轴疲劳分析方法的比较:DIN 743与基于Soderberg准则的方法

S.M.O. Tavares , P.M.S.T. de Castro
{"title":"轴疲劳分析方法的比较:DIN 743与基于Soderberg准则的方法","authors":"S.M.O. Tavares ,&nbsp;P.M.S.T. de Castro","doi":"10.1016/j.ctmat.2016.06.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The design of rotating steel shafts is a classical mechanical engineering problem. Since the recognition of fatigue as a major source of failures in shafts, many different criteria for fatigue design of rotating steel shafts have been put forward. Two commonly used approaches are based on the Soderberg criterion and on the DIN 743 approach. However, in the vast and ever growing literature on fatigue design, comparisons of these two procedures, based on concrete examples, are not commonly available. Therefore, a clear need exists for a comparison of the two approaches. This article analyses these two approaches considering a simple and common case. This case is a transition in diameter of a steel shaft, assumed as the critical cross section where bending and torsion moments are applied. Contrary to expectation, substantial differences were found between the two approaches, including in the fatigue correction factors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10198,"journal":{"name":"Ciência & Tecnologia dos Materiais","volume":"29 1","pages":"Pages e76-e81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ctmat.2016.06.014","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of methodologies for fatigue analysis of shafts: DIN 743 vs. approaches based on Soderberg criterion\",\"authors\":\"S.M.O. Tavares ,&nbsp;P.M.S.T. de Castro\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ctmat.2016.06.014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The design of rotating steel shafts is a classical mechanical engineering problem. Since the recognition of fatigue as a major source of failures in shafts, many different criteria for fatigue design of rotating steel shafts have been put forward. Two commonly used approaches are based on the Soderberg criterion and on the DIN 743 approach. However, in the vast and ever growing literature on fatigue design, comparisons of these two procedures, based on concrete examples, are not commonly available. Therefore, a clear need exists for a comparison of the two approaches. This article analyses these two approaches considering a simple and common case. This case is a transition in diameter of a steel shaft, assumed as the critical cross section where bending and torsion moments are applied. Contrary to expectation, substantial differences were found between the two approaches, including in the fatigue correction factors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10198,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ciência & Tecnologia dos Materiais\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages e76-e81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ctmat.2016.06.014\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ciência & Tecnologia dos Materiais\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0870831217300733\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ciência & Tecnologia dos Materiais","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0870831217300733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

旋转钢轴的设计是一个经典的机械工程问题。自从人们认识到疲劳是导致轴类失效的主要原因以来,人们提出了许多不同的旋转钢轴疲劳设计准则。两种常用的方法是基于Soderberg准则和DIN 743方法。然而,在关于疲劳设计的大量且不断增长的文献中,基于具体实例的这两种程序的比较并不常见。因此,显然有必要对这两种方法进行比较。本文以一个简单而常见的案例来分析这两种方法。这个例子是一个钢轴的直径的过渡,假设作为临界截面,其中弯矩和扭转矩应用。与预期相反,两种方法之间存在实质性差异,包括疲劳校正因子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A comparison of methodologies for fatigue analysis of shafts: DIN 743 vs. approaches based on Soderberg criterion

The design of rotating steel shafts is a classical mechanical engineering problem. Since the recognition of fatigue as a major source of failures in shafts, many different criteria for fatigue design of rotating steel shafts have been put forward. Two commonly used approaches are based on the Soderberg criterion and on the DIN 743 approach. However, in the vast and ever growing literature on fatigue design, comparisons of these two procedures, based on concrete examples, are not commonly available. Therefore, a clear need exists for a comparison of the two approaches. This article analyses these two approaches considering a simple and common case. This case is a transition in diameter of a steel shaft, assumed as the critical cross section where bending and torsion moments are applied. Contrary to expectation, substantial differences were found between the two approaches, including in the fatigue correction factors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
PRINCIPAIS PARÂMETROS PARA PRODUÇÃO DE BIOGÁS A PARTIR DE DEJETOS SUÍNOS AGRICULTURA 4.0: estudo de caso sobre a eficiência da indústria 4.0 aplicada ao agronegócio CERTIFICAÇÃO DE SUSTENTABILIDADE DA AQUICULTURA: uma análise de mercado com consumidores PESQUISA SOBRE AS ESTRATÉGIAS DE MELHORIA CONTÍNUA E A IMPORTÂNCIA DA GESTÃO DA QUALIDADE COM O MÉTODO KAIZEN FATORES QUE AFETAM A FERMENTAÇÃO ALCOÓLICA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1