Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Beam Fatigue Deformation

Beam Fatigue Deformation

Beam Fatigue Deformation

Hi All,

We have a manipulator arm with a large central vertical shaft that after about 20 years of use has developed a slight bow to it. I don't know if this was due to some specific event or from cyclic loading, but it has the entire system skewed.

To replace it, I want to consider some sizing calculations. I can calculate the bending moment and cycles to fatigue failure well enough, but I don't know of any theory I can use to estimate plastic deformation over time/cycles of the entire shaft (not just local crack propagation). Does anyone know of anything like that?

There are no evident cracks, but perhaps there are some internally that are causing this. If so I have no way to translate that to the bulk deformation I am seeing and try to size against that moving forward.

RE: Beam Fatigue Deformation

There is no direct way to get what you're asking.

If it were me, I'd re-design the boom using an endurance limit based on the yield strength instead of UTS (i.e. 50% of Sy instead of 50% of UTS).

RE: Beam Fatigue Deformation

This is probably due to creep or relaxation.

RE: Beam Fatigue Deformation

I didn't think so. That sounds reasonable, jgKRI. And israelkk I'm sure that's a part of it. Thank you both for your replies.

RE: Beam Fatigue Deformation

If this is structural the original design should have been bases on 25% of UTS or 33% of yield, whichever is lowest.
Often design for structures is based more on deflection than on load, and resulting load safety factors tend to be more like 6 or 8 to 1.

One key question is did the deflection of this gradually accumulate over time, of is it the result of a few severe overloads?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube

RE: Beam Fatigue Deformation

Thanks for the additional info, EdStainless. This is structural in the sense that it is an overhead member supporting load.

On non-structural parts, I've used a FOS of 4:1 on the yield or 6:1 on the UTS, whichever is more conservative. But you're right that this does not necessarily account for deflection. In this case your range sounds about right to me.

Unfortunately I do not know the history of this machine. Based on its usage I can't think of how it could have been acutely deformed the way it is and so I'm suspecting the accumulation of micro-plastic deformation over time. Since it's at ambient temperature and undergoes loading-unloading I am doubtful that I can rely on general creep theory for a full answer.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close