Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

Chapter 7
Factors of Safety

Screen Titles

Purpose and Definition

Items Effecting Factor of Safety
Variation Scenario – 1
Variation Scenario – 2
Modified Theories of Failure
Generic Factors of Safety
Actual Load Distribution
Load Capability Distribution
Difference of Distribution
Gaussian (Normal) Distribution
Transformation of Variables
Transformation of Normal Distribution
Application to Lc-L Distribution
Determination of tf
Sample Problem
Problem Solution
Alternate form for n
No Failure Scenario
Review Exercise
Off Line Exercises
Off Line Exercises

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 145 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 146 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
1. Title page
Chapter 7 deals with the subject of the factor of
safety in design from both a classical and
statistical point of view. The presentation begins
with a consideration of the purpose of
introducing this concept and its definition in a
classical sense. This is followed by looking at
factors that influence its impact on a design and
how it is included in the established theories of
static failure. Some recommendations for factors
of safety based on generically defined design
scenarios are presented and discussed. The
chapter content then takes up how a statistical
treatment can be used in very large part
populations to predict required factors of safety
in terms of the properties of the sample’s
statistical representation. A number of exercise
problems are included to demonstrate the
application of the concepts and principles
discussed.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 147 -
2. Page Index
Listed on this page are all the individual pages in
Chapter 7 with the exception of the exercise
problems. Each page title is hyperlinked to its
specific page and can be accessed by clicking
on the title. It is suggested that the reader first
proceed through all pages sequentially. Clicking
on the text button at the bottom of the page
provides a pop up window with the text for that
page. The text page is closed by clicking on the
x in the top right corner of the frame. Clicking on
the index button returns the presentation to the
page index of chapter 7.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
3. Purpose and Definition
The term “factor of safety” is ubiquitous in the
practice of design. Everyone seems to know
and appreciate what it means generically but
similarly find it difficult to specify what it should
be in a given situation. It has been called the
“factor of ignorance” or the “factor of uncertainty”
by many. The second designation is probably
the more accurate. Another sense of its
importance is summarized in the couplet “If in
doubt make it stout”. One of the better ways to
begin its study is to look at what might be
considered its principal purpose in design. This
can be simply stated as “the concept of factor of
safety is introduced into design for the purpose
of minimizing the risk of potential part failure”.
This risk of potential failure is a direct
consequence of the approximate analytical
techniques used to determine load and strength
levels and the uncertainty and variability in the
values used in the numerical calculations
involved. Classically this is incorporated in a
simple analytical definition that states that the
factor of safety is equal to the material strength
of a part divided by the working stress that the
part is designed to carry. Thus, if the factor of
safety is two it simply means that it is anticipated
that the part can be subjected to effectively twice
the load it was designed for before the design
criteria of either yielding or fracture, whichever
has been chosen, will be exceeded in a static
application.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 148 -
4. Items Effecting Factor of Safety
The natural variations and the level of
confidence in understanding and knowing the
extent of these variations in four specific areas
give rise to the need and utility of a factor of
safety to meet the purpose cited on the previous
page. The first is the mathematical model with
its included assumptions used to calculate the
working stress in the part. For example, is
simple bending theory based on elastic behavior
appropriate to determine the bending stress in
the part under consideration? The second area
is the geometry of the part. This is
characterized by the variability in the dimensions
of the part as dictated by how it was physically
processed into its final shape. In other words
how close are the final dimensions to those used
in calculating the working stress? The third
area is the degree of certainty of the magnitude
of the applied loads. Is there some question
about the level of overloading the part may be
subjected to or the direction in which the load
may be applied? Finally, there is the area of the
strength properties of the material from which
the part will be made. How accurately are the
material properties known and what is the
degree of their variability?
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
5. Variation Scenario - 1
To determine the effect of variations of
parameters associated with the areas discussed
on the previous page consider the following
numerical example. A bending moment of
10,000 in. lbs. plus or minus 500 in. lbs. acts on
a rectangular cross section beam with nominal
dimensions of 2 in. by 1 in. The width is only
known to within plus or minus 1/16 inch and the
height may vary by as much as plus or minus
1/8 inch. Using the nominal load and
dimensions the nominal bending stress at the
top of the section is calculated to be 14,992 psi.
However, using the maximum possible bending
moment together with the minimum possible
dimensions results in a comparative maximum
working stress in bending of 19,114 psi at the
top of the section. This is 1.27 times the
nominal working stress due to the uncertainty of
the loading and the geometry.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 149 -
6. Variation Scenario - 2
Now assume that the yield stress for the beam
material is 15,000 psi plus or minus 10% or
1500 psi as established from a series of tensile
tests. Therefore the minimum yield stress will
be 13,500 psi or 9/10ths of sigma y nominal.
Applying the criteria of the maximum normal
stress theory can be stated as the maximum
working stress must be less than or equal to the
minimum yield stress. Substituting 1.27 times
the nominal working stress for the maximum
working stress and .9 nominal yield stress for
the minimum yield stress gives the inequality
that 1.27 sigma working nominal must be equal
to or less than .9 sigma yield nominal. The
concept of the factor of safety is now introduced
by the equation that the nominal working stress
should be equal to the nominal yield stress
divided by the factor of safety. Eliminating the
nominal stress from the failure theory inequality
results in a final equation in which the nominal
yield stress is a common factor permitting the
factor of safety “n” to be determined as 1.4. This
is the value of “n” that should be applied in the
nominal design calculations to account for the
uncertainty of the parameter values of load,
geometry and material property to insure that
yielding will not take place.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

7. Modified Theories of Failure - 1 8. Exercise Problem

Incorporating the concept of a factor of safety In this first interactive exercise problem you are
into the equations for the static theories of failure to determine the factor of safety for a shaft in
for both ductile and brittle materials is a simple pure torsion applying the maximum shear stress
modification of the expressions developed in theory where the twisting torque may vary by
Chapter 6. It is only necessary to divide the plus 30%, the diameter is known to within 2%
strength property representation of the material and the yield stress in tension is assumed to be
designated by either the yield or ultimate stress within plus or minus 7% of the nominal value
that normally appears on the right side of the listed in a table of properties. When you have
various ductile theory equations by the factor of completed your calculation click on the solution
safety “n”. In the equations shown here the button to check your answer. Then continue on
material strength parameter in the first three by use of the return button.
theory relations has been placed in the
denominator of the left side so that the right side (Solution on Page 165)
simply becomes one over the factor of safety
“n”. It should be noted that in the modified
Coulomb Mohr theory where the material
properties in tension and compression already
appear on the left side of the equation that the
right side is again simply one over the factor of
safety “n”. This implies that the same factor of
safety is being applied to both the tensile and
compressive properties.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 150 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

9. Generic Factors of Safety 10. Exercise Problem –2

Unfortunately, variations in the parameters In this exercise the parameters of the specified
representing the loading, geometry and material part design are expressed in nominal terms for
properties are seldom known precisely at the the loading, geometry and the yield property of
beginning of the design process. This makes it the material. Your task is to determine whether
virtually impossible to establish apriori what the the part will yield where the stresses are
specific magnitude of the factor of safety should maximum and if yielding does not take place
be. To circumvent this difficulty accumulated what minimum factor of safety is provided by the
design experience and judgment over many design. Assume that the part is made of a
years has lead to suggested recommendations ductile material and that the load is constant.
for possible factors of safety to be used based After you have completed your analysis click on
on generic classification of such general the solution button to check your conclusions.
characteristics as material properties, loading When you are satisfied with the solution click on
and application environment. One such table of the return button to continue to the next page of
recommendations is shown on this page taken the chapter.
from the 20th edition of Machinery’s Handbook.
Note how broad and generic the classifications (Solution on Pages 166 and 167)
are. Their precise interpretation is of course left
up to the judgment of the designer. It is to be
observed that in the two numerical examples
already covered both would seem to fit into the
category of the materials properties being know
to a level of high reliability and the load and
environment as being not severe, whatever that
means, and that the weight of the part has
significant importance. You can be sure that
these kinds of recommendations are very
strongly conservative irrespective of how they
are interpreted.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 151 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
11. Actual Load Distribution
When a part is designed and fabricated in very
large numbers for the same application it is of
value to apply statistical considerations to the
concept of a factor of safety. The remainder of
this chapter will be devoted to this subject.
Begin by considering that the loads to be carried
by the total population of parts will have some
probability distribution around a mean value of
the load designated by L bar. Any specific load
L in this distribution will fall between the limits of
L bar plus or minus delta L representing the
maximum variation of the load from the mean
value. In general the natural probability
distribution of L will look something like the bell
shaped curve in the figure. That is, it is
expected that the probability of L will be highest
around the mean value and will tail off in both
the positive and negative directions from L bar
approaching zero at L bar plus or minus delta L.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 152 -
12. Load capability
In a similar fashion the load capability of the
part, that is, the ability of the part to carry a
load L will also possesses a probability
distribution due to variances in its geometric
and material property values. Again the
distribution is defined in terms of a mean
load capability Lc bar and variance of plus or
minus delta Lc as depicted in the figure.
The height and breadth of the distribution
may be different from that of the actual load
distribution but its appearance will again
may be expected to be bell shaped for a
very large number of parts.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
13. Comparison of Distributions
Now consider the interpretation of these two
distributions plotted beside each other on the
same axis system. It is expected that the mean
value of the load capability Lc bar will be greater
than the actual mean load L bar to prevent part
failure. However, if any portion of the two
distributions overlap as shown in the figure it
means that there are parts that will be subjected
to loads that are greater than the available load
capability of some parts. Hence, the region of
overlap represents potential failure. Whether
such a region exists in a specific instance is a
function of the mean values of the actual load
and the load capability and the variances in both
these parameters. If the mean actual load and
load capability are interpreted as nominal load
and load capability then it is appropriate to
define a factor of safety as the ratio of Lc bar to
L bar as was done earlier in the chapter.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 153 -
14. Difference of Distributions
It is now convenient to consider the
interpretation of the difference of these two
distributions. This difference will also be a bell
shaped probability distribution as depicted in the
figure. The distance from the origin to the peak
value of the distribution will just be equal to the
difference in the mean values of the separate
distributions. If a portion of the distribution
extends over into the negative side off the origin
the area under that portion of the curve
represents the portion of parts subject to failure
from the total population, which is represented
by the total area under the total combined
distribution curve.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
15. Gaussian (Normal) Distribution)
The assumption is now made that the bell
shaped probability distribution of the difference
between the load capability and the actual load
curve can be represented as a Gaussian or
normal distribution. This permits some of the
mathematics of statistics to be introduced into
this analysis to create an analytic model for
predicting numerical factors of safety where
large populations are involved. The normal
probability density distribution y of a variable x is
defined by the exponential function adjacent to
the curve in the figure. In this exponential
function x bar is the arithmatic mean of the
variable x as N approaches infinity as indicated
by the accompanying equation. The symbol Dx
is called the standard deviation and is defined as
the square root of one over N minus 1 times the
sum over N of the quantity the difference of the
variable x and its mean value squared. The
most important property of the standard
deviation in this development is that the area
under the probability density curve within three
standard deviations on either side of the mean
value of x represents 99.73 percent of the total
population under the entire probability curve
from minus to plus infinity.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 154 -
16. Transformation of Variables
A transformation of variables is now introduced
to put this statistical model into a form in which
the results of integrating the normal distribution
over some portion of its variable can be obtained
from available standard tables of numerical
results. The importance of this will be clarified
shortly. The transformation introduced is a new
variable t that is equal to x minus x bar divided
by the standard deviation Dx. It is demonstrated
on this page that the mean value t bar of the
variable t is zero and that its standard deviation
Dt is simply 1. Hence, the transformed
probability distribution of t, which is also normal,
is uniformly distributed around the origin of the
axis system. The transformed normal
distribution of the variable t is depicted in the
figure. It is seen as centered on the origin since
its mean value is zero. The area under the
portion of the total distribution represented by
the horizontal coordinates plus and minus 3
constitutes 99.73 percent of the total population.
In this instance the total area under the curve is
unity. The shaded area that corresponds to the
integral from minus infinite to minus tf represents
the decimal percentage of all points in the
population with values less than minus tf. The
importance of this shaded area as it relates to
factor of safety will be made clear on the next
page.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
17. Transformed Normal Distribution
The transformed probability distribution is now
expressed more simply as y equal to one over
the square root of two Pi multiplied by e raised
to the power of minus t squared over two. The
curve is now observed centered with respect to
the origin with its mean value at t equal to zero.
With a standard deviation of one the area under
the portion of the curve between t equal to –3 to
t equal to +3 represents 99.73 % of the total
area under the curve from minus infinity to plus
infinity. The total area under this transformed
distribution is simply unity. The shaded area
under the portion of the curve from minus infinity
to –tf represents the decimal % of all points with
values less than –tf. The parameter Tf plays a
very important role in the statistical definition of
factor of safety as will be demonstrated on the
next two slides.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 155 -
18. Application to Lc-L distribution
To relate these properties of the unit normal
distribution to factor of safety the variable t is
now written in terms of the parameters of the
difference of the load capability and actual load
probability distribution assuming this distribution
is also normal. That is, t is now defined as the
quantity Lc minus L minus the quantity Lc bar
minus L bar all divided by the standard deviation
of the Lc minus L distribution. This standard
deviation can itself be written as the square root
of the sum of the squares of the standard
deviations of the individual Lc and L
distributions. For proof of this refer to any
standard text on statistics. Now set t equal to -tf
for which Lc minus L is equal to zero. Click on
the recall button to pop the previous graph of Lc
minus L to see that this is true. Having satisfied
yourself that this is the case substitute these
conditions into the general expression for tf,
solve the result for Lc bar and divide both
sides of the equation by L bar. Thus the left side
of the resulting equation is simply the factor of
safety “n” defined as the mean load capability
divided by the mean actual load and the right
side of the equation contains terms which define
the characteristics of the Lc and L distributions
multiplied by tf. Appropriate application of this
equation permits the determination of a factor of
safety for a large population of parts whose load
characteristics approximate normal probability
distributions.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

19. Determination of tf 20. Approximate values of tf

To apply the equation from the previous page to For low values of acceptable failure rates a
calculate a factor of safety it is first necessary to convenient approximation for tf can be
determine the appropriate value of tf. Recall that employed. First define Fd as the percent
tf is the negative upper limit of the integral of the decimal failure. That is, Fd is equal to the
area from minus infinity of the unit normal integral of the unity distribution function from
distribution that now represents the decimal minus infinity to minus tf. Then for Fd between
percentage of failure due to Lc being less than .001 and .015 that represents failure rates from
L. Unfortunately this integration cannot be .1% to 1.5% tf can be approximated by the
carried out in closed form. Hence, it is equation tf equal to 1.29 divided by Fd raised to
necessary to refer to numerical tables that list the 0.128 power. This equation for the limits
the value of the integral for specific values of tf. previously specified is accurate to within 2%
A portion of such a table is presented on this error. This approximation is then substituted
page in which values of the integral are given for into the factor of safety equation resulting in a
values of tf from 2.00 to 3.08 in intervals of .02. relationship that includes the decimal percent
As an example if a specific design instance will failure rate directly along with the other
permit a failure potential of 2% or two parts per parameters describing the actual load and load
hundred the value to be used for the integral of capability distributions.
the area representing this failure level is 0.02.
The closest value of tf from the table
corresponding to this integral value is
approximately equal to 2.04. This is the value of
tf that would be used in the equation for
determining the associated factor of safety
depending of course on the values of other
distribution parameters in the equation.
by the direction of epsilon 2 and an axis
perpendicular to it. Note that the construction
results in angles of two theta of 90 degrees
between the diameter for axes 13 and the
direction of epsilon three, which agrees with the
fact that on the rosette axes 1,2 and 3 are
separated by 45 degrees.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 156 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
21. Sample Problem
This statistical approach for determining a factor
of safety will now be applied to a specific
problem. Assume that a bar in tension is to
carry a load of 1000 lbs. with a possible variation
of +/- 25 %. Thus the maximum load capability
must be at least 1250 lbs. However, the load
capability can only be known to within +/- 10 %
variation. Assume that a sufficient number of
parts are to be produced such that these
variables can be considered normally
distributed. Calculate the necessary factor of
safety to be applied to the mean values of load
and load capability if the failure rate is not to
exceed 2 %.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 157 -
22. Problem Solution
From the conditions of the problem L bar is1000
lbs. and delta L is 250 lbs. The value of Lc bar
should be at least 1250 lbs. To be a little
conservative it will be assumed to be 1300 lbs.
Its variance will then be 130 lbs. The standard
deviation for the actual load will be delta L over
three or 83.3 lbs. while the standard deviation
for the load capacity will be delta Lc over three
or 43.3 lbs. A value of tf is now needed for a
failure rate of 2%. Click on the % failure button
to pop up the numerical chart from which it is
seen that tf is just about 2.04. Substituting all
these values into the equation for the factor of
safety and carrying out the indicated
mathematical manipulations gives a final answer
of about 1.2. This value would be applied to
design calculations based on the nominal values
of actual load and load capability.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
23. Alternate form for n
An alternate formulation for n in terms of just the
variations in actual load and load capability can
be developed by manipulating the form of the
equation used in the previous problem. Starting
with the equation on the first line on this page
the standard deviations are first replaced with
delta Lc over 3 and delta L over 3. The L bar
from the denominator of the second term is
taken inside the square root term. It is then
recognized the term delta Lc over L bar can be
rewritten as delta Lc over Lc bar times the factor
of safety n. This permits the starting equation
for n to be written in the form given at the bottom
of the page.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 158 -
24. Alternate form for n (continued)
The last equation from the previous page is
rearranged so that only the square root term
remains on the right. This expression is now
squared and the common terms of n and its
powers are combined. This results in the
quadratic equation for n at the bottom of the
page in which the coefficients are only functions
of the variations of the actual load and the load
capability along with a measure of the failure
rate in the parameter tf. One further modification
that could be made to this equation would be to
replace tf by it equivalent representation in terms
of the decimal percentage failure Fd provided Fd
is limited to a failure rate between .1 to 1.5 %.
This is left for the reader to do if desired.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
25. Exercise Problem - 3
This exercise deals with determining the factor
of safety “n” for the sample problem just solved
using the alternate form for “n” as a quadratic
equation. Recall that the mean applied load was
1000 lbs. with a variation of 25% and the mean
load capability was taken to be 1300 lbs. with a
variation of +/- 10 %. The acceptable failure rate
was 2% for which tf was 2.04. Compare the
result with the solution for “n” obtained in the
sample problem. When you have calculated
your answer click on the solution button to check
your result. When finished with the solution click
on the return button to continue on to the next
page.
(Solution on Page 167)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 159 -
26. “No Failure” Scenario
A relationship will now be developed for “n” for
the case in which the failure rate is to be zero.
This condition is defined by the inequality that L
bar plus delta L must be less than or equal to Lc
bar minus delta Lc. In other words the
maximum actual load must be less than the
minimum load capability. This inequality is first
solved for Lc bar. Then both sides of the
equation are divided by L bar. The last term of
delta Lc over L bar is rewritten as delta Lc over
Lc bar times n the factor of safety. The resulting
expression is then solved for n giving the final
relation that “n” is greater than or equal to the
ratio of one plus delta L over L bar to one minus
delta Lc over Lc bar. Note that this equation
only involves the percentage variation of the
actual load and the percentage variation of the
load capability.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
27. Example Problem –4
In this final chapter 7 exercise determine the
factor of safety for the previous problem
assuming the “no failure scenario”. Recall again
that the mean applied load is 1000 lbs. with a
variation of +/- 25% and the mean load
capability was taken to be 1300 lbs. with a
variation of +/- 10 %. Compare this “no failure”
factor of safety with the value calculated for a 2
% failure rate. When you have calculated your
answer click on the solution button to check your
result. When finished with the solution click on
the return button to continue on to the next
page.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 160 -
28. Review Exercise
In this exercise the items in the list on the left
are to be matched with the symbols and
mathematical relationships on the right. Place
the cursor over an item on the left and hold
down the left button. A pencil will appear that
can be dragged to one of the green dots on the
right. If the right choice is made the arrow will
remain. If the selection is incorrect the arrow will
disappear. After the exercise is completed
proceed to the next page.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

29. Off Line Exercise

An established design procedure calls for the

use of a factor of safety of 2 for a class of
specific non-moving parts used in an automotive
suspension system. If the material properties
variation is expected to be 10% determine the
allowable projected load variation for zero failure
potential based on the “no failure” scenario.
How does this load variation change if 1 part per
100 or 1 part per 1000 is the prescribed failure
rate? When you have finished with this
statement click on the exit or main menu button
to leave the chapter.

(Solution in Appendix)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 161 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 162 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

Chapter 7
Factors of Safety

Screen Titles

Problem 1 - Solution
Problem 1 – Solution (cont.)
Problem 2 - Solution
Problem 2 – Solution (cont.)
Problem 2 – Solution (cont.)
Problem 2 – Solution (cont.)
Problem 3 - Solution
Problem 3 – Solution (cont.)
Problem 4 - Solution

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 163 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 164 - C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
1. Problem 1 - Solution
For a shaft in pure torsion the nominal principal
stress sigma one is equal to the maximum shear
stress defined by TR over J with J equal to Pi R
fourth over two. This give sigma one nominal
equal to two T over Pi times R cubed. It then
follows that sigma one max is equal to two T
max divided by Pi times R min cubed.
Substituting T max and R min into this
expression gives sigma one max equal to 1.34
times sigma one nominal. The problem also
states that sigma yield min is equal to .9 sigma
yield nominal.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 165 -
2. Problem 1 Solution (cont.)
From the maximum shear stress theory of failure
sigma one max must be less than or equal to
sigma yield min over two. The previous
expressions for sigma one max and sigma yield
min are now substituted into this inequality. The
factor of safety is introduced with the equation
that sigma one nominal is given by sigma yield
nominal divided by 2n to satisfy the maximum
shear stress theory of failure. Using this
equation to eliminate sigma one nominal from
the previous inequality allows n to be
determined as the ratio of 1.34 to .9 for a final
result of 1.49. When finished with this solution
click on the return button to go to the next page
in Chapter 7.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
3. Problem 2- Solution
The location of the maximum bending stress in
the bar is where the bar and rod are welded
together. This stress is equal to Mc over I where
I is the moment of inertia of the rectangular
cross section given by b times h cubed over 12.
The magnitude of the moment M is the force, 30
lbs. times the length of the bar, two inches,
giving 60 in. lbs. With the given dimensions of
the cross section the I is calculated to be 1.1
times ten to the minus three inches to the fourth
power. Taking c to be half the height of the
section the maximum bending stress becomes
10,230 psi. Since this is the only normal stress
in the bar the applicable theory of failure is the
normal stress theory. With the yield stress in
tension for the material in the bar being 50,000
psi the factor of safety for this portion of the part
is determined to be 4.9
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 166 -
4. Problem 2 – Solution (cont.)
Now consider the stresses at the fixed end of
the rod. These will consist of a shear stress due
to the twisting torque created by the force F and
a bending stress resulting from the bending
moment due to the force F. Both the twisting
torque T and the bending moment M have the
same numerical value of 60 in. lbs. Since the
rod is a quarter inch in diameter its polar
moment of inertia J is calculated to be .35 time
ten to the minus three inches to the fourth. The
moment of inertia needed for the bending stress
calculation is just half the value of J since the
cross section is a solid circle. Substituting these
values into the Mc over I and Tr over J
equations for the stress gives a shear stress of
21,420 psi and a bending stress of 42,840 psi.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7
5. Problem 2 – Solution (cont.)
Next the principal stresses must be calculated
before applying an appropriate theory of failure
to determine the factor of safety for this portion
of the part. Since there is no normal stress
perpendicular to the bending stress the equation
for the maximum principal stress is given by the
equation at the top of the page. Substituting the
appropriate values for the normal stress and the
shear stress into this equation gives sigma one
equal to 51,700 psi. In a similar fashion the
minimum principal stress is calculated to be –
8,900 psi. With the two principal stresses being
opposite in sign the appropriate theory of failure
to apply is the maximum shear stress theory.
Substituting the numerical values of sigma 1,
sigma 2 and the yield stress of 75,000 psi into
the equation for the maximum shear stress with
the factor of safety included results in a
numerical value for the factor of safety of 1.24.
This is less than the value calculated for the bar
section and thus is the minimum factor of safety
for the part. When you have finished with this
solution click on the return button to go to the
next page in Chapter 7.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 167 -
6. Problem 3 – Solution
The solution is begun by recalling the equation
for n in quadratic form. The fractional variations
for the load capability of .10 corresponding to
10% and for the actual load of .25 representing
25 % are substituted into this equation along
with the value of tf of 2.04 from the sample
problem. This permits the coefficients of the n
terms in the quadratic equation to be numerically
determined. The resulting equation is then
divided through by the coefficient of the n
squared term and the quadratic formula is
applied to determine a final value for n of 1.19 or
approximately 1.2. It is observed that this is the
same result as determined in the sample
problem without an assumption being required
as to the magnitude of the mean value of the
load capability. When you have finished with
this page click on the return button to go to the
next page in Chapter 7.
C.F. Zorowski  2002
Design for Strength and Endurance – Chapter 7

7. Problem 4 – Solution

To calculate the factor of safety for the

sample problem for the condition of a zero
failure rate requires the application of the
equation for the “No failure “ scenario. The
only parameters needed to carry out this
application numerically are the fractional
variations of the actual load and the load
capability. Respectively these values are
.25 and .10. Substituting these values into
the “No failure” scenario relationship gives a
numerical value for the factor of safety of
1.39. Compared with the value of 1.2
calculated for n with a 2 % acceptable failure
rate this represents a 16 % increase in the
factor of safety. When you have finished
with this page click on the return button to
go to the next page in Chapter 7.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
Factors of Safety - 168 - C.F. Zorowski  2002