UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL AND

MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING DESIGN II
FME 461
PART 4
GO NYANGASI
November 2008

1
FACTOR OF SAFETY

INDICATORS OF FAILURE
STATIC LOADING

2
 INDICATORS OF FAILURE
STATIC LOADING
• Failure of a machine part in static loading
may be indicated by one of three events:
1) Ductile material yielding because induced
stress has reached yield strength
2) Brittle material fracture because induced stress
has reached ultimate strength
3) Excessive deflection of part causing loss of
function, including slender column where the
deflection causes elastic instability and
buckling

3
 BRITTLE VERSUS DUCTILE
MATERIAL
• A rough guide employs percent
elongation at fracture obtained from the
tensile test of the material
1) Brittle materials have Percent
Elongation<5%
2) Ductile materials have Percent
Elongation > 5%

4
 FACTOR OF SAFETY AND
ASSESSMENT OF ADEQUACY
• Design considerations (or factors) for a
machine or structural part are factors or
variables that are expected to influence
the part’s performance of its intended
function.
• Such considerations or factors include

5
 Design Considerations/Factors
1) Ability to perform function
2) Strength/ stress
3) Deflection/rigidity
4) Wear/resistance to indentation
5) Corrosion resistance
6) Manufacturability
7) Reliability
8) Maintainability e.t.c
6
 Adequacy without Waste
• Design seeks to ensure that the factors or
considerations are enough, (adequate but
not wasteful).
• Assessing the part for adequacy with respect to
a particular consideration consists of
1) Determining the indicator value of
consideration for part,
2) Determining the margin by which that
indicator value is exceeded.
3) Example: Strength (maximum stress) /Stress

7
 ADEQUACY ASSESSMENT
STRENGTH VERSUS STRESS
• Various indicators of strength which may be used are
1) Tensile strength,
2) Yield strength,
3) Fatigue strength etc.
• The indicator of strength to be applied will depend on
the material and the type of load (static or variable)
• A stress expected to cause failure is identified as
significant, and this stress may be
1) Tensile stress,
2) Shear stress,
3) Principal stress,
4) Von-Mises stress, etc

8
 ADEQUACY ASSESSMENT
STRENGTH VERSUS STRESS
• A particular location of the part is
identified as the location where failure is
expected to occur
• The pair of strength and significant
stress selected is compared at this
location.
• Adequacy is the margin by which the
strength exceeds the significant
stress
9
 ADEQUACY ASSESSMENT
STRENGTH VERSUS STRESS
• Adequacy therefore depends on how
accurately the strength and significant
stress are known,
• Adequacy also depends on what margin
between strength and stress is enough

10
 ADEQUACY ASSESSMENT
FACTOR OF SAFETY
• The adequacy of the part with respect to
strength can therefore be assessed by
comparing the strength of the part to the stress
induced at the chosen location of the part
• When the strength and stress are compared by
dividing the strength by the stress, the
adequacy assessment is referred to as the
factor of safety, or design factor.

11
 FACTOR OF SAFETY
BEFORE DESIGN
• When design starts with a material of known
strength, the next step is to choose geometry
and dimension of the part that is able to carry
the object load.
• A factor of safety therefore identifies an
allowable stress, or design stress that is
used to determine required dimension for
the part.
• The allowable stress is the strength divided
by the factor of safety.

12
 FACTOR OF SAFETY
AFTER DESIGN
• Where the design is complete, the actual
factor of safety is determined by
• Comparing the strength of the part,
with the stress induced when the part of
known geometry and dimension is
subject to the object load.
• Design can therefore be done through
trial and error by determining stress for
various dimensions.
13
 FACTOR OF SAFETY
• APPLIED ON OTHER MEASURES OR
INDICATORS OF LOSS OF FUNCTION
1) Deflection
2) Wear

14
DEFLECTION AND BUCKLING
• The concept of factor of safety can be
generalized and applied to other indicators that
signify loss of function for the part, such as
load and deflection.
• A slender column subject to compression will
fail by buckling, and the loss of function is
therefore signified by the buckling load, rather
than the compressive strength.
• The buckling load can therefore be used as the
indicator of loss of function, that is compared
with expected load to obtain a factor of safety
for the column.
15
 FAILURE BY DEFLECTION
• In the case where failure is indicated by
a deflection that causes loss of function
• Loss of function deflection can be
used for comparison with the expected
deflection, and a factor of safety
obtained to assess adequacy.
• This may be the case for a beam with
transverse load such as a gear shaft

16
 FAILURE BY WEAR
• What if the loss of function occurs as a result
surface failure in fatigue caused by contact
stresses?
• The consequence of failure, in this case, is
seen as wear of the surface after several load
applications.
• A limit for the wear of the part can then be
specified in terms of a life (number of load
applications) before the limiting level of wear
occurs.

17
 FAILURE BY WEAR
• A load that will give the desired life can
then be chosen as the safe load, since a
greater load will reduce the life.
• Loss of function from wear is a gradual
occurrence and the specification of life
therefore answers the question of what is
the margin between loss of function load
and the operating load.

18
 SELECTING THE FACTOR OF
SAFETY
• Variables that influence the selection of the factor
of safety are:
1) Material property used as the indicator of loss of
function such as strength, loss of function load, loss of
function deflection etc, and its variation or uncertainty
2) Expected variation or uncertainty in the final
dimensions of the part, which cannot be controlled by
design, because it is in the manufacturing process
3) Uncertainty resulting from assumptions employed in
the design analysis as a means of predicting stress
and deflection from the load applied

19
CHOOSING THE MAGNITUDE OF
THE FACTOR OF SAFETY
• One of the major factors influencing the
magnitude of the factor of safety to be
employed in design is the expected
consequence of failure.
• Consequences of failure can be classified in
categories such as:
1) Inconvenience
2) Loss of time
3) Financial loss
4) Loss of life
20
 CODES OF PRACTICE AND
REGULATIONS
• When product failure is likely to cause loss of
life, codes of practice are developed as part of
national and international standards to prescribe
the factor of safety that will prevent failure and
therefore loss of life.
• Examples of such codes of practice and
standards are available for design of pressure
vessels and boilers
• In such standards, the material to be used, the
material properties, and the allowable stresses
are specified, and hence the factor of safety is
specified.
21
 FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR
MACHINE PARTS
• For other machine parts that are not
subject to codes and regulations, the
designer is free to choose the factor of
safety
• This is done by considering the material
concerned and the mode of failure
expected.

22
 CAST IRON
STATIC LOADING
1) The indicator of failure is ultimate tensile or
compressive strength
2) Failure is expected to occur when the tensile
or compressive stress reaches the ultimate
tensile or compressive strength at any
location
3) Material is not as homogeneous as steel and
often carries residual stresses from the casting
process
4) A value of 3 to 5 is recommended for factor of
safety on tensile or compressive strength

23
 DUCTILE MATERIALS (STEEL)
STATIC LOADING
1) The indicator of failure is yield strength
2) Failure is expected to occur when the
tensile or compressive stress reaches
the tensile or compressive yield strength
at any location
3) A value of 1.5 to 2 is recommended for
factor of safety to be applied on the
yield strength in tension or compression

24
 DUCTILE MATERIALS (STEEL)
VARIABLE LOADING
• The indicator of failure is endurance or fatigue
strength
• Fatigue failure depends on both the magnitude of
stress and the number of loading cycles
• Fatigue strength also varies with material properties as
well as other factors that are unique to the part such
as:
1) Yield strength
2) Stress concentration
3) Surface finish
4) Size
5) Temperature of part

25
 DUCTILE MATERIALS (STEEL)
VARIABLE LOADING
• Fatigue failure is sudden and total, and
occurs in a similar manner to the static
failure of brittle materials
• A value of 1.3 to 1.5 is recommended for
factor of safety to be applied on the
fatigue strength

26
 COLUMN FAILURE BY
BUCKLING
• Members loaded in compression are likely to
fail by buckling
• Buckling is caused by elastic instability which
results in large deflection of the compression
member
• Buckling load depends on
1) Yield strength of the material
2) Modulus of elasticity of the material
3) End conditions for the column, such as
fixed/fixed, pivoted/pivoted, free/fixed,
pivoted/fixed.
4) Compressive load

27
 COLUMN FAILURE BY
BUCKLING
• A factor of safety of 3 to 6 is recommended to
be applied on the buckling load
• For a given column dimension and end
conditions, the Euler column formula
expresses the critical unit load in terms of the
slenderness ratio, the modulus of elasticity,
and the end conditions constant.
• The critical unit load expresses the loss of
function load on which the factor of safety is to
be applied.

28
 PARTS SUBJECT TO CONTACT
STRESSES
• Parts such as cams, gear teeth, bearings, rail wheel
on rail, are subject to contact stresses between the
surfaces which result in local failure of the surface by
pitting.
• This is local failure caused by contact stress reaching
endurance strength of the surface material at the point
of contact.
• Such local failure does not render the entire machine
element out of operation. Pitting is therefore a form of
wear since the machine element continues to operate.
• A factor of safety of 1.8 to 2.5 is recommended to be
applied on the surface endurance strength.

29
GEAR TOOTH FORCES

30