kpsi Eq. (6-20): kb  1.24(30) 0.107  0.86
m m
 
Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.86)(220)  170 MPa
   
1/2
 15.32  3  4.43 
1/ 2
 max  3
2
2 2
 17.11 kpsi
max max
 
Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory.
S 1  a  m 263 99.9
ny  y 
54
 3.16    
 max
 17.11 nf Se Sut 170 440
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. n f  0.56 Infinite life is not predicted. Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5  64   32 kpsi

6-39 Table A-20: S ut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi Sy 370
ny    4.57
From Prob. 3-70, the critical stress element experiences  = 21.5 kpsi and  = 5.09 kpsi.  max
 80.9
The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving
a = 21.5 kpsi, m = 0 kpsi, a = 0 kpsi, m = 5.09 kpsi. Obtain von Mises stresses for Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5  440   220 MPa
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
  21.52  3  0  
1/2 2
 21.5 kpsi Eq. (6-19): ka  4.51(440) 0.265  0.90
 
kb  1.24(20) 0.107  0.90
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/ 2 Eq. (6-20):
  0 2  3  5.09  
1/2 2
 8.82 kpsi
  Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.90)(220)  178.2 MPa
    2 1/ 2
  21.5  3  5.09  
1/ 2
 max 2
 3 2 2
 23.24 kpsi
max max
  Using Modified Goodman,
Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory. 1  a  m 72.9 35.2
   
Sy 54 nf Se Sut 178.2 440
ny    2.32
 max
 23.24
n f  2.04 Ans.
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. ______________________________________________________________________________

ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
6-41 Table A-20: S ut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
kb  0.879(1) 0.107  0.88
From Prob. 3-72, the critical stress element experiences  = 35.2 kpsi and  = 7.35 kpsi.
Se  0.90(0.88)(0.5)(64)  25.3 kpsi The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving
Using Modified Goodman, a = 35.2 kpsi, m = 0 kpsi, a = 0 kpsi, m = 7.35 kpsi. Obtain von Mises stresses for
1  a  m 21.5 8.82
   
nf Se Sut 25.3 64
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
 35.22  3  0  
1/2 2
 35.2 kpsi
 
n f  1.01 Ans.
 m    m2  3 m2 
2 1/2
  02  3  7.35  
1/2
 12.7 kpsi
______________________________________________________________________________  
    max 
1/ 2
 35.22  3  7.35  
1/2
2
2 2
 37.4 kpsi
6-40 Table A-20: S ut  440 MPa, S y  370 MPa  
From Prob. 3-71, the critical stress element experiences  = 72.9 MPa and  = 20.3 MPa. Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory.
The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving
a = 72.9 MPa, m = 0 MPa, a = 0 MPa, m = 20.3 MPa. Obtain von Mises stresses for Sy 54
the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses. ny    1.44
 max
 37.4
 a    a2  3 a2 
2 1/2
  72.92  3  0  
1/2
 72.9 MPa
  Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/2
  0 2  3  20.3 
1/2 2
 35.2 MPa
  Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
    max 
1/2
  72.92  3  20.3  ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
1/ 2
2
2 2
 80.9 MPa Eq. (6-19):
 
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(1.25) 0.107  0.86
Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory. Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.86)(32)  24.8 kpsi

Using Modified Goodman, 6-43 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
1  a  m 35.2 12.7 From Prob. 3-74, the critical stress element experiences completely reversed bending
    stress due to the rotation, and steady torsional and axial stresses.
nf Se Sut 24.8 64
 a ,bend  9.495 kpsi,  m ,bend  0 kpsi
n f  0.62 Infinite life is not predicted. Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________  a ,axial  0 kpsi,  m,axial  0.362 kpsi
 a  0 kpsi,  m  11.07 kpsi
6-42 Table A-20: S ut  440 MPa, S y  370 MPa
From Prob. 3-73, the critical stress element experiences  = 333.9 MPa and  = 126.3 Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
MPa. The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady,
giving a = 333.9 MPa, m = 0 MPa, a = 0 MPa, m = 126.3 MPa. Obtain von Mises  a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
  9.495   3  0  
1/2 2 2
 9.495 kpsi
stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.  
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/ 2
  0.362   3 11.07  
1/2 2 2
 19.18 kpsi
 
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
 333.9 2  3  0  
1/2 2
 333.9 MPa
 
    max 
1/ 2
  9.495  0.362   3 11.07  
1/ 2
2 2
2 2
 21.56 kpsi
 
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/ 2
  0 2  3 126.3  
1/ 2 2
 218.8 MPa
 
    max 
1/ 2
 333.9 2  3 126.3 
1/ 2
2
2 2
 399.2 MPa S 54
  ny  y   2.50
 max
 21.56
Sy Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
370
ny    0.93
 max
 399.2 Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
The sample fails by yielding, infinite life is not predicted. Ans. Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(1.13) 0.107  0.87
The fatigue analysis will be continued only to obtain the requested fatigue factor of
safety, though the yielding failure will dictate the life. Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.87)(32)  25.1 kpsi
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. Using Modified Goodman,
1  a  m 9.495 19.18
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(440)  220 MPa    
nf Se Sut 25.1 64
Eq. (6-19): ka  4.51(440) 0.265  0.90
Eq. (6-20): kb  1.24(50) 0.107  0.82 n f  1.47 Ans.
Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.82)(220)  162.4 MPa ______________________________________________________________________________
Using Modified Goodman, 6-44 Table A-20: S ut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi

From Prob. 3-76, the critical stress element experiences completely reversed bending
1  a  m 333.9 218.8
    stress due to the rotation, and steady torsional and axial stresses.
nf Se Sut 162.4 440  a ,bend  33.99 kpsi,  m ,bend  0 kpsi
n f  0.39 Infinite life is not predicted. Ans.  a ,axial  0 kpsi,  m,axial  0.153 kpsi
______________________________________________________________________________  a  0 kpsi,  m  7.847 kpsi

Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses. Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/2
  33.99   3  0  
1/2 2 2
 33.99 kpsi
  Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(440)  220 MPa
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/ 2
  0.153  3  7.847   ka  4.51(440) 0.265  0.90
1/2 2 2
 13.59 kpsi Eq. (6-19):
 
Eq. (6-20): kb  1.24(30) 0.107  0.86
    max 
1/2
  33.99  0.153  3  7.847  
1/ 2
2 2
2 2
 36.75 kpsi Se  0.90(0.86)(220)  170 MPa
  Eq. (6-18):
Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory. Using Modified Goodman,
Sy 54 1  a  m 68.6 65.3
ny    1.47    
 max
 36.75 nf Se Sut 170 440
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. n f  1.81 Ans.

______________________________________________________________________________
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90 6-46 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(0.88) 0.107  0.89 From Prob. 3-79, the critical stress element experiences  = 3.46 kpsi and  = 0.882 kpsi.
Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.89)(32)  25.6 kpsi The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving
a = 3.46 kpsi, m = 0, a = 0 kpsi, m = 0.882 kpsi. Obtain von Mises stresses for the
alternating, mid-range, and maximum stresses.
1  a  m 33.99 13.59  a    a2  3 a2 
1/2
 3.462  3  0  
1/2 2
     3.46 kpsi
25.6 64
 
nf Se Sut
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/2
  02  3  0.882  
1/2 2
 1.53 kpsi
n f  0.65 Infinite life is not predicted. Ans.  
    max 
1/ 2
 3.462  3  0.882  
1/ 2
2
______________________________________________________________________________ 2 2
 3.78 kpsi
 
6-45 Table A-20: S ut  440 MPa, S y  370 MPa Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory.
From Prob. 3-77, the critical stress element experiences  = 68.6 MPa and  = 37.7 MPa.
Sy 54
The bending is completely reversed due to the rotation, and the torsion is steady, giving ny    14.3
a = 68.6 MPa, m = 0 MPa, a = 0 MPa, m = 37.7 MPa. Obtain von Mises stresses for  max
 3.78
 a    a2  3 a2 
1/ 2
  68.6 2  3  0  
1/2 2 Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
 68.6 MPa
 
Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
 m    m2  3 m2 
1/ 2
Eq. (6-8):
  0 2  3  37.7  
1/2 2
 65.3 MPa
  Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
    max  2 1/ 2
  68.6 2  3  37.7    94.7 MPa
1/ 2
 max 2
 3 max
2
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(1.375) 0.107  0.85
 
Check for yielding, using the distortion energy failure theory. Eq. (6-18): Se  0.90(0.85)(32)  24.5 kpsi
S 370
ny  y   3.91 Using Modified Goodman,
 max
 94.7

1  a  m 3.46 1.53
    Eq. (6-24): de  0.370d  0.370 1  0.370 in
nf S e Sut 24.5 64 Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.98
n f  6.06 Ans. Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.90)(0.98)(32)  28.2 kpsi
______________________________________________________________________________ Using Modified Goodman,
1  a  m 13.98 13.98
6-47 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi    
nf S e Sut 28.2 64
Since the load is applied and released repeatedly, this gives max = 16.3 kpsi, min = 0 n f  1.40 Ans.
kpsi,  max = 5.09 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi. Consequently,m = a = 8.15 kpsi, m = a = 2.55 ______________________________________________________________________________
kpsi.
6-48 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
For bending, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a),
Since the load is applied and released repeatedly, this gives max = 16.4 kpsi, min = 0
a  0.246  3.08 103   64   1.51105   64   2.67 108   64   0.10373
2 3
kpsi,  max = 4.46 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi. Consequently,m = a = 8.20 kpsi, m = a = 2.23
1 1 kpsi.
q   0.75
a 1  0.10373
1 For bending, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a),
r 0.1
a  0.246  3.08 103   64   1.51105   64   2.67 108   64   0.10373
2 3
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.75(1.5  1)  1.38
1 1
For torsion, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35b), q   0.75
a  0.190  2.51103   64   1.35 105   64   2.67 108   64   0.07800
2 3 a 1  0.10373
1
r 0.1
1 1
q   0.80 Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.75(1.5  1)  1.38
a 1  0.07800
1
r 0.1
For torsion, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35b),
Eq. (6-32): K fs  1  qs ( K ts  1)  1  0.80(2.1  1)  1.88
a  0.190  2.51103   64   1.35 105   64   2.67 108   64   0.07800
2 3
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and 1 1
q   0.80
(6-56). a 1  0.07800
1
r 0.1

 a  1.38  8.15    3 1.88  2.55 
2

2 1/ 2
 13.98 kpsi Eq. (6-32): K fs  1  qs ( K ts  1)  1  0.80(2.1  1)  1.88
 m   a  13.98 kpsi
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and
   a   m , (6-56).
ny 
Sy

54
 1.93

 a  1.38  8.20    3 1.88  2.23
2

2 1/ 2
 13.45 kpsi
 a   m 13.98  13.98  m   a  13.45 kpsi
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
   a  m ,
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90

Sy 54 Eq. (6-32): K fs  1  qs ( K ts  1)  1  0.80(2.1  1)  1.88
ny    2.01
 a   m 13.45  13.45
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. (6-56).
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi 

 a  1.38 10.15    3 1.88  2.55  
2

2 1/ 2
 16.28 kpsi
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90  m   a  16.28 kpsi

Eq. (6-24): d e  0.370d  0.370(1)  0.370 in Check for yielding, using the conservative  max
   a  m ,
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.98 Sy 54
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.90)(0.98)(32)  28.2 kpsi ny    1.66
 a   m 16.28  16.28
Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit.
1  a  m 13.45 13.45
    Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
nf S e Sut 28.2 64
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
n f  1.46 Ans. Eq. (6-24): d e  0.370d  0.370(1)  0.370 in
______________________________________________________________________________ Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.98
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.90)(0.98)(32)  28.2 kpsi
From Prob. 3-82, the critical stress element experiences repeatedly applied bending, Using Modified Goodman,
axial, and torsional stresses of x,bend = 20.2 kpsi, x,axial = 0.1 kpsi, and  = 5.09 kpsi..
Since the axial stress is practically negligible compared to the bending stress, we will 1  a  m 16.28 16.28
simply combine the two and not treat the axial stress separately for stress concentration    
nf S e Sut 28.2 64
factor and load factor. This gives max = 20.3 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi,  max = 5.09 kpsi, min =
0 kpsi. Consequently,m = a = 10.15 kpsi, m = a = 2.55 kpsi. n f  1.20 Ans.
____________________________________________________________________________
For bending, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a),
a  0.246  3.08 103   64   1.51105   64   2.67 108   64   0.10373
2 3
From Prob. 3-83, the critical stress element on the neutral axis in the middle of the
1 1 longest side of the rectangular cross section experiences a repeatedly applied shear stress
q   0.75
a 1  0.10373 of  max = 14.3 kpsi,  min = 0 kpsi. Thus, m = a = 7.15 kpsi. Since the stress is entirely
1 shear, it is convenient to check for yielding using the standard Maximum Shear Stress
r 0.1
theory.
Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.75(1.5  1)  1.38 S / 2 54 / 2
ny  y   1.89
 max 14.3
For torsion, from Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35b),
a  0.190  2.51103   64   1.35 105   64   2.67 108   64   0.07800
2 3
Find the modifiers and endurance limit.
1 1
q   0.80 Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
a 1  0.07800
1 Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90
r 0.1

The size factor for a torsionally loaded rectangular cross section is not readily available. 
 a  1.47 14.0    3 1.32  7.65  
2

2 1/2
 27.0 kpsi
Following the procedure on p. 289, we need an equivalent diameter based on the 95  m   a  27.0 kpsi
percent stress area. However, the stress situation in this case is nonlinear, as described on
p. 102. Noting that the maximum stress occurs at the middle of the longest side, or with a Check for yielding, using the conservative  max
   a   m ,
radius from the center of the cross section equal to half of the shortest side, we will
Sy 54
simply choose an equivalent diameter equal to the length of the shortest side. ny    1.00
 a   m 27.0  27.0
de  0.25 in Since stress concentrations are included in this quick yield check, the low factor of safety
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879de 0.107  0.879(0.25)0.107  1.02 is acceptable.
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi

We will round down to k b = 1.
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.897
Eq. (6-26): kc  0.59 Eq. (6-24): de  0.370d  0.370 1  0.370 in
Eq. (6-18): S se  0.9(1)(0.59)(32)  17.0 kpsi Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.978
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.897)(0.978)(0.5)(64)  28.1 kpsi
Since the stress is entirely shear, we choose to use a load factor k c = 0.59, and convert the
ultimate strength to a shear value rather than using the combination loading method of
Sec. 6-14. From Eq. (6-54), S su = 0.67S u = 0.67 (64) = 42.9 kpsi.
1  a  m 27.0 27.0
Using Modified Goodman,    
nf Se Sut 28.1 64
1 1
nf    1.70 Ans. n f  0.72 Ans.
( a / S se )  ( m / S su ) (7.15 /17.0)  (7.15 / 42.9)
______________________________________________________________________________
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an
6-51 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi equivalent completely reversed stress (See Ex. 6-12).
From Prob. 3-84, the critical stress element experiences  = 28.0 kpsi and  = 15.3 kpsi.  a 27.0
Since the load is applied and released repeatedly, this gives max = 28.0 kpsi, min = 0  rev    46.7 kpsi
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (27.0 / 64)
kpsi,  max = 15.3 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi. Consequently,m = a = 14.0 kpsi, m = a = 7.65
kpsi. From Table A-15-8 and A-15-9, Fig. 6-18: f = 0.9
( f Sut ) 2  0.9(64)
2
D / d  1.5 / 1  1.5, r / d  0.125 /1  0.125 Eq. (6-14): a   118.07

Se 28.1
K t ,bend  1.60, K t ,tors  1.39
1  f Sut  1  0.9(64) 
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1039
Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35), or Figs. 6-20 and 6-21: q bend = 0.78, q tors = 0.82 3  Se  3  28.1 
Eq. (6-32): 1
K f ,bend  1  qbend  K t ,bend  1  1  0.78 1.60  1  1.47  
1/ b
 46.7  0.1039
Eq. (6-16):N   rev      7534 cycles  7500 cycles Ans.
K f ,tors  1  qtors  K t ,tors  1  1  0.82 1.39  1  1.32  a   118.07 
______________________________________________________________________________
(6-56).

From Prob. 3-85, the critical stress element experiences x,bend = 46.1 kpsi, x,axial = 0.382 Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi
kpsi and  = 15.3 kpsi. The axial load is practically negligible, but we’ll include it to Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.897
demonstrate the process. Since the load is applied and released repeatedly, this gives
max,bend = 46.1 kpsi, min,bend = 0 kpsi, max,axial = 0.382 kpsi, min,axial = 0 kpsi, max = Eq. (6-24): de  0.370d  0.370 1  0.370 in
15.3 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi. Consequently,m,bend = a,bend = 23.05 kpsi, m,axial = a,axial = Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.978
0.191 kpsi, m = a = 7.65 kpsi. From Table A-15-7, A-15-8 and A-15-9, Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.897)(0.978)(0.5)(64)  28.1 kpsi
D / d  1.5 / 1  1.5, r / d  0.125 / 1  0.125
K t ,bend  1.60, K t ,tors  1.39, K t ,axial  1.75
1  a  m 38.45 38.40
   
Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35), or Figs. 6-20 and 6-21: q bend = q axial =0.78, q tors = 0.82 nf Se Sut 28.1 64
Eq. (6-32):
n f  0.51 Ans.
K f ,bend  1  qbend  Kt ,bend  1  1  0.78 1.60  1  1.47
K f ,axial  1  qaxial  Kt ,axial  1  1  0.78 1.75  1  1.59 Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an
K f ,tors  1  qtors  Kt ,tors  1  1  0.82 1.39  1  1.32
 a 38.45
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and  rev    96.1 kpsi
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (38.40 / 64)
(6-56).
1/2
   0.191 
2

2
 a   1.47  23.05  1.59    3 1.32  7.65     38.45 kpsi This stress is much higher than the ultimate strength, rendering it impractical for the S-N
diagram. We must conclude that the fluctuating stresses from the combination loading,
 
0.85 

when increased by the stress concentration factors, are so far from the Goodman line that

 m  1.47  23.05   1.59  0.191   3 1.32  7.65  
2

2 1/ 2
 38.40 kpsi the equivalent completely reversed stress method is not practical to use. Without testing,
we are unable to predict a life.
______________________________________________________________________________
   a   m ,
Sy 54 6-53 Table A-20: Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi
ny    0.70
 a   m 38.45  38.40 From Prob. 3-86, the critical stress element experiences x,bend = 55.5 kpsi, x,axial = 0.382
kpsi and  = 15.3 kpsi. The axial load is practically negligible, but we’ll include it to
Since the conservative yield check indicates yielding, we will check more carefully with demonstrate the process. Since the load is applied and released repeatedly, this gives
with  max
 obtained directly from the maximum stresses, using the distortion energy max,bend = 55.5 kpsi, min,bend = 0 kpsi, max,axial = 0.382 kpsi, min,axial = 0 kpsi, max =
failure theory, without stress concentrations. Note that this is exactly the method used for 15.3 kpsi, min = 0 kpsi. Consequently,m,bend = a,bend = 27.75 kpsi, m,axial = a,axial =
static failure in Ch. 5. 0.191 kpsi, m = a = 7.65 kpsi. From Table A-15-7, A-15-8 and A-15-9,
D / d  1.5 / 1  1.5, r / d  0.125 / 1  0.125
K t ,bend  1.60, K t ,tors  1.39, K t ,axial  1.75
   max,axial   3  max    46.1  0.382   3 15.3  53.5 kpsi
2
 max
 
2 2 2
max,bend
S 54 Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35), or Figs. 6-20 and 6-21: q bend = q axial =0.78, q tors = 0.82
ny  y   1.01 Ans.
 max
 53.5 Eq. (6-32):
This shows that yielding is imminent, and further analysis of fatigue life should not be K f ,axial  1  qaxial  Kt ,axial  1  1  0.78 1.75  1  1.59
interpreted as a guarantee of more than one cycle of life.
K f ,tors  1  qtors  Kt ,tors  1  1  0.82 1.39  1  1.32

Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35), or Figs. 6-20 and 6-21: q bend = 0.76, q tors = 0.81
(6-56). Eq. (6-32):
1/2
   0.191  
2

2
 a   1.47  27.75   1.59    3 1.32  7.65     44.71 kpsi
K f ,tors  1  qtors  Kt ,tors  1  1  0.811.60  1  1.49
 
0.85 


 m  1.47  27.75   1.59  0.191   3 1.32  7.65  
2

2 1/ 2
 44.66 kpsi Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and
(6-56).
Since these stresses are relatively high compared to the yield strength, we will go ahead
and check for yielding using the distortion energy failure theory.

 a  1.72  35.0    3 1.49  0  
2
 2 1/ 2
 60.2 kpsi
   max,axial   3  max    55.5  0.382   3 15.3  61.8 kpsi
2
 max
 
2 2 2
   1.72  0    3 1.49  2.97   

max,bend
2 2 1/ 2
 7.66 kpsi
S 54 m
ny  y   0.87 Ans.
 max
 61.8 Check for yielding, using the conservative  max
   a   m ,
Sy 71
ny    1.05
This shows that yielding is predicted. Further analysis of fatigue life is just to be able to  a   m 60.2  7.66
report the fatigue factor of safety, though the life will be dictated by the static yielding
failure, i.e. N = 1/2 cycle. Ans.
From the solution to Prob. 6-17, S e = 29.5 kpsi. Using Modified Goodman,
Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5  64   32 kpsi 1  a  m 60.2 7.66
   
Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.897 nf Se Sut 29.5 85
Eq. (6-24): de  0.370d  0.370 1  0.370 in
n f  0.47 Ans.
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879 d e 0.107  0.879(0.370) 0.107  0.978
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.897)(0.978)(0.5)(64)  28.1 kpsi
Using Modified Goodman,  a 60.2
 rev    66.2 kpsi
1  a  m 44.71 44.66 1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (7.66 / 85)
   
nf Se Sut 28.1 64
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.867
 f Sut    0.867(85)  184.1
2 2
n f  0.44 Ans. Eq. (6-14): a
______________________________________________________________________________ Se 29.5
6-54 From Table A-20, for AISI 1040 CD, S ut = 85 kpsi and S y = 71 kpsi. From the solution to 1  f Sut  1  0.867(85) 
Prob. 6-17 we find the completely reversed stress at the critical shoulder fillet to be rev = Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1325
3  Se  3  29.5 
35.0 kpsi, producing a = 35.0 kpsi and m = 0 kpsi. This problem adds a steady torque
which creates torsional stresses of 1
 
1/ b
 66.2  0.1325
Eq. (6-16): N   rev     2251 cycles
Tr 2500 1.625 / 2   a   184.1 
m    2967 psi  2.97 kpsi,  a  0 kpsi
J  1.6254  / 32
______________________________________________________________________________
From Table A-15-8 and A-15-9, r/d = 0.0625/1.625 = 0.04, D/d = 1.875/1.625 = 1.15,
K t,bend =1.95, K t,tors =1.60

6-55 From the solution to Prob. 6-18 we find the completely reversed stress at the critical  f Sut   0.867(85)
2 2
shoulder fillet to be rev = 32.8 kpsi, producing a = 32.8 kpsi and m = 0 kpsi. This Eq. (6-14): a   184.1
Se 29.5
problem adds a steady torque which creates torsional stresses of
1  f Sut  1  0.867(85) 
b   log     log    0.1325
Tr 2200 1.625 / 2 
Eq. (6-15):
m    2611 psi  2.61 kpsi,  a  0 kpsi 3  Se  3  29.5 
J  1.6254  / 32
1
 
1/ b
 61.3  0.1325
From Table A-15-8 and A-15-9, r/d = 0.0625/1.625 = 0.04, D/d = 1.875/1.625 = 1.15, Eq. (6-16): N   rev     4022 cycles
 a   184.1 
K t,bend =1.95, K t,tors =1.60
Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35), or Figs. 6-20 and 6-21: q bend = 0.76, q tors = 0.81 N = 4000 cycles Ans.
Eq. (6-32): ______________________________________________________________________________
6-56 Sut  55 kpsi, S y  30 kpsi, K ts  1.6, L  2 ft, Fmin  150 lbf , Fmax  500 lbf
K f ,tors  1  qtors  Kt ,tors  1  1  0.811.60  1  1.49
Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35b), or Fig. 6-21: q s = 0.80
Obtain von Mises stresses for the alternating and mid-range stresses from Eqs. (6-55) and Eq. (6-32): K fs  1  qs  Kts  1  1  0.80 1.6  1  1.48
(6-56).

 a  1.72  32.8   3 1.49  0  
2
 2 1/ 2
 56.4 kpsi
Tmax  500(2)  1000 lbf  in, Tmin  150(2)  300 lbf  in
   1.72  0    3 1.49  2.61  

2 1/ 2 16 K fsTmax 16(1.48)(1000)
2
 6.74 kpsi  max    11 251 psi  11.25 kpsi
m
d3  (0.875)3
   a   m , 16 K fsTmin 16(1.48)(300)
 min    3375 psi  3.38 kpsi
Sy 71 d3  (0.875)3
ny    1.12
 a   m 56.4  6.74  max   min 11.25  3.38
m    7.32 kpsi
2 2
From the solution to Prob. 6-18, S e = 29.5 kpsi. Using Modified Goodman,  max   min 11.25  3.38
a    3.94 kpsi
2 2
1  a  m 56.4 6.74
   
nf Se Sut 29.5 85 Since the stress is entirely shear, it is convenient to check for yielding using the standard
Maximum Shear Stress theory.
n f  0.50 Ans. S / 2 30 / 2
ny  y   1.33
Since infinite life is not predicted, estimate a life from the S-N diagram. First, find an  max 11.25
Find the modifiers and endurance limit.
 a 56.4 Se  0.5(55)  27.5 kpsi
 rev    61.3 kpsi Eq. (6-8):
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (6.74 / 85) Eq. (6-19): k a  14.4(55) 0.718  0.81
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.867 Eq. (6-24): d e  0.370(0.875)  0.324 in
Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(0.324) 0.107  0.99
Eq. (6-26): kc  0.59
Eq. (6-18): S se  0.81(0.99)(0.59)(27.5)  13.0 kpsi

Since the stress is entirely shear, we will use a load factor k c = 0.59, and convert the  a  [(a / 0.85)2  3 a2 ]1/2  [(1.238P / 0.85) 2  3(1.385P) 2 ]1/2  2.81P
ultimate strength to a shear value rather than using the combination loading method of
Sec. 6-14. From Eq. (6-54), S su = 0.67S u = 0.67 (55) = 36.9 kpsi.  m  [ m 2  3 m2 ]1/2  [(1.238P) 2  3(1.385 P)2 ]1/2  2.70 P
(a) Modified Goodman, Table 6-6 Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(145)  72.5 kpsi
1 1 Eq. (6-19): ka  2.70(145)0.265  0.722
nf    1.99 Ans.
( a / S se )  ( m / S su ) (3.94 / 13.0)  (7.32 / 36.9) Eq. (6-20): kb  0.879(1.2) 0.107  0.862
Eq. (6-18): Se  (0.722)(0.862)(72.5)  45.12 kpsi
(b) Gerber, Table 6-7
1  a  m 2.81P 2.70 P 1
2  2 Modified Goodman:     
1S    2 S  n f Se Sut 45.12 145 3
n f   su  a  1  1   m se  
2   m  S se   Ssu a  
  P  4.12 kips Ans.
 2
 2(7.32)(13.0)  
2
1  36.9   3.94   Sy 120
      1  1    Yield (conservative): ny    5.29 Ans.
2  7.32   13.0   36.9(3.94)    a   m
(2.81)(4.12)  (2.70)(4.12)
 
n f  2.49 Ans. ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________ 6-58 From Prob. 6-57, K f  2.80, K f s  1.74, S e  45.12 kpsi
6-57 Sut  145 kpsi, S y  120 kpsi 4 Pmax 4(18)
 max   K f  2.80  44.56 kpsi
From Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35a), or Fig. 6-20, with a notch radius of 0.1 in, q = 0.9. Thus, d2  (1.22 )
with K t = 3 from the problem statement, 4P 4(4.5)
 min   K f min2  2.80  11.14 kpsi
d  (1.2)2
K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.9(3  1)  2.80
 Dd   6  1.2 
4P 2.80(4)( P) Tmax  f Pmax    0.3(18)    9.72 kip  in
 max   K f   2.476 P  4   4 
d 2  (1.2) 2
 Dd   6  1.2 
1 Tmin  f Pmin    0.3(4.5)    2.43 kip  in
 m   a  (2.476 P)  1.238P  4   4 
2 16Tmax 16(9.72)
f PD  d  0.3P  6  1.2   max  K f s  1.74  49.85 kpsi
Tmax    0.54 P d3  (1.2)3
4 4 16Tmin 16(2.43)
 min  K f s  1.74  12.46 kpsi
From Eqs. (6-34) and (6-35b), or Fig. 6-21, with a notch radius of 0.1 in, qs  0.92. Thus, d 3
 (1.2) 3
with K ts = 1.8 from the problem statement, 44.56  (11.14)

a   16.71 kpsi
K fs  1  qs ( K ts  1)  1  0.92(1.8  1)  1.74 2
16 K fsT 44.56  (11.14)
 max 
16(1.74)(0.54 P)
  2.769 P m   27.85 kpsi
d3  (1.2)3 2
 max 49.85  12.46
 a  m  
2.769 P
 1.385 P a   18.70 kpsi
2 2 2
49.85  12.46
Eqs. (6-55) and (6-56): m   31.16 kpsi
2

Eqs. (6-55) and (6-56): 0.9  470  
2
a   1022.5 MPa
 a  [( a / 0.85)2  3 a2 ]1/2  [(16.71/ 0.85) 2  3(18.70) 2 ]1/2  37.89 kpsi 175
1 0.9  470 
 m  [ m 2  3 m2 ]1/2  [(27.85) 2  3(31.16)2 ]1/ 2  60.73 kpsi b   log  0.127 767
3 175
1/0.127 767
1  a  m 37.89 60.73  223.8 
Modified Goodman:     N    145 920 cycles
n f Se Sut 45.12 145  1022.5 
320   200  320   200 
n f = 0.79 Second loading:  m 2   60 MPa,   a 2   260 MPa
2 2
equivalent completely reversed stress (See Ex. 6-12). 260
 a  e 2   298.0 MPa
1  60 / 470
 a 37.89
 rev    65.2 kpsi
1  ( m / Sut ) 1  (60.73 / 145) 1/0.127767
 298.0 
(a) Miner’s method: N2     15 520 cycles
Fig. 6-18: f = 0.8  1022.5 
n1 n2 80 000 n2
 f Sut  0.8(145)  1   1  n2  7000 cycles Ans.
2 2
Eq. (6-14): a   298.2 N1 N 2 145 920 15 520

Se 45.12
1  f Sut  1  0.8(145)  (b) Manson’s method: The number of cycles remaining after the first loading
Eq. (6-15): b   log     log    0.1367
3  Se  3  45.12 
N remaining =145 920  80 000 = 65 920 cycles
1
 
1/ b
 65.2  0.1367 Two data points: 0.9(470) MPa, 103 cycles
Eq. (6-16): N   rev     67 607 cycles
 a   298.2  223.8 MPa, 65 920 cycles
0.9  470  a2 10  3 b2
N = 67 600 cycles Ans. 

a2  65 920  2
b
______________________________________________________________________________ 223.8
1.8901   0.015170  2
b
6-59 For AISI 1020 CD, From Table A-20, S y = 390 MPa, S ut = 470 MPa. Given: S e = 175
MPa. log1.8901
b2   0.151 997
360  160 360  160
First Loading:  m 1   260 MPa,   a 1   100 MPa log 0.015170
2 2 223.8
a2   1208.7 MPa
 65 920 
0.151 997
 a 1 100
Goodman:  a e1    223.8 MPa  Se  finite life 1/ 0.151 997
1   m 1 / Sut 1  260 / 470  298.0 
n2    10 000 cycles
 Ans.
 1208.7 
______________________________________________________________________________
6-60 Given: S e = 50 kpsi, S ut = 140 kpsi, f =0.8. Using Miner’s method,

0.8 140   a2 103 
2 b2
0.9  530 
a   250.88 kpsi   1.3629   0.11696  2
b
a2  8550  2
b
50 350
1 0.8 140 
b   log  0.116 749
3 50 log 1.362 9 
1/ 0.116 749 b2   0.144 280
1  95 kpsi,
 95 
N1    4100 cycles log  0.116 96 

 250.88  350
1/ 0.116 749 a2   1292.3 MPa
8550 
0.144 280
 80 
 2  80 kpsi, N2     17 850 cycles
 250.88  1/0.144 280
 260 
1/ 0.116 749 N2     67 090 cycles
 65   1292.3 
 3  65 kpsi, N3     105 700 cycles
 250.88  N R 2  67 090  50 000  17 090 cycles
0.2 N 0.5 N 0.3N

   1  N  12 600 cycles Ans. 0.9  530  a3 10  3 b3
  1.834 6   0.058 514  2

b
4100 17 850 105 700
a3 17 090  3
b
______________________________________________________________________________ 260
6-61 Given: S ut = 530 MPa, S e = 210 MPa, and f = 0.9. log 1.834 6  260
(a) Miner’s method b3   0.213 785, a3   2088.7 MPa
log  0.058 514  17 090 
0.213 785
 0.9  530  
2
a   1083.47 MPa
210 1/0.213 785
 225 
1 0.9  530  N3     33 610 cycles Ans.
b   log  0.118 766  2088.7 
3 210 ______________________________________________________________________________
1/ 0.118 766
 350  6-62 Given: S e = 45 kpsi, S ut = 85 kpsi, f = 0.86, and a = 35 kpsi and m = 30 kpsi for 12
1  350 MPa, N1     13 550 cycles
 1083.47  (103) cycles.
1/ 0.118 766 a 35
 260  Gerber equivalent reversing stress:  rev    39.98 kpsi
 2  260 MPa, N 2     165 600 cycles 1   m / Sut  1   30 / 85 
2 2

1083.47 
1/ 0.118 766 (a) Miner’s method: rev < S e . According to the method, this means that the endurance
 225 
 3  225 MPa, N 3     559 400 cycles limit has not been reduced and the new endurance limit is Se = 45 kpsi. Ans.
 1083.47 
n1 n2 n3
  1 (b) Manson’s method: Again, rev < S e . According to the method, this means that the
N1 N 2 N 3 material has not been damaged and the endurance limit has not been reduced. Thus,
5000 50 000 n3 the new endurance limit is Se = 45 kpsi. Ans.
   184 100 cycles Ans.
13 550 165 600 559 400 ______________________________________________________________________________
(b) Manson’s method: 6-63 Given: S e = 45 kpsi, S ut = 85 kpsi, f = 0.86, and a = 35 kpsi and m = 30 kpsi for 12
The life remaining after the first series of cycling is N R1 = 13 550  5000 = 8550 (103) cycles.
cycles. The two data points required to define S e,1 are [0.9(530), 103] and (350, 8550). a 35
Goodman equivalent reversing stress:  rev    54.09 kpsi
1   m / Sut  1   30 / 85 
Initial cycling

 0.86  85  
2
a   116.00 kpsi 6-65 A Priori Decisions:

45
1 0.86  85  • Material and condition: 1020 CD, S ut = 68 LN(1, 0.28), and
b   log  0.070 235
3 45 S y = 57 LN(1, 0.058) kpsi
• Reliability goal: R = 0.99 (z =  2.326, Table A-10)
1/ 0.070 235 • Function:
 54.09 
1  54.09 kpsi, N1     52 190 cycles Critical location—hole
 116.00  • Variabilities:
(a) Miner’s method (see discussion on p. 325): The number of remaining cycles at 54.09 Cka  0.058
kpsi is N remaining = 52 190  12 000 = 40 190 cycles. The new coefficients are b = b,
Ckc  0.125
and a =S f /Nb = 54.09/(40 190)  0.070 235 = 113.89 kpsi. The new endurance limit is
CSe  0.138
Se,1  aN eb  113.89 10 
6  0.070 235
 43.2 kpsi  
1/2
Ans. CSe  Cka2  Ckc2  CS2e  (0.0582  0.1252  0.1382 )1/2  0.195
CKf  0.10
(b) Manson’s method (see discussion on p. 326): The number of remaining cycles at
54.09 kpsi is N remaining = 52 190  12 000 = 40 190 cycles. At 103 cycles, CFa  0.20
S f = 0.86(85) = 73.1 kpsi. The new coefficients are C a  (0.102  0.202 )1/2  0.234
b = [log(73.1/54.09)]/log(103/40 190) =  0.081 540 and a = 1 / (N remaining ) b =
54.09/(40 190)  0.081 540 = 128.39 kpsi. The new endurance limit is CSe2  C2a 0.1952  0.2342
Cn    0.297
1  C2a 1  0.2342
Se,1  aN eb  128.39 106 
 0.081 540
 41.6 kpsi Ans.
Resulting in a design factor n f of,
______________________________________________________________________________
6-64 Given S ut =1030LN(1, 0.0508) MPa Eq. (6-59): n f  exp[(2.326) ln(1  0.297 2 )  ln 1  0.297 2 ]  2.05
• Decision: Set n f = 2.05
From Table 6-10: a = 1.58, b =  0.086, C = 0.120
Eq. (6-72) and Table 6-10): k a  1.58 1030  LN 1, 0.120   0.870LN 1, 0.120 
0.086
Now proceed deterministically using the mean values:
k a  2.67  68 
0.265
From Prob. 6-1: k b = 0.97 Table 6-10:  0.873
Eq. (6-21): kb = 1
Eqs. (6-70) and (6-71): S e = [0.870LN(1, 0.120)] (0.97) [0.506(1030)LN(1,
kc  1.23  68 
0.138)] 0.0778
Table 6-11:  0.886
S e  0.870 (0.97)(0.506)(1030) = 440 MPa

Eq. (6-70): Se  0.506  68   34.4 kpsi
and, C Se  (0.122 + 0.1382)1/2 = 0.183

Eq. (6-71): Se  0.873 1 0.886  34.4  26.6 kpsi
S e =440LN(1, 0.183) MPa Ans.
______________________________________________________________________________ From Prob. 6-14, K f = 2.26. Thus,

Fa Fa F S   1 C2 
a  K f  Kf  Kf a  e ln  S 

A t  2.5  0.5  2t n f   1  CS2 
z  
2.05  2.26  3.8
ln 1  CS 1  C2  
n f K f Fa  2
t    0.331 in
2Se 2  26.6 
Decision: Use t = 3
8
in Ans. ln  263.8 / 152 

1  0.15  / 1  0.15  
2 2
  2.61
ln 1  0.152 1  0.152  
______________________________________________________________________________
6-66 Rotation is presumed. M and S ut are given as deterministic, but notice that  is not; From Table A-10, p f = 0.004 53. Thus, R = 1  0.004 53 = 0.995 Ans.
therefore, a reliability estimation can be made.
Note: The correlation method uses only the mean of S ut ; its variability is already
From Eq. (6-70): S e = 0.506(780)LN(1, 0.138) = 394.7 LN(1, 0.138) included in the 0.138. When a deterministic load, in this case M, is used in a reliability
estimate, engineers state, “For a Design Load of M, the reliability is 0.995.” They are, in
Table 6-13: k a = 4.45(780) 0.265LN(1, 0.058) = 0.762 LN(1, 0.058) fact, referring to a Deterministic Design Load.
Based on d = 32  6 = 26 mm, Eq. (6-20) gives ______________________________________________________________________________
 0.107 6-67 For completely reversed torsion, k a and k b of Prob. 6-66 apply, but k c must also be
 26 
kb     0.877 considered. Sut = 780/6.89 = 113 kpsi
 7.62 
Eq. 6-74: k c = 0.328(113)0.125LN(1, 0.125) = 0.592LN(1, 0.125)
Note 0.590 is close to 0.577.
Conservatism is not necessary
S e  k a kbk cSe
S e  0.762LN 1, 0.058   (0.877)(394.7)  LN(1, 0.138)
 0.762[LN(1, 0.058)](0.877)[0.592LN(1, 0.125)][394.7LN(1, 0.138)]
Se  263.8 MPa
Se  0.762(0.877)(0.592)(394.7)  156.2 MPa
CSe  (0.0582  0.1382 )1/2  0.150
CSe  (0.0582  0.1252  0.1382 )1/2  0.195
S e  263.8LN(1, 0.150) MPa
S e  156.2LN(1, 0.195) MPa
Fig. A-15-14: D/d = 32/26 = 1.23, r/d = 3/26 = 0.115. Thus, K t  1.75, and Eq. (6-78)
Fig. A-15-15: D/d = 1.23, r/d = 0.115, then K ts  1.40. From Eq. (6-78) and
and Table 6-15 gives
Kt 1.75 Table 7-8
Kf    1.64 K ts 1.40
2  K t  1 a 2 1.75  1 104 / 780 K fs    1.34
1 1 2  K ts  1 a 2 1.40  1 104 / 780
Kt r 1.75 3 1 1
K ts r 1.40 3
From Table 6-15, C Kf = 0.15. Thus,
From Table 6-15, C Kf = 0.15. Thus,
K f = 1.64LN(1, 0.15)
K fs = 1.34LN(1, 0.15)
The bending stress is
The torsional stress is
32M  32(160) 
 Kf  1.64LN(1, 0.15)  3 16T  16 160  
d3   (0.026)    K fs  1.34LN(1, 0.15)  3
d3    0.026  
 152 106  LN(1, 0.15) Pa  152LN (1, 0.15) MPa
From Eq. (5-43), p. 250,  62.1106  LN(1, 0.15) Pa  62.1LN(1, 0.15) MPa

From Eq. (5-43), p. 250, 2.20LN(1, 0.10)
Kf   1.83LN(1, 0.10)
2  2.20  1 5 / 76
1
ln (156.2 / 62.1) (1  0.152 ) / (1  0.1952 )  2.20 0.125
z    3.75
ln[(1  0.1952 )(1  0.152 )]
Table A-16:
 AD3  (0.80)(1.53 )
From Table A-10, p f = 0.000 09 Z net    0.265 in 3
32 32
R = 1  p f = 1  0.000 09 = 0.999 91 Ans.
M  1.5 
 Kf  1.83LN(1, 0.10)  
For a design with completely-reversed torsion of 160 N · m, the reliability is 0.999 91. Z net  0.265 
The improvement over bending comes from a smaller stress-concentration factor in  10.4LN (1, 0.10) kpsi
torsion. See the note at the end of the solution of Prob. 6-66 for the reason for the
  10.4 kpsi
phraseology.
______________________________________________________________________________ C  0.10
ln (23.2 /10.4) (1  0.102 ) / (1  0.1762 ) 
6-68 Eq. (5-43), p. 250: z    3.94
ln[(1  0.1762 )(1  0.102 )]
Table A-10: p f = 0.000 041 5  R = 1  p f = 1  0.000 041 5 = 0.999 96 Ans.

______________________________________________________________________________
6-69 From Prob. 6-68: S e = 23.2 LN(1, 0.138) kpsi

Given: S ut = 58 kpsi.
k a = 0.644LN(1, 0.11)
Eq. (6-70): S e = 0.506(76) LN(1, 0.138) = 38.5 LN(1, 0.138) kpsi
k b = 0.936
Table 6-13: k a = 14.5(76) 0.719 LN(1, 0.11) = 0.644 LN(1, 0.11) Eq. (6-74): k c = 0.328(76)0.125LN(1, 0.125) = 0.564 LN(1, 0.125)
Eq. (6-24): d e = 0.370(1.5) = 0.555 in Eq. (6-71): S e = [0.644LN(1, 0.11)](0.936)[ 0.564 LN(1, 0.125)][ 23.2 LN(1, 0.138)]
Eq. (6-20): k b = (0.555/0.3)0.107 = 0.936
Se  0.644  0.936  0.564  23.2   7.89 kpsi
Eq. (6-70): S e = [0.644 LN(1, 0.11)](0.936)[38.5 LN(1, 0.138)]
C Se = (0.112 +0.1252 + 0.1383)1/2 = 0.216
Se  0.644  0.936  38.5  23.2 kpsi
Table A-16: d/D = 0, a/D = (3/16)/1.5 = 0.125, A = 0.89, K ts = 1.64
From Eqs. (6-78) and(7-79), and Table 6-15
C Se = (0.112 + 0.1382)1/2 = 0.176
1.64LN (1, 0.10)
S e =23.2 LN(1, 0.176) kpsi Kfs   1.40LN (1, 0.10)
2 1.64  1 5 / 76
1
Table A-16: d/D = 0, a/D = (3/16)/1.5 = 0.125, A = 0.80  K t = 2.20. 1.64 3 / 32
From Eqs. (6-78) and (6-79) and Table 6-15

Table A-16: In Prob. 6-30, it was found that the hole was the significant location that controlled the
 AD 4  (0.89)(1.54 ) analysis. Thus,
J net    0.4423 in 4 S
32 32 a  e
Ta D 2(1.5) n
a  K f  1.40[LN (1, 0.10)]  4.75LN (1, 0.10) kpsi
2  0.4423 S Fa S
s
2 J net a  e  K f  e
n h  w1  d  n
From Eq. (6-57):
ln(7.89 / 4.75) (1  0.102 ) / (1  0.2162 ) We need to determine S e
z  2.08
ln[(1  0.102 )(1  0.2162 )]
ka  2.67 Sut-0.265  2.67(64) -0.265  0.887
Table A-10, p f = 0.0188, R = 1  p f = 1  0.0188 = 0.981 Ans.
kb = 1
______________________________________________________________________________
kc  1.23Sut 0.0778  1.23(64)  0.0778  0.890
6-70 This is a very important task for the student to attempt before starting Part 3. It illustrates kd  ke  1
the drawback of the deterministic factor of safety method. It also identifies the a priori S e  0.887(1)(0.890)(1)(1)(0.506)(64)  25.6 kpsi
decisions and their consequences.
The range of force fluctuation in Prob. 6-30 is  16 to + 5 kip, or 21 kip. Let the
From the solution to Prob. 6-30, the stress concentration factor at the hole is K t = 2.68.
repeatedly-applied F a be 10.5 kip. The stochastic properties of this heat of AISI 1018 CD
From Eq. (6-78) and Table 6-15
are given in the problem statement.
2.68
Function Consequences Kf   2.20
2  2.68  1 5 / 64
Axial F a = 10.5 kip 1
Fatigue load C Fa = 0 2.68 0.2
C kc = 0.125 K f nFa 2.20(2.02)(10.5)
Overall reliability R ≥ 0.998; z =  3.09 h   0.588 Ans.
 w1  d  Se  3.5  0.4  (25.6)
with twin fillets C Kf = 0.11
______________________________________________________________________________
R  0.998  0.999
Cold rolled or machined C ka = 0.058 6-71
surfaces Fa  1200 lbf
Ambient temperature C kd = 0
Use correlation method C  0.138 Sut  80 kpsi
Stress amplitude C Kf = 0.11
(a) Strength
C  a = 0.11
Significant strength S e CSe  (0.0582  0.1252  0.1382 )1/2  0.195 k a = 2.67(80) 0265LN(1, 0.058) = 0.836 LN(1, 0.058)
Choose the mean design factor which will meet the reliability goal. From Eq. (6-88) kb = 1
0.1952  0.112 k c = 1.23(80) 0.0778LN(1, 0.125) = 0.875 LN(1, 0.125)

Cn   0.223
1  0.112
n  exp  (3.09) ln(1  0.2232 )  ln 1  0.2232 
 
n  2.02

www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com ©
Se  0.506(80)LN(1, 0.138)  40.5LN(1, 0.138) kpsi
S e   0.836LN (1, 0.058)  (1)  0.875LN(1, 0.125)  40.5LN(1, 0.138) 
Se  0.836(1)(0.875)(40.5)  29.6 kpsi
CSe  (0.0582  0.1252  0.1382 )1/2  0.195
Stress: Fig. A-15-1; d/w = 0.75/1.5 = 0.5, K t = 2.18. From Eqs. (6-78), (6-79) and
Table 6-15
2.18LN(1, 0.10)
Kf   1.96LN(1, 0.10)
2  2.18  1 5 / 80
1
2.18 0.375
Fa
a  K f , C  0.10
( w  d )t
K f Fa 1.96(1.2)
a    12.54 kpsi
( w  d )t (1.5  0.75)(0.25)
S a  Se  29.6 kpsi
ln ( S a /  a ) 1  C2  1  CS2  
z  
ln 1  C2 1  CS2  
ln  29.6 /12.48  1  0.102  / 1  0.1952  

    3.9
ln 1  0.102 1  0.1952  
From Table A-20, p f = 4.81(10 5)  R = 1  4.81(10 5) = 0.999 955 Ans.
(b) All computer programs will differ in detail.

______________________________________________________________________________
6-72 to 6-78 Computer programs are very useful for automating specific tasks in the design
process. All computer programs will differ in detail.
Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 66/66

www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com ©

Chapter 6 Solutions 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 6 Solutions 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.com © www.iranmanufacturing.rozblog.

6-1 Eq. (2-21): Sut  3.4 H B  3.4(300)  1020 MPa

6-2 (a) Table A-20: S ut = 80 kpsi

‫مهندسی مکانیک و ساخت و تولید مرجع تخصصی دروس و نرمافزارهای مهندسی‬

Eq. (6-14): a   161.4 kpsi

Eq. (6-14): a   2168.3 MPa

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 1/66

Eq. (6-14): a   313.6 kpsi

 S f  Sut N (log f )/3 1  N  103

log S1  log a  b log N1

Eq. (6-14): a   1373 MPa log S2  log a  b log N 2

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 2/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 3/66

Se  0.5(110)  55 kpsi 1 1

kb  0.879d 0.107  0.879(1.5) 0.107  0.842 Tr K fs 16T 1.32(16)(1800)

For AISI 1040: Eq. (6-54): S su = 0.67 S ut = 0.67(68) = 45.6 kpsi

kb  0.907 (same as 4340) Eq. (6-14): a

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 4/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 5/66

M max  (2000 N)(0.6 m)  1200 N  m

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 6/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 7/66

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 8/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 9/66

6-18 From a free-body diagram analysis, the

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 10/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 11/66

Se 29.5 Eq. (6-32): K f  1  q ( K t  1)  1  0.85(1.65  1)  1.55

Eq. (6-14): a ka  2.70(120)0.265  0.76

6-19 Table A-20: Sut  120 kpsi, S y  66 kpsi Eq. (6-14): a

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 12/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 13/66

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 14/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 15/66

  (c) ASME-Elliptic, Table 6-8

Eq. (6-14): a   122.5

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 16/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 17/66

Eq. (6-14): a   1263

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 18/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 19/66

Eq. (6-14): a   1263 For m < 0, nf 

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 20/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 21/66

Eq. (6-14): a   748.4 stresses. The maximum bending moment

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 22/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 23/66

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 24/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 25/66

Eq. (6-8): S  0.5(64)  32 kpsi

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 26/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 27/66

6-32 Sut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi e  rc  rn  0.75  0.74608  0.00392 in

Equating to the desired stress, and solving for K f , 1

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 28/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 29/66

 a  1.4(60)  0  3 2.0(25)  120.6 MPa

 m  0  1.1(20)  3 2.0(25)  89.35 MPa

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 30/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 31/66

Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5  440   220 MPa

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 32/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 33/66

Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. ______________________________________________________________________________

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 34/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 35/66

Using Modified Goodman, 6-44 Table A-20: S ut  64 kpsi, S y  54 kpsi

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 36/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 37/66

Obtain the modifying factors and endurance limit. n f  1.81 Ans.

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 38/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 39/66

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 40/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 41/66

Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi 

Eq. (6-19): k a  aSutb  2.70(64) 0.265  0.90  m   a  16.28 kpsi

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 42/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 43/66

Eq. (6-8): Se  0.5(64)  32 kpsi

D / d  1.5 / 1  1.5, r / d  0.125 /1  0.125 Eq. (6-14): a   118.07

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 44/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 45/66

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 46/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 47/66

   1.72  0    3 1.49  2.97   

Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 48/66 Chapter 6 - Rev. A, Page 49/66

   1.72  0    3 1.49  2.61  