0% found this document useful (0 votes)
344 views27 pages

Stress Concentration Factors in T-Head

This document presents two simple formulae that predict stress concentration factors for a two-dimensional symmetrical T-head configuration subjected to different loading conditions. The T-head consists of a deep head joined to a shank by fillet radii. One formula predicts the stress concentration factor when a tensile force is applied to the shank, pulling the shank in tension. The other formula predicts the stress concentration factor when a compressive load is applied to the top of the head, stressing only the head in compression. The formulae are derived by superimposing the loading cases and assuming maximum stresses occur at the same location. Experimental stress concentration factors are obtained to validate the formulae for different geometric ratios of the T-head.

Uploaded by

Leandro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
344 views27 pages

Stress Concentration Factors in T-Head

This document presents two simple formulae that predict stress concentration factors for a two-dimensional symmetrical T-head configuration subjected to different loading conditions. The T-head consists of a deep head joined to a shank by fillet radii. One formula predicts the stress concentration factor when a tensile force is applied to the shank, pulling the shank in tension. The other formula predicts the stress concentration factor when a compressive load is applied to the top of the head, stressing only the head in compression. The formulae are derived by superimposing the loading cases and assuming maximum stresses occur at the same location. Experimental stress concentration factors are obtained to validate the formulae for different geometric ratios of the T-head.

Uploaded by

Leandro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 27

AD

CO

AMRA TR 66-36

STRESS CONCENTRATION
FACTORS IN T-HEADS
oc
I

TECHNICAL REPORT
by

FRANCIS I. BARATTA

NOVEMBER 1966

C,

Uistribution of this document is unlimited

mm
U. S. ARMY MATERIALS RESEARCH AGENCY
WATERTQWN, MASSACHUSETTS 02172

-* srcSEC,I"'"

U
BW

A"

"

n &l.m&
[

ABU

,ST.

ic/miiB;un

GOOES

ttL */ SKCIAlf

Mention of any trade names or manufacturers in this report


shall not be construed as advertising nor as an official
indorsement or approval of such products or companies by
the United States Government.

The findings in this report are not to be construed an


an official Department of the Army position, unless so
designated by other authorized documents.

DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS
Destroy this report when it is no longer needed.
Do not return it to the originator.

T-*""I'Tnti

i ,"|'>t^ '*~-^*~ .-

*mr

STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN T-HEADS

Technical Report AMRA VR 66-36

by
Francis I. Baratt a

November 1966

D/A Project IN54271&D387


AMCMS Code 5547.12.^2700
Projectile XM 474/573
Subtask 35425

Distribution of this document is unlimited.

U.

S.

ARMY MATERIALS RESEARCH AGENCY

WATERTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS

tm*m*mvmm

0 217 2

^J^T^m

U. S4 ARMY MATERIALS RESEARCH AGENCY


STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN T-HEADS

ABSTRACT
Two simple formulae are presented which predict stress concentration
factors applicable to a two-dimensional symrr.*trical T-head configuration.
This configuration consists of a deep head joined to a shank by fillet radii.
The independent equations that predict stress concentration factors for the
same geometry are derived for two different leading conditions.
In one
instance, a tensile force is applied to the shank end of the T-shape.
Equilibrium of forces is attained by supporting the bottom edge of the head
section, resulting in the shank section being pulled in tension.
In the
second instance, a compressive load is appliec to the top edge of the head
section while the configuration is again supported at the bottom edge.
Thus, only the head section is stressed and ir,> a compressive manner.
Because the analysis is not exact, the magnitudes of the stress concentration factors resulting from the predictive equations appear to be
overly conservative at some ranges of the geometry parameter ratios.
Therefore, an arbitrary "limit of application", as it is termed in the text, is
recommended when using these equations.
Again, because of the inexactness of the analysis, experimental stress
concentration factors are indirectly obtained for the first loading condition and lirectly obtained for the second loading condition mentioned above.
These data were obtained for several geometric ratios of the T-head configuration aid compared to the corresponding predicted values.
It W4s found that the formulae could be utilized, with engineering accuracy, witiin a certain range of the two pertirent geometry ratios.
Beyond
these ranges, the error became excessive, but conservative.

..'

CONTKNTS
age
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

FORMULATION

.......

LIMIT 07 APPLICATION

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ....

............

RESULTS WD DISCUSSION

12

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS .....

15

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

15

REFERENCES

16

liiin

^_.

INTRODUCTION
A brief literature survey is presented of past work relating to stress
concentration factors in two-dimensional T-head configurations.
The results
of the survey are pertinent to subsequent discussions.
Hetenyi
was one of
the first experimenters to test a two-dimensional T-head configuration.
He
stressed the body in a similar but slightly different manner than that shown
in Figure la.
The results were applicable for geometries which included several h/d ratios but only one d/R ratio.
Twenty years later Hetenyi presented
additional results which were an extension of Reference 1.
Heywood8 further
applied an empirical formula to the initial results of Hetenyi.
His objective was to extrapolate Hetenyi's data by including the effect of d/R for
T-heads of various h/d ratios.
Nishihara and Fujii4 obtained, by elasticity
theory, the stress distribution in a two-dimensional bolt head.
Although the
results of this reference yield the desired stress concentration factor, the
formulae are complicated and applicable over a limited range.
The objective of this report is to obtain an expression for the stress
concentration factor associated with the configuration and loading shown in
Figure la.
The formula is developed because:
a.
the empirical expression given in Reference 3 is based on the
limited data of Reference 1; and
b.
the formulae of Reference 4 are not amenable to simple computations
and are inaccurate at some ratios of d/R of practical interest.
Formulae are obtained by
superposition of various loading cases of Figure 1 which
are guided by experimental
observation.
Two expressions,
which yield yalues of the
stress concentration factors
applicable to Figures la and
lc, result from this analysis.
These formulae increase the
usable range of existing data
and are easy to apply.
However, because of the apparent conservativeness of the
resulting equations at some
ranges of the geometry parameters, a limit of application
is suggested in the text.
Also, since these formulae are
not exact, experimental verification is provided.

.**

an

[Uli
/

-d -

h-t

w w

amJ
L- _.i__i _ J

(a)

*a
(b)

*a
(c

Figure 1 . SUPERPOSED T-HEADS LOADINGS

FORMULATION
Photographs of models loaded similarly to those shown in Figures lb and
lc are presented in Figures 2a and 2b.
In particular, note the isochromatic
fringe distribution at the fillets.
An experimental determination of the
location of these fringes at the fillet periphery for both loading cases
revealed that for this model which had a large D/d ratio:
a.
the stress gradient at and near the maximum stress site was
relatively small; and
b.

these regions for the two loading cases overlapped.

rrm fTTT

r*

ID

m
a.

APPLIED LOAD 260 POUNDS

b.

APPLIED LOAD 580 POUNDS

Figure 2. ISOCHROMATIC PATTERN


Case IA, D/d = 4.0, d/R = 10.0
As the D/d ratio was reduced, while retaining a constant d/R ratio, the
above statements became less correct.
Even so, it shall be assumed hereafter
that the maximum stress for the two loading cases occur at the same location
and can be added or superimposed.
The limitation on such an assumption will
subsequently be determined.
However, the maximum principal stresses at the
fillets of Figures lb and lc are superimposed to obtain an approximate relationship for the maximum principal stresses at the fillets of Figure la.
This relationship is given by the following formula:
rfT

where &fjt

CT

fa

of Figures la,

8nc

ic

are

lb, and lc.

tne

fa

max mum

+ cr

fe-

principal stresses at the fillets

rn

The stress concentration factors for the loading cases shown in Figure 1
are defined as follows:
rfT

iT

fa

~n

(2)

and

,
kfc s

"fc

'v57d)'

where aj and cra are the uniformly applied stresses.


The sign convention adopted for the above stress concentration factors
is as follows:
a. positive when the examined stress is the same sign (tension or
compression) as the nominal stress to which it is compared; and
b. negative when the examined stress is the opposite sign to the
nominal stress.
Substitution of Equations 2 into Equation 1 [note (Xj a cr^ (D/d)] results
in a relationship among the three stress concentration factors, given by the
following:
k

fT~kfa *

fC

(3)

Thus, it is seen that the three concentrators associated with Figure 1 are
directly superposable, if it can be assumed that jaximum stresses are
coincident.
It remains to obtain a relationship between the stress concentrators,
ka and kfc, to reduce the number of variables in Equation 3 to one.
Accomplishment of this is realized by equating the loading state represented
by Figure lb, for which the stress concentration factor kfa is experimentally
well known,5"
to the sum of the two loading states shown in Figures 3b fend
3c. Figure 3b can, in turn, be reduced to the same loading cases as those
shown in Figures lb and lc, in which it is again assumed that the points of
maximum stress of the two cases coincide. Therefore, the stress states represented by the loading cases shown in Figures 3b and 3c are superposable
and result in the following formula:

fa ~ a fb a fc

(4)

where cr^ in the maximum principal stress at the fillet of the configuration
and loading hown in Figure 3b.

iilllWIIIMgBWa

wmimmmmmm

'111'

[III]
I

111

III

t^i; 4 *- 4 -i --*
*a
(a)

* A_i._J.__i
a
b
(>)

LJ.
*c
(c)

Figure 3. SUPERPOSED LOADINGS OF T-HEAD IN TENSION


It was indicated in Reference 11 that if the stress loading cr>p could
have been applied to all horizontal surfaces of the configuration shown in
Figure 3b as well as on the fillet radii, then the stress concentrator would
be exactly equal to one. It was considered impracticable to accomplish this
loading exactly by experimental means. However, it was found that as long
as the fillet radius was small relative to the neck width d the stress at the
fillet crfb tended to be equal to the applied stress crj when the stress loading and configuration were the same as that shown in Figure 3b. Thus,
Equation 4 can be reduced to the following:
cra _ <Jj o-c

(R/d be small).

(5)

Defining the stress concentration factors kfa and kfc in terms of the
applied stress shown in Figures 3a and 3c, we have:
r

fa

'fa
and
'fc

'fc
* crc(D/d).

Substitution of the above into Equation 5 and consideration of the equilibrium


of forces on the body shown in Figure 3c yields:
fa (D/d-^-l>

fc = 1

(6)

'

or

'fa - 1

fc

D/d -

d/R

(7)
- 1

(For physically significant geometry D-d-2R>0 and D/d-l-2/d/R>0).


Substitution of Equation 7 into Equation 3 for kf-r finally results in
the following formula:
k

fa W* - dTR)-1

cfT

(8)
D/d -

d7R

- 1

As previously indicated, experimental data are available for the stress


concentration factor kfa for various D/d and d/R ratios. However, an empirical
formula is given by Heywood in Reference 3 for this concentrator based on the
experimental data available. Heywood's equation becomes (using the nomenclature in this report):
n ._

.k*

'faa

[W - 1): d/R I0'65 .

% 1 + I

(9)

[.2(2.8 D/d -2)J

This empirical relationship can be utilized to obtain formulae for the


stress concentrators kfr and kfc, which are dependent upon only the geometry
ratios D/d and d/R. Direct substitution of Equation 9 into Equations 7 and 8
results in the following relationships:
1
cfT

["(D/d 1) d/R]'65
[.2(2.8 D/d - 2)J
2_
D/d - T75d/R - 1

(D/d -

d/R )- 1
(10)

and

(D/d - 1) d/R] 0.65


2(2.8 D/d-2)J

'fc

2
D/d - l
d/R

(ii;

The reader is cautioned that Equations 8 and 10 are invalid for small
values of h/d (see Figure 1) since bending of the flanges of the head is
precluded from the analysis. Hetenyi2 indicates that when h/d is equal to
3.0 or greater, the head of the T can be considered infinitely deep, thus
eliminating the existence of bending stresses at the fillet.
A more useful definition of the stress concentration factor for the configuration shown in Figure 3c is kj or, /a , and from Equation 2 we see

I,
A

that kfc * kc D/d.


Substitution of this latter relationship into Equation 11
results in the following:
Hp/d - i) d/Rl0-',65
D

fc * *

L2<2-8 /d - 2)J

(12)

^-TR-1
LIMIT OF APPLICATION
The stress concentration factors, kf-r and Kc, described by Equations 10
and 12, are shown plotted as a function of the constant parameter D/d and variable d/R in Figures 4a and 4b. There are distinct minimum values for each curve described by D/d in these figures.
As previously indicated, it would seem that
as d/R is decreased, kfj and kfc should also decrease (which they do up to a
point) and asymptotically approach a minimum value (which they do not).
It is
evident that this behavior is not correct and occurs as a result of inexactness
of the equations which in turn could be cauaeu by:
a.
the approximate nature of the observation that the maximum principal
stresses occur at the same fillet locations; and
b.
the violation of th*
to the width d.

restriction that the radius R be small compared

>T
J
T
cr
h/d

4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0 20.0 24.0

28.0

=
=
=
>

stress at filltt
applied stress at shank
applied stress at shoulders
3.0

32.0

d/R
Figure 4a. STRESS C0NCEMTRATI0N FACTOR kfT

rnmrn

0/d = 1.5

1
(7

mi mi

D/d = 1.75
D/d =2.0
D/d = 2.5
D/d =3.0
D/d = 4.0
0/d =5.0
D/d = oo

Jlk Hilft
*t

LEGEND
"fc

-c

stress at fillet
applied stress at head
applied stress at shoulders

3.0

4.0

8.0

12.0 16.0

20.0

24.0 28.0

32.0

d/R

Figure 4b. STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTOR kfc

Thus, the accuracy and application of the expressions beyond the minimum points are questionable. The seemingly odd behavior indicated above
wi'l provide convenient practical cut-off points for each curve describing
kfj and kfc. (The cut-off points are experimentally checked for two cases
and are discussed later). These cut-off points can be determined by th
minimum values of the stress concentration factors defined by particular
values of d/R as a function of D/d. These minimum values will provide
limits on the use of Equations 10 and 12 and shall be called "limits of
application".
The limits are analytically determined by simply applying maximumminimum principles to Equations 10 and 12. The limits of application of
Equation 10 describing kfj are given in the following:

d/R >

D/d - 1/2 (1-1/n) -/(l/n)(D/d) 1/4 (1-1/n)2 '

(13)

The limits of application of Equation 12 describing kjc are given by


d/R >

2(1 n)
n(D/d-l)

(14)

where n = 0.65. Both limits have been computed and are shown in Figures 4a
and 4b as lines connecting the minimum point in each curve and are labeled
"limit of application".

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Because of the approximations used in the previous section it was necessary to establish the validity of the derived equations. Therefore, the primary objective of the experimental program was to determine the order of
magnitude of the inherent error associated with the determination of kff and
k}-c by Equations 10 and 12.
To accomplish the above in the simplest manner, the stress concentration
factors kfa and kj-c were experimentally determined for four cases which had
the various geometry ratios shown in Table I. The stress concentration factor
kj was then obtained from these data for each of the four cases by simple
superposition as indicated by Equation 3.

Table I.

EXPERIMENTAL, SUPERPOSED, AND PREDICTED DATA

EXPERIMENTAL DATA
Case d/R D/d hf.

>J

kfc

SUPERPOSED DATA
Coabined Factor, Equation 6
k

fT

f.

+ (D d

/ -d7R*mfc

E l 6

'

PREDICTED DATA

kn

Percent
difference -;.

Percent
di fferencel

JA

10.0 4.0 2.37 2.05 -0.51 2.88

0.94

2.86

- 0.7

.1.96

- 4.4

IB

10.0 2.0 2.25 2.48 -1.24 3.49

1.27

3.79

+ 8.6

-3.10

-'5.0

IC" 10.0 1.5 1.9S ^2.71 .1.81 3.76

1.41

5.71

+S1.8

-5.43

+ 100

5.1 2.0 1.95 -1.08 -0.54 2.49

1.62

3.13

+25.7

-2.65

+ 145

II"

'Obtained
tCoaputed
fCoaputed
**Liaiit of

by anperpoaing kfa and kfc according to Equation 3.


according to Equation 10.
according to Equation 12.
application caae for kfc.

NOTE: -J> 3.0

Cases IC and II were designed to determine the maximum error allowed by


the limit of application. The geometries for these cases were determined
according to the limit of application on the concentrator kfc, (Equation 14)
rather than kfr. This was done because the minimum points for kfc as shown
in Figure 4b are slightly more limiting than the corresponding curves in
Figure 4a. Thus, for the same D/d value the limiting d/R ratio is greater
for kj- than for krj, and, therefore, more restricted.

The experimental data were obtained by a photoelastic study using a


model made of Homalite 100. The two methods of applying the load and the
model dimensions for the four cases investigated are shown in Figure 5. The
model was compressively stressed* by the first method of loading, Figure 5a,
then by the second method, Figure 5b. The photoelastic model was stressed
by the first method to determine the factor kfa the location of the maximum
fringe order, and to index this maximum stress site by scribing fiduciary
lines on the model. At this location the fringe order was also determined
when the model was leaded by the second method. Thus, the nominal fringe
order at the shank section Nj, the maximum fringe order at the fillet Nt
and at this same site the fringe order Nfc, were obtained for each case and
are shown plotted as functions of load in Figures 6 and 7. These experimental
data were then utilized to obtain the stress concentration factors kfa and
kfc, from which kfj was indirectly determined.
Figures 2a and 2b are photographs of the isochromatic fringe patterns,
with a light background resulting from the two loading methods chosen as
representative of typical patterns of case IA (d/D 4.0 and d/R 10.0).

LLL

!__
CASE
IA

IB

IC

0.079 0079

0.790 0.790 0.790 0.969

OXJT*

0.110

BJOOO

2"

2"

2"

2"

7"

3"

5"

5"

1.900 1.129

1.129

1/2" 1/2" 1/2" 1/2"

/
f.

NOTES:
1. DECIMAL TOLERANCE
IS 0.001"
2. SHADED AREAS SHOW
CARDBOARD PAD
LOCATIONS

*h
(b)
Figure 5. LOADING AND MODEL PARAMETERS
Pads were used st sil contact surfaces to siaulate constantly distributed load.

H t
\

mm -

H
CASE
IA

-100

-200

-300

IB

ZC

0.075 0.075 0.075 0.110

0.750 0.750 0.750 0.565

3000 1.500 1.125

l 125

ft

2"

2"

2"

2"

5"

5"

5"

1/2"

-400

NOTES:
1. DECIMAL TOLERANCE
IS t 0.001"
2. SHAOEO AREAS SHOW
CAROeOARD PAD
LOCATIONS

1/2 1/2" 1/2"

-500

P APPLIED LOAD-LB
Figure 6. FRINGE ORDER Nfa AND Nd AS A FUNCTION OF APPLIED LOAD

10

\
-

CASE
IA

7.0

6.0

19

IC

0.075 04)75

0.750 0.750 0.750 0.365

3000 1.500 1.125 1.125

OJOTS

0.110

2"

2"

2"

5"

5"

1/2"

1/2-

2"

h
t

R -d-

in

1/2" 1/2"

Hfc

NOTES:
I. OECIMAL TOLERANCE
IS 0.001"

5.0

2 SHADED AREAS SHOW


CAR060AR0 PAD
LOCATiONS

r.-

5
UJ

-300

-i*00

-500

-700

P APPLIED LOAD-LB
Figure 7. FRINGE ORDER Nfc AS A FUNCTION OF APPLIED LOAD

I 1

z~. i-jisri

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


A least-square method which incorporated the data shown in Figures 6
and 7 was used to determine accurately the equation of each straight iine
designated by Nj, Na> and Nfc for all cases. A straight-line fit for each
curve was corrected to initiate at the origin of the plot. Residual stresses
and time edge effects present in the photoelastic model were thus compensated.
These results were then used to determine the desired experimental concentration factors defined as:
'fa '

Uli

_Nfc

fc

and
k

fc " kfc(D/d).

The stress concentration factors for each case are shown in Table I.
It is noted that in the formulation of Equation 6, it was necessary to
make use of:
a. an experimental approximation, i.e., it was assumed that the points
of maximum stress of the loading cases shown in Figures lb and lc coincided;
b. an experimental fact, i.e., from Reference 10 it was determined that
under idealized conditions the stress concentrator would be equal to 1.0; and
c. the restriction that the fillet radius R be small compared to the
small width d
If all of the above were true, the left side of Equation 6, which is termed
the Combined Factor, would be equal to unity (1.0). This Combined Factor
could be used as an index, when compared to 1.0, on the relative accuracy of
Equations 10 and 12, which predict kfr and kc. The Combined Factor, for
which the computations were based on the experimentally determined concentrators kfa and kfc, as well as the predicted values of kfp and kjc, and the
percent difference when compared to experimental values are also given in
Table I.
Results given in Table I indicate that when d/R is constant (see cases
IA, IB, and IC), the Combined Factor approaches the idealized value of 1.0
with increasing D/d. Also, when D/d is constant but d/R is increased, as in

12

^F3*7*:

cases II and IB, the Combined Factor appears to approach the idealized value
of 1.0. It is apparent from Table I that as the Combined Factor approaches
1.0, the percent differences for both kfj and kc become small. These differences are based on a comparison of experimental values of krj (and superposed data) and kj-c to those given by the predictive equations 10 and 12.
Further examination of these relative differences reveals that:
1. kf-r determined by Equation 10 is accurate, compared to the experimental value (see superposed data), to within less than 9.0% if D/d 2 2.0
and d/R > 10.0 (compare cases IA and IB to case IC).
2. kc determined by Equation 12 is accurate to within 25.0% if
D/d > 2.0 and d/R . 10.0 when related to the experimental data (compare
cases IA and IB to case IC).
3. The two cases, IC and II, which are at the limit of application for
the concentrator kc, yieJd the maximum differences, 100% and 145%, respectively.
However, these differences are positive and are considered conservative.
Comparisons can also be made to the datt given in References 1 and 2 by
Hetenyi even though the loading configuration used by this author, shown in
Figure 8a, is different from that shown in Figure 8b. The difference between
these two loading states is shown in Figure c. It is readily apparent that
if the fillet radius R is small, the Hetenyi-type stress concentration factor
termed here as kjj is approximately equivalent to kj. The data from References 1 and 2 are presented in Table II as well as the predicted values of
the stress concentration factor kj given by Equation 10, and the percent
error when compared to k|f

Mill
l -fH

*- d -

ittii/

Uiii

(a)

1/

(b)

(O

Figure 8. HETtNYl TYPE T-HEADS

J3

-'--

'

II

Table II.

\w

fH

COMPARISON TO EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF T-HEADS


AVAILABLE IN TOE LITERATURE
Ketenyi's Results - References 1 and 2

d/R * 20.0
k
% rror

d/R * 13.33
k

ffl

fT*

X rror

>>ffl

d/R 10.0
k
fT# % rror

fH

d/R 5.0
k
fT# % error 1

s.o

4.10

4.20

2.4

3. SO

3.48

- 0.6

3.10

3.08

. 1,0

2.52

2.38

5.6

2.5

4.47

4. SO

- 1.0

3.6S

3.73

+ 2.2

3.02

3.30

9.3

2.35

2.58

+ 9.8

2.0

S.00

S.10

2.0

3.90

4.25

9.0

3.30

3.79

+14.8

2.60

3.10

19.2

l.S | 6.0S i 6.97

+15.0

4.90

6.S

+24.0

4.70

5.71

21.5

*Coapted according to Eqeatioa 10 (AH values of kfT aro within the liait of
application fiten by Eqaatioa 13)
NOTE: -y>3.0

A comparison of the results given in Table II indicates that as D/d increases, with d/R remaining constant, the.error generally decreases. This
is because the points of maximum stress for the various loading cases tend
to coincide and the stress gradient becomes small as D/d becomes large.
The results also indicate that, generally, Equation 10 becomes more accurate
as d/R increases, with D/d remaining constant. This is due to:
a.
the restriction that the fillet radius R be small compared to the
width d in the analysis; and
b.
to kfj.

as R becomes small the Hetenyi-type concentration becomes equivalent

It is also seen from Table II that as the error becomes large, it is


positive. Further, if one is interested in accuracy of 10% or better, then
Equation 10 can be used when:
a. D/d is equal to or greater than 2.5 and d/R lies between 5.0 and
20.0; and
b. D/d is equal to or greater than 2.0 and d/R lies between 13.33
and 20.0.
Analytically computed results for the stress concentration factor kfj as
a function of d/R when D/d * 2.325 are given in Reference 4. These
data, as well as those obtained from Equation 10, can readily be compared
and are shown in Figure 9. It is seen that these curves compare to within at
least 10% of each other when d/R is between 3 and 28; beyond the value of 28,
the difference is excessive. As d/R increases, kfj becomes more accurate.
On the other hand, the mapping function utilized in Reference 4 becomes inexact for large values of d/R. This difference is attributed to the method
used in Reference 4 when d/R > 28. However, it is expected that when d/R is
small, the method given by Reference 4 is quite accurate.

14

\!
\

D/d 2.325

tu

mi lii
%)

LEGEND

<7fT

cr

h/d >

I
4.0

8.0

12.0

16.0

20.0 24.0
d/R

HtK

strsts at filUt
applied straas at hank
applied strass at shouldara
3.0

28.0

32.0

Figure 9. COMPARISON OF STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTOR kfT

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
.
1.
The difference between the experimentally determined concentiaLors,
kfj and kr, and the equations used to predict them become quite small when
either:
(a) the ratio of d/R is increased, while retaining D/d as a constant
parameter; or (b) the ratio of D/d is increfsed while retaining d/R as a
constant parameter.
2.
When compared to the experimental value, if D/d > 2.0 and d/R>10.0,
kfj can be determined by Equation 10 within a difference of 9% or less.
Equation 10 can be used in other ranges with a corresponding increase in the
difference, which appears to be conservative.
Alternatively, the formula of
Reference 4 can be used in those regions.
3.
The prediction of kfc by Equation 12 could be useful as a first-order
approximation, and it is considered probable that the error in predicting this
concentrator will be conservative.
4.
The Hetenyi-type concentrator kfjj can be determined by Equation 10
within an error of 10% or less if:
(a) D/d > 2.5 with d/R between 5.0 and
20.0; and (b) D/d > 2.0 with d/R between 13.33 and 20.0.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author gratefully acknowledges the constructive criticisms and
suggestions given by Mr. J. Adachi, which materially aided in realizing the
final copy.

15

REFERENCES
1.

HETENYI, M. Some Applications of Photoelasticity in Turbine-Generator


Design. Trans. ASME, v. Sl9 1939, p. A-151 to A-155.

2.

HETENYI, M. Stress-Concentration Factors for T-Heads.


v. 81, no. 3, 1959, p. 130-132.

3.

HEYWOOD, R. B.
1952, p. 178.

4.

NISHIHARA, T., and FUJII, T. Stresses in Bolt Head. Proc. of First


Japanese National Congress for Applied Mechanics, 1951, p. 145-150.

5.

FROCHT, M. M. Factors of Stress Concentration Photoelastically


Determined. ASME, V. 57, 1935, p. A-67.

6.

FROCHT, M. M. Photoelastic Studies in Stress Concentration.


Engineering, v. 58, 1936, p. 485-489.

7.

FROCHT, M. M., and LANDSBHtG, D. Factors of Stress Concentration in Bars


with Deep Sharp Grooves and Fillets in Tension. Proc. SESA, v. VIII,
no. 2, 1951, p. 148.

8.

TIMOSHENKO, S., and DIETZ, W. Stress Concentration Produced by Holes


and Fillets. Trans. ASME, v. 47, 1925, p. 199-237.

9.

WEIBEL, E. E. Studies in Photoelastic Stress Determination.


ASME, v. 56, 1934, p. 637-658.

Chapman & Hall Ltd.,

Stress Concentration Design Factors.

Mechanical

Trans.

10.

PETERSON, R. E.
1953.

11.

BARATTA, F. I., and BLUHM, J. I. On the Nullification of Stress


Concentration Factors by Stress Equalization. U. S. Army Materials
Research Agency, AMRA TR 66-37, November 1966. Presented at the June
1966 meeting of S.E.S.A. in Detroit.

16
4

Designing by Photoelasticity.

J. Appl. Mech.,

John Wiley & Sons,

U. S. ARMY MATERIALS RESEARCH AGENCY


WATERTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS 02172
TECHNICAL REPORT DISTRIBUTION
Report No.:

AMRA TR 66-36
November 1966

Title: Stress Concentration Factors in


T-Heads

28 N

istribution List approved by Picatinny Arsenal, telephone conversation,


toer 1966.

No. Of
Copies
1
20
2

2
1

To

Office of the Director, Defense Research and Engineering, The Pentagon,


Washington, D. C. 20301
Commander, Defense Documentation Center, Cameron Station, Building 5,
5010 Duke Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Defense Metals Information Center, Batteile Memorial Institute,
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Chief of Research and Development, Department of the Army,
Washington, D. C. 20310
ATTN: Physical and Engineering Sciences Division
Commanding Officer, Army Research Office (Durham), Box Ol,
Duke Station, Durham, North Carolina 27706

1
1
1

Commanding General, U. S. Army Materiel Command,


Washington, D. C. 20315
ATTN: AMCPP, Mr. S. Lorber
AMCRD
AMCRD-RS

5
1
1
1
1

Commanding General, U. S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal,


Alabama 35809
ATTN: AMSMI-RBLD, Redstone Scientific Information Center
AMSMI-RRS, Mr. R. E. Ely
AMSMI-RKX, Mr. R. Fink
AMSMI, Mr. W. K. Thomas
AMSMI-RSM, Mr. E. J. Wheelahan

Commanding General, U. S. Army Mobility Command, Warren, Michigan

Commanding General, U. S. Army Munitions Command,


Dover, New Jersey 07801
ATTN: Feltman Research Laboratories

48090

wm-

No. of
Copies

mnn

To

Commanding General, L\ S. Army Natick Laboratories, NaticK,


Massachusetts 01762
ATTN: Dr. J. Flanagan

Commanding General, U. S. Army Tank-Automotive Center, Warren,


Michigan 48090
ATTO: AMSM0-REM.1

Commanding General, U. S. Arr.y Test and Evaluation Command,


Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005
ATTN: AMSTE

1
1
1

Commanding General, U. S. Army Weapons Command, Rock Island,


Illinois 61202
ATTN: AMSWE-PP, Procurement and Production Directorate
AMSWE-TX, Research Division
AMSWE-IM, Industrial Mobilization Branch

ATTN:

Commanding Officer, Frankford Arsenal, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


ATTN: Pitman-Dunn Institute of Research

Commanding Officer, Picatinny Arsenal, Dover, New Jersey


ATTN: SMUPA-TW, Nuclear Engineering Directorate

1
1

Commanding Officer, Springfield Armory, Springfield,


Massachusetts 01101
ATITI: SWESP-EG, Engineering Division
SWESP-TX, Research and Development Division

Commanding Officer, Harry Diamond Laboratories, Washington, D. C.

19137

07801

Commanding Officer, U. S. Army Mobility Command, Washington Liaison


Office, Room 1719, Building T-7, Gravelly Point, Washington, D. C. 20315

Commanding Officer, Watervliet Arsenal, Watervliet, New York


ATTN: Mr. F. Dashnaw

Chief, Bureau of Naval Weapons, Department of the Navy, Room 2225,


Munitions Building, Washington, 20390
ATTN: RMMP

Chief, Bureau of Ships, Department of the Navy, Washington, D. C.


ATTN: Code 341

20438

AMXDO, Library

12189

20360

Chief, Naval Engineering Experimental Station, Department of the Navy,


Annapolis, Maryland

.***-

T-V

No. of
Copies

To

Commander, Naval Ordnance Laboratory, White Oak, Silver Spring,


Maryland 20910
ATTN: Code WM

Commander, Naval Ordnance Test Station, China Lake, California


ATTN: Code 5557

Director, Naval Research Laboratory, Anacostia Station,


Washington, D. C. 20390
ATTN: Technical Information Officer

Commander, Naval Weapons Laboratory, Dahlgren, Virginia


ATTN: AP Laboratory

Chief, Office of Naval Research, Departmsnt of the Navy,


Washington, D. C. 20390
ATTN: Code 423

1
1

Commander, Wright Air Development Division,


Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433
ATTN: WWRCO
AFRCWE-1

93555

22448

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Army Reactor Branch,


Division of Research Development, Washington, D. C.
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Di/ision of Nuclear Materials Management,
Washington, D. C.
ATTN: Mr. Alton F. Elder

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Albuquerque Field Office, P. 0. Box 4500,


Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106
1 .ATTN: Mr. N. MacKay, Nuclear Materials Management Office
1

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Office of Technical Information


Extension, P. 0. Box 62, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, San Francisco Operations Office,


2111 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, California 94704

1
1
1

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1520 H Street, N. W.,


Washington, D. C. 20546
ATTN: Mr. B. G. Achhammer
Mr. G. C. Deutsch
Mr. R. V. Rhode

_!!'-

s
-

- -,.

~-

NO. Of

Copies

To

1
1

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Marshall Space Flight


Center, Huntsville, Alabama 3S812
ATTO: R-PSVE-M, Dr. W. R. Lucas
M-F&AE-M, Mr. W. A. Wilson

Director, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology,


4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91003
ATTN: Mr. Howard E. Martens, Materials Section 351

5
1
1
1
1

Commanding Officer, U. S. Army Materials Research Agency,


Watertown, Massachusetts 02172
ATTN: AMXMR-AT
AMXMR-AA
AMXMR-RP
AMXMR-RX
Author

90

TOTAL COPIES DISTRIBUTED

" HZLhSSIHEL-

Seen ity Classification


DOCUMENT CONTROL DAT 4 R&D
(SmcuTity clmmmttlcmtlon of titlm. body of mbmtrmct mnd indexing mnnotmlion mumt bm mntmtmd mhmn thm ovmrmll rmpert im clmmattimd)
1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY 'Corporate muthor)

U. S. Army Materials Research Agency


Watertown, Massachusetts 02172

2 6 GROUP

REPORT SECURITV CLASSIFICATION

Unclassified

3. REPORT TITLE

STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTORS IN T-HEADS

DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (Typo ot tmport mnd inelumivm dmtmm)

5 AUTHOR^) (Lmmt nmmm. tint nom. tnitiml)

Baratta, Francis I.
. REPORT DATE

t,

PROJECT NO.

AMCMS Code 5547.12.62700

11

9a. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUMBER'S;

D/A 1N542718D387

76. NO. OF REFS

-1_

November 1966

. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO.

TOTAL f.O- OF PAGES

AMRA TR 66-36
f 6. OTHER REPORT NOfS) (Any otttmr numbmrm thmt mmv bm mmmimyimd
thim rmpott)

"SuhtasV ^5475

10. AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES

Distribution of this document is unlimited.


11 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

u. ABSTRACTv.Two

12

SPCKSOPING

MILITARY ACTIVITY

Picatinny Arsenal
Dover, New Jersey

07801

simple formulae are presented which" predict stress concentration ractors applicable to a two-dimensional symmetrical T-head configuration. This configuration corsists of a deep head joined to a shank by fillet radii. The independent
equations that predict stress concentration factors for the same geometry are derived for two different loading conditions. In one instance, a tensile force is
applied to the shank end of the T-shape. Equilibrium of forces is attained by
supporting the bottom edge of the head section, resulting in the shank section being
pulled in tension. In the second instance, a conpressive load is applied to the top
edge of the head section while the configuration is again supported at the bottom
edge. Thus, only the head section is stressed and in a compressive manner.
Because the analysis is not exact, the magnitudes of
factors resulting from the predictive equations appear to
some ranges of the geometry parameter ratios. Therefore,
application", as it is termed in the text, is recommended

the stress concentration


be overly conservative at
an arbitrary "limit of
when using these equations.

Again, because of the inexactness of the analysis, experimental stress concentration factors are indirectly obtained for the first loading condition and directly
obtained for the second loading condition mentioned above. These data were obtainec
for several geometric ratios jyf^the T-head configuration and compared to the corresponding predicted values.
It was found that the
within a certain range of the
the error becomes excessive,

DD ,'Jffl 1473

e could be utilized, with engineering accuracy,


pertinent geometry ratios. Beyond these ranges,
conservative-'
UNCLASSIFIP
Security Classic. j'.on

UNCLASSIFIED
Security Classification

TT

LINK A

KEY WOROS

LINK B

LINK C

Experimental mechanics
Stresses
Stress concentrations
Stress intensity
Expefimental stress analysis
Photoelasticity

INSTRUCTIONS
1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY: Enter the name and address
10. AVAILABILITY/LIMITATION NOTICES: Enter any limof the contractor, subcontractor, grantee. Department of Deitations on further disst mination of the report, other than those
fense activity or other organization (corporate author) issuing
imposed by security classification, using standard statements
the report.
such as:
2a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION: Enter the over(1) "Qualified requesters .may .obtain copies of this
all security classification of the report. Indicate whether
report from DDC"
"Restricted Data" is included. Marking is to be in accord(2) "Foreign announcement and dissemination of this
ance with appropriate security regulations.
report by DDC is not authorized."
2b. GROUP Automatic downgrading is specified in DoD Di(3) "U. S. Government agencies may obtain copies of
rective 5200.10 and Armed Forces Industrial Manual. Enter
this report directly from DDC. Other qualified DDC
the group number. Also, whe r applicable, show that optional,
users shall request through
markings hsve been used f
jup 3 and Group 4 as authorized.
ii
3. REPORT TITLE: Enter t complete report title in all
capital letters. Titles in all cases should be unclassified.
If a meaningful title cannot be selected without classification, show title classification in all capitals in parenthesis
immediately following the title.
4. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES: If appropriate, enter the type of
report, e.g., interim, progress, summary, annual, or final.
Give the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is
covered.
5. AUTHOR(S): Enter the nanve(s) of authors) as shown on
or in the report. Enter last name, first name, middle initial.
If military, show rank and branch of service. The name of
the principal author is an absolute minimum requirement.
6. REPORT DATE Enter the date of the report as day,
month, y?ar; or month, year. If more than one date appears
on the report, use date of publication.
la. TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES: The total page count
should follow normal pagination procedures, i.e., enter the
number of pages containing information.
7b. NUMBER OF REFERENCES: Enter the total number of
references cited in the report.
8a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER: If appropriate, enter
the applicable number of the contract or grant under which,
the report was written.
8b, 8c, & 8d. PROJECT NUMBER: Enter the appropriate
military department identification, such as project number,
subproject number, system numbers, task number, etc.
9a. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S): Enter the official report number by which the document will be identified
and controlled by the originating activity. This number must
be unique to this report.
9b. OTHER REPORT NUMBER(S): If the report has been
assigned any other report numbers (either by the originator
ot by the sponsor), also enter this numbers).

(4)

"U. S. military agencies may obtain copies of this


report directly from DDC Other qualified users
shall request through

(5)

"All distribution of this report is controlled. Qualified DDC users shall request through

If the report has been furnished to the Office of Technical


Services, Department of Commerce, for sale to the public, indicate this fact and enter the price, if known.
1L SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: Use for additional explanatory notes.
12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY: Enter the name of
the departmental project office or laboratory sponsoring (pay
ing tor) the research and development. Include address.
13. ABSTRACT: Enter an abstract giving a brief and factual
summary of the document indicative of the report, c . en though
it may also appear elsewhere in the body of the technical report. If additional space is required, a continuation sheet
shall be attached.
It is highly desirable that the abstract of classified reports be unclassified. Each paragraph of the abstract shall
end with an indication of the military security classification
of the information in the paragraph, represented as (TS), (S),
(C), or (V).
There is no limitation on the length of the abstract. However, the suggested length is from 150 to 225 words.
14. KEY WORDS: Key words are technically meaningful terms
or short phrases that characterize a report and may be used as
index entries fc- cataloging the report. Key words must be
selected so that no security classification is required. Idenfiers, such as equipment model designation, trade name, military project code name, geographic location, may be used as
key words but will be followed by an indication of technical
context. The assignment of links, rules, and weights is
optional.

UNCLASSIFIED
Security Classification
'
*

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy