MECH323-01

Machine Design





Design Project 1
Report Submitted to
Dr. Frank S. Henry











James Buser
Submitted on September 26, 2013
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 3
ANALYSIS 3
RESULTS & DISCUSSION 4
CONCLUSION 4
APPENDICES 5
REFERENCES 5


Introduction

The primary objective of this design project was to determine the smallest
possible diameter the shaft can have without any failure occurring due to the
applied loads as shown on the project instructions. Because of the irregular design
of the shaft and attached rod, there will be areas that have a higher stress than the
rest of the structure. In order to avoid calculating the equivalent stress at many
different points, I initially analyzed the structure and loads and determined where
the maximum equivalent stress will occur. The material of the structure was
assumed to be Steel 1010A, and the properties for that material were obtained from
Appendix C-2 in the textbook. After gathering all of the required data needed to
solve the problem, the next step was determining which method to use to solve the
problem. The Maximum-Distortion Energy Theory for Ductile Yielding method was
used because for this specific problem yielding is considered failure of the system
and this method is the most accurate for this scenario.

The details and intricacies of the Maximum-Distortion Energy Theory for
Ductile Yielding method along with all of the other necessary assumptions and
calculations will be further explained throughout this paper.
Analysis

In the design project instructions we were told to assume this is a static
loading problem, the rectangular bar does not deflect, the safety factor is 2, and that
stress concentrations can be neglected. Because the rectangular bar does not deflect,
the applied force P1 can be viewed as an axial load on the shaft. Another crucial
assumption that was made was the location of the maximum equivalent stress in the
shaft. Because the bending stress is substantially larger than the shear stress, it is
assumed that the maximum stress will occur where the bending stress is largest,
which is at the perimeter of the shaft. At the perimeter of the shaft, the shear stress
due to bending is equal to zero and can be ignored. Due to this, the maximum
equivalent stress will occur at the top of the shaft (parallel to the y-axis and directly
above the x-axis). The stress at the top of the shaft is also slightly larger than the
stress at the bottom of the shaft due to the direction and magnitude of the applied
loads. The stress at either side of the shaft is smaller than stress at both the top and
bottom because those points are not on the y-axis so the shear stress due to bending
cannot be neglected, which leads to a smaller possible shaft diameter.

Another important assumption I made that would dramatically impact the
answer was that failure was considered to occur at yielding instead of fracture. If
fracture were considered failure instead of yielding, the minimum allowable shaft
diameter would dramatically decrease.


Results & Discussion

The main concept behind the Maximum-Distortion Energy Theory for Ductile
Yielding involves finding the equivalent stress at the top of the shaft and then
relating it to the safety factor that was given in the design instructions. The safety
factor for this method is equal to the equivalent stress divided by the yield strength
of the 1010A Steel, and because we already know the safety factor (SF=2) and yield
strength (Sy=200 MPa), we can solve for the equivalent stress, which is found to be
400 MPa. Using the equations and theories outlined in chapter 6.8 of the textbook, I
was then able to construct an equation for the equivalent stress. Then the equivalent
stress equation was set equal to 400 MPa and solved for the radius (r). The reason
we used the point with the highest stress is because if we use the equivalent stress
at another point we will get a smaller possible radius of the shaft but even though
the shaft will not fail for most of the shaft, failure will occur at the point where the
maximum stress occurs.

The results and calculations are shown in the Appendices section in addition
to this section. From the given information I was able to calculate the Force (F),
Shear Force (V), Torque (T), and the moment about each axis (Mx, My, Mz). Then
applying the equations for the moments of inertia and the area of the shaft, the
equation for the equivalent stress was complete except for the radius. Solving this
equation for the radius produced a minimum allowable radius of 14.5122 mm,
which would make the minimum allowable diameter 29.0244 mm. This means that
if the shaft has a diameter greater than 29.0244 mm, no failure will occur at any
point of the shaft. The equations and variables mentioned in this section will be
more clearly displayed in the Appendices section of this report.
Conclusion

For the purposes of this design project, I am going to assume that the
direction and magnitudes of the loads cannot be changed to improve the design. So
excluding the possibility of altering the applied loads, some alterations that could be
made to improve the design include changing the length of the shaft to allow the
minimum allowable diameter to increase/decrease, selecting a material with a
higher yield strength than 1010A Steel to strengthen the design, or decreasing the
safety factor so a smaller minimum diameter will be permissible. These potential
design alterations cannot appropriately be analyzed without knowing engineering
factors such as economic restrictions and the intended use of the design. Depending
on the requirements of these factors, it might be possible to use a stronger, but more
expensive, material or decrease the length of the shaft to reduce the minimum
allowable diameter.



References

Juvinal, Robert C., Marshek, Kurt M., Fundamentals of Machine Component Design, 5
th

Edition, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2012.
Appendices

F P
1
2000 N
V F
2
3500 N
M
x
0
M
y
P
1
0.5L
B
250 N m
M
z
P
2
L
S
875 N m
T P
2
0.5L
B
437.5 N m

e
SF S
y
2 200 MPa 400 MPa

e

xy
( )
2
+3
xy
( )
2

e

F
A

M
z
r
I
z

2
+3
T r
J
c

2
400 MPa
2000 N
r
2

(875 N m) r
0.25 r
4

2
+3
(437.5 N m) r
0.5 r
4

2
400 MPa
r 0.0145122 m 14.1522 mm
d 2r 0.0290244 m 29.0244 mm