Theories of Failure

Strength of a material or failure of the material is deduced

generally from uni-axial tests from which stress strain
characteristics of the material are obtained.
The typical stress-strain curves for ductile and brittle materials
are shown below.
Material Strength parameters are OR
y
S
u
S
Theories of Failure
In the case of multidimensional stress at a point we have a more
complicated situation present. Since it is impractical to test every
material and every combination of stresses o
1
, o
2
, and o
3
, a
failure theory is needed for making predictions on the basis of a
materials performance on the tensile test., of how strong it will
be under any other conditions of static loading.
The theory behind the various failure theories is that whatever
is responsible for failure in the standard tensile test will also be
responsible for failure under all other conditions of static
loading.
Theories of Failure
The microscopic yielding mechanism in ductile material is
understood to be due to relative sliding of materials atoms within
their lattice structure. This sliding is caused by shear stresses and
is accompanied by distortion of the shape of the part. Thus the
yield strength in shear S
sy
is strength parameter of the ductile
material used for design purposes.
Generally used theories for Ductile Materials are:
Maximum shear stress theory
Maximum distortion energy theory.
(von Mises-Henckys theory).
Theories of Failure
The Maximum - Shear - Stress Theory
The Maximum Shear Stress theory states that failure occurs when the
maximum shear stress from a combination of principal stresses equals
or exceeds the value obtained for the shear stress at yielding in the
uniaxial tensile test.
At yielding, in an uni-axial test, the principal stresses are
o
1
= S
y
; o
2
= 0 and o
3
= 0.
Therefore the shear strength at yielding
S
sy
=[o
1
- (o
2
or o
3
=0)]/2. Therefore S
sy
= S
y
/2
Theories of Failure
(Maximum Shear Stress theory )
To use this theory for either two or three-dimensional static stress in
homogeneous, isotopic, ductile materials, first compute the three
principal stresses ( o
1
, o
2
, o
3
) and the maximum shear stress t
13
as
( )
1 2
max
2
o o
t

=
=
( )
max min
2
p p
o o
Then compare the maximum shear stress to the failure criterion.
max sy
S t s
OR
( )
max min
2
p p
sy
S
o o
s
The safety factor for the maximum shear-stress theory is given by
max
sy
S
N
t
=
Theories of Failure
Distortion-Energy Theory OR The von Mises - Hencky Theory
It has been observed that a solid under hydro-static, external
pressure (e.g. volume element subjected to three equal normal
stresses) can withstand very large stresses.
When there is also energy of distortion or shear to be stored, as in the
tensile test, the stresses that may be imposed are limited.
Since, it was recognized that engineering materials could withstand
enormous amounts of hydro-static pressures without damage, it was
postulated that a given material has a definite limited capacity to
absorb energy of distortion and that any attempt to subject the
material to greater amounts of distortion energy result in yielding
failure.
Total Strain Energy: Assuming that the stress-strain curve is
essentially linear up to the yield point, we can express the total
strain energy at any point in that range as.
Let U
h
be energy due to volume change and U
d
be energy due to distortion.
Then we can express each of the principal stresses in terms of hydrostatic
component ( o
h
), common to all the faces of volume element and distortion
component ( o
id
) that is unique to each face.
For volumetric change with no distortion, the terms in the bracket of eqn (g) must
be zero. Thus, we have
Theories of Failure
Distortion energy theory states that failure by yielding under a
combination of stresses occurs when the energy of distortion equals
or exceeds the energy of distortion in the tensile test when the yield
strength is reached.
According to theory failure criteria is
S
y
= [o
1
2
+ o
2
2
+ o
3
2
- o
1
o
2
o
2
o
3
o
3
o
1
]
1/2
For two dimensional stress state ( o
2
= 0), the equations reduces to
S
y
= [o
1
2
+ o
3
2
- o
3
o
1
|
1/2
Theories of Failure
It is often convenient in situations involving combined tensile and shear
stresses acting at a point to define an effective stress that can be used to
represent the stress combination.
The von-Mises effective stress ( o
e
) also sometimes referred to as
equivalent stress is defined as the uniaxial tensile stress that would create
the same distortion energy as is created by the actual combination of
applied stresses.
1/ 2
2 2 2
1 2 3 1 2 2 3 3 1
1/ 2
2 2
1 3 3 1
1/ 2
2 2 2
3
e
e
e xx yy xx yy xy
y
e
In terms of applied stresses in coordinate directions
S
Safety factor N
o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o
o o o o o t
o
( = + +

( = +

( = + +

=
Static Failure Theories for Brittle Materials
Brittle materials fracture than yield.
Brittle Fracture in tension is considered to be due to normal tensile stress
alone and thus the maximum normal-stress theory is applicable.
Brittle fracture in compression is due to some combination of normal
compressive stress and shear stress.
Even and Uneven Materials
Some wrought materials, such as fully hardened tool steel, can be brittle.
These materials tend to have compressive strength equal to their tensile
strengths . They are called EVEN materials.

Many cast materials, such as gray cast iron, are brittle but have compressive
strengths much greater than their tensile strengths. These are called
UNEVEN materials.
For uneven materials; tensile strength is due to the presence of
microscopic flaws in the castings, which when subjected to
tensile loading, serve as nuclei for crack formation.
when subjected to compressive stress, these flaws are pressed
together, increasing the resistance to slippage from shear
stresses.
Gray cast irons typically have compressive strengths 3 to 4 times
their tensile strengths and ceramics have even larger ratios.
Another characteristics of some cast, brittle materials is that their
shear strength can be greater than their tensile strength, falling
between their compressive and tensile strengths.
Mohrs circles for both compression and tensile tests of an even and
uneven materials are shown below.
The lines tangent to these circles constitute failure lines for all
combinations of applied stress between the two circles. The area
enclosed by the circles and the failure lines represent a safe zone.
In the case of even material, the failure lines are independent of the
normal stresses and are defined by the maximum shear strength of
the material. This is consistent with the maximum shear stress
theory.
For the uneven material, the failure lines are a function of both normal stresses and shear
stresses. For compressive regime, as the normal stress component becomes increasingly
negative (i.e. more compression) the materials resistance to shear stress increases.

The interdependence between shear and normal stress is confirmed by experiment for
cases where the compressive stress is dominant, specifically where the principal stress
having the largest absolute value is compressive.
However, experiments also show that in tensile-stress-dominated situations with uneven,
brittle materials, failure is due to tensile stress alone. The shear stress appears not to be a
factor in uneven materials if the largest absolute value is tensile.
Maximum Normal Stress Theory
The maximum normal stress theory, shown for even materials could be used as the
failure criterion for brittle materials in static loading if compressive and tensile
strengths were equal (even material).
The maximum-normal stress theory envelope for an uneven material as the
asymmetric square of half-dimensions S
ut
, - S
uc
is also shown. This failure envelope
is only valid in the first and third quadrants as it does not account for the
interdependence of normal and shear stresses which affects second and fourth
quadrants.
Coulomb-Mohr theory
The coulomb-Mohr envelope attempts to account for the interdependence by
connecting opposite corners of these quadrants with diagonals.
The Figure shows some gray cast-iron
experimental test data superposed on the
theoretical failure envelopes.
The failures in the first quadrant fit the
maximum normal-stress theory line.
The failures in the fourth quadrant fall
inside the maximum normal-stress line
(indicating its unsuitability)
Also experimental data fall outside the
Coulomb-Mohr line (indicating its
conservative nature).
This observation leads to a modification of the Coulomb-Mohr
theory to make it better fit the observed data.
The actual failure data in the above figure
follow the even material maximum normal
stress theory envelop down to a point S
ut
, -S
ut
below the o
1
axis and then follow a straight line
to 0, -S
uc
. The set of lines shown by a solid line
is the modified-Mohr failure theory envelop.
It is the preferred failure theory for uneven,
brittle materials in static loading.
If the 2-D principal
stresses are ordered o
1
>
o
3
, o
2
= 0, then only the
first and fourth quadrants
need to be drawn as
shown in Figure
the figure depicts three
plane stress conditions
labeled A, B, and C.
Point A represents any stress state in which the two non zero principal
stresses o
1
, o
3
are positive. Failure will occur when the load line OA
crosses the failure envelop at . The safety factor for this situation can be
expressed as
N = S
ut
/o
1
A
'
If the two nonzero principal stresses have opposite sign, then two possibilities
exist for failure, as depicted by points B and C. The only difference between
these two points is the relative values of their two stress components o
1,
and
o
3
. The load line OB exits the failure envelop at above the point(S
ut
,-S
ut
)
and the safety factor for this case is the same as the previous equation.
B'
If the stress state is as depicted by point C, then the intersection of the load line
OC and the failure envelop occurs at below the point (S
ut
, -S
ut
)
.
The safety
factor can be found by solving for the intersection between the load line OC and
the failure line and is given by
If the stress state is in the fourth quadrant both of these equations should be
checked and the resulting smaller safety factor used.
C'
1 1 3
( )
ut uc
uc ut
S S
N
S S o o o
=
+